In a country of 340M+ people, every hypothetical is an eventual actual, and the worst-case scenario for the fetus-fondlers actually happened: a 10-year old girl was raped and had to leave her Gawd Bothering home state of Ohio to have an abortion in the friendlier state of [checks notes] Indiana, which has got to be a first time on this blog anyone said anything nice about Indiana.
But I digest.
Anyway, the Republican fighting-back strategy —of course— involved gaslighting the country:
And savvy readers are no doubt screaming HIPPAA* at their screens, and the readers would be right. A doctor is following the law and not revealing private details. Also, this was a minor child, have some decorum!
Then a man was arrested and charged with the 10-year old girl’s rape. It’s true that being charged does not prove his guilt, but what does prove his guilt is the fact that he’s already confessed. In fact, he confessed to raping the girl twice.
So now that the worst hypothetical has two confirming points for a victim and a perp, the sane amongst us think that the Right Wing Outrage Machine would slink away and not bring up the story again, and the sane amongst us would be wrong: the Republicans are going after the doctor!
Yup: The right-wing smear machine is going after the doctor who helped a 10-year old rape victim.
And some of you might be wondering about why the party of Law & Order is not going after the rapist? He appears to have a Mexican surname, and so we’re pretty sure all the usual GOP anti-immigrant racism is going to become the story and drown out the story that a little girl had to escape Jeebusland to avoid having her rapist’s baby.
*I left out an “A” – the most important one, too. H/T Scissorhead Martin Pollard in the comments.
Also too, in a stunning example of whataboutism, they’re trying to make hay out of the criminal being an undocumented.
Listen, when you spend your energy talking about rape and the life of the mother, you’ve already conceded 99% of their argument. I will die on the hill that every person has the unconditional right to control their own body. Anything else, particularly before viability, is nothing but religious gobbledygoop.
I’m tired of DLC focus group talking poins. Grow a pair, guys (the gals are doing fine on their own).
LikeLiked by 5 people
It’s a heartbreaker guys, but it’s going according to the plan constructed by the same people who stacked the high court with arch-conservatives. Women in blue states will be allowed to choose their health care, if they’re stuck in a red state, then good luck to you and hope you agree with some man making your healthcare decisions for you, but the ten year old girl? What choice did she have?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Those morons can scream “HIPPA” all they like. I shall, instead, scream “HIPAA” (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act). 😉
LikeLiked by 4 people
I cinged when I saw BOTH the Double-P’s and A’s.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hope she already had the procedure. There’s probably some dumbass Ohio law about protecting this bastard’s “parental rights.” If not, there soon will be.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Isn’t it pretty obvious that HIPAA does not apply in cases of abortion?
It absolutely applies. The Doctor who helped her DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to discuss their patient’s treatment with third parties who are not authorized under the various exemptions (persons authorized by the patient, or patient’s guardian in this case), other covered parties with a need (primary care physicians, phrmacies, insurance, billing) or law enforcement with a warrant.
This is WHY when you visit the doctor, there’s a page or two of HIPAA authorizations ad such. As a patient you have a right to deny sharing info with any of the above except duly warranted law enforcement. You can tell your pharmacist to NOT bill or tell your insurance company about a prescription you get filled. (methotrexate without insurance still shouldn’t cost that much as it is a generic…we’ve actually saved money on a few prescriptions by paying out of pocket rather than per our insurance company’s formulary)
LikeLiked by 2 people
Criminy – another ‘crisis actor’ claim.
1 – it’s a medical situation, so HIPAA says no revealing of information.
2 – it’s an alleged rape, so current practice is not to reveal the victim’s identity unless they okay it.
3 – it’s a minor child, so the practice is not to reveal the minor’s identity.
And all this pushing has probably effectively revealed the victim’s identity to those with familiarity with the alleged rapist’s connections to the minor and her family.
But, you know, it’s all worth violating those first three points because decency and privacy laws all take second place to “owning the libs”. /s
LikeLiked by 2 people
Her parents have the HIPAA rights over this child, not the child per se. A child cannot sign her own HIPAA paperwork, a parent has to. (Speaking as a parent). For all we know, the parents gave the doctor permission to release the story to the press.
Yes, but for all we know they didn’t. Until she’s named, within limitations, informing the press that a child has been raped might not be a HIPAA violation. I’m not an expert, but I believe there are exceptions to revealing HIPAA covered information if it’s anonymous as well as if it’s a public health concern or signed off by the affected party.