rape exception to abortion restrictions

[Susanna Peters]

I know this doesn't answer the question posed but the issue  came up in 
my class as well so I am interested in the answer. A student who had 
lived in Uruguay claimed this exception had proved problematic in 
Uruguay (which requires a showing of rape to get any abortion) for two 
reasons. 1) Too many false rape claims (which I had not really thought 
about though it is obvious) and 2) on the law enforcement front it 
apparently harder to get convictions of real rapists when the woman does 
not get an abortion (the rapist says it must not have been rape--since 
no one would want to carry a rapists child). I don't if there is 
comparative literature on this or not but it does raise some intriguing 
questions and I would like to see more on it.

Susanna Peters

Edward Still wrote:
> I hope the  replies are on-list, because I would like to know the answer 
> too.
> 
> At 09:43 AM 3/22/2006, Jessica Silbey wrote:
>> A student asked a question I cannot find an immediate answer to.  She 
>> asks how, in practice, the rape exception would work in an abortion 
>> statute. Does a pregnant woman who has been raped have to prove she 
>> was raped in order to terminate her pregnancy (presuming that she is 
>> otherwise barred from doing so, either because of the fetus’ 
>> gestational age or because of some other restriction)? What would the 
>> burden of proof be in that circumstance and how, if at all, might it 
>> satisfy Casey’s undue burden standard? Do rape exceptions generally 
>> require timely reporting of the rape? I have found only one article 
>> that mentions the procedural problems of the rape exception, and it 
>> does so cursorily as part of a larger argument about abortion 
>> regulations generally.  I could find no cases that analyze the issue 
>> under Casey or any other reproductive rights case.
>>  
>> Off list replies are welcome.  Thanks.
>>  
>> ________________________________
>> Jessica Silbey
>> Assistant Professor of Law
>> Suffolk University Law School
>> 120 Tremont Street
>> Boston, MA 02108
>> 617-305-6270 (office)
>> 617-305-3079 (fax)
>> jsilbey at suffolk.edu <mailto:jsilbey at suffolk.edu>
>>  
> 
> 
> Edward Still
> attorney & mediator
> Suite 201
> 2112 11th Avenue South
> Birmingham AL 35205
>   phone 205-320-2882
>   fax toll free 1-877-264-5513
>   still at votelaw.com
>   http://www.EdwardStill.com <http://www.edwardstill.com/>
>   http://www.votelaw.com/blog
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
> 
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.