https://apnews.com/article/indiana-abortion-ohio-girl-raped-caitlin-bernard-4de25dd09f61fbaed4a83bce34d7fa83INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — An Indiana board is set to hear testimony Thursday that an Indianapolis doctor should face disciplinary action after she spoke publicly about providing an abortion to a 10-year-old rape victim from neighboring Ohio.The Medical Licensing Board’s hearing comes after Indiana’s Republican attorney general accused Dr. Caitlin Bernard of violating state law by not reporting the girl’s child abuse to Indiana authorities. She’s also accused of breaking federal patient privacy laws by telling a newspaper reporter about the girl’s treatment.Bernard and her attorneys maintain that the doctor followed Indiana’s child abuse reporting requirements as the girl’s rape was already being investigated by Ohio authorities. Bernard’s lawyers also say she didn’t release any identifying information about the girl that would break privacy laws.The Indianapolis Star cited the girl’s case in a July 1 article that sparked a national political uproar in the weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last June, putting into effect an Ohio law that prohibited abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. Some news outlets and Republican politicians falsely suggested Bernard fabricated the story, until a 27-year-old man was charged with the rape in Columbus, Ohio.
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita’s complaint asked the licensing board to impose “appropriate disciplinary action” but doesn’t specify a requested penalty.The Indiana board — made up of six doctors and one attorney appointed by Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb — could vote whether to impose any penalties Thursday after hearing what is expected to be several hours of testimony. State law gives the board wide latitude, allowing it to issue reprimand letters or suspend, revoke or place on probation a doctor’s license.Amid the wave of attention to the girl’s case last summer, Rokita, who is stridently anti-abortion, told Fox News he would investigate Bernard’s actions, calling her an “abortion activist acting as a doctor.”“This case is about two things – and two things only – patient privacy and this doctor’s failure to protect this child,” he said in a statement this week.Ohio’s law imposing a near-ban on abortion was in effect for about two months before being put on hold as a lawsuit against it plays out.Bernard unsuccessfully tried to block Rokita’s investigation last fall, although an Indianapolis judge wrote that Rokita made “clearly unlawful breaches” of state confidentiality laws with his public comments about investigating the doctor before filing the medical licensing complaint against her.Bernard lawyer Kathleen DeLaney has called the complaint against the doctor “baseless attacks” done at taxpayer expense.“Rokita’s actions set a dangerous precedent imperiling the provision of lawful patient care,” DeLaney has said.
tl;drRepublican AG prosecuting a doctor for daring to speak out about Ohio forcing a 10-year-old to carry her rapist's baby.Republicans once again coming out on the side of pedophiles and rapists.
>>1170783Actually, this was the one where the abortion activist abortion doctor sent the kid to a different state to avoid reporting the rape because the mother didn't want her boyfriend arrested then claimed it was due to "abortion law".
>>1170785>the doctor followed Indiana’s child abuse reporting requirements as the girl’s rape was already being investigated by Ohio authoritiesreading comprehension not your strong suit?June 22nd the rape was reported to Ohio authorities. June 30th the abortion was performed in Indiana. The suspect, an undocumented Guatemalan immigrant, was identified July 12th and arraigned on the 13th.
>>1170785This.The mother took her child to Indiana to have an abortion because she was the victim of statutory rape. Any abortion request would have been followed up by an investigation by the police, which would have implicated the illegal immigrant currently staying over at their house.This is Biden's America.
>>1170785>>1170791Do you have any source stating that Fuentes was living with the family, or did you just pull that out of your ass?
>>1170793..why is your hangup that the immigrant was living with the family? He raped the little girl twice and the mother actively tried to defend him.
https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/crime/2022/07/28/judge-no-bond-accused-rapist-gerson-fuentes/10161173002/>On July 6, a second interview was done with the girl at her home, where Huhn said Fuentes was present and had been living. The girl acknowledged, nonverbally, that Fuentes assaulted her, and Fuentes provided a DNA sample that day, according to the detective, the only person to testify at the hearing. So Fuentes was living with the family. However, claiming that they traveled to Indiana to cover this up is false.>The girl's mother sought a consultation in the Columbus area for a potential abortion, Huhn testified, but because of the estimated gestational age, the procedure could not be performed in Ohio under state law because she was just over six weeks pregnant. A call was made to Indianapolis and the girl traveled there on June 29. So the law forced them to go to Indiana for the procedure
>>1170781>The Medical Licensing Board’s hearing comes after Indiana’s Republican attorney general accused Dr. Caitlin Bernard of violating state law by not reporting the girl’s child abuse to Indiana authoritiesHoly fuck op read next time
>>1170795>The girl's mother sought a consultation in the Columbus area for a potential abortion, Huhn testified, but because of the estimated gestational age, the procedure could not be performed in Ohio under state law because she was just over six weeks pregnant. Yeah, she's lying.Ohio has medical exemptions for pregnancies which represent a clear and present danger to the mother, and the state AG already confirmed that this abortion would have qualified under Ohio abortion law, because a 10 y.o cannot reasonably expect to take a child to term.
It's disingenuous to say this is clear under Ohio law when you have the people who advocated for this law saying she should have carried the pregnancy to term.James Bopp of the National Right to Life Committee:"She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child" Cincinnati Right to Life stated that the girl should have been forced to give birth, explaining that although “a pregnancy might have been difficult on a 10-year-old body, a woman’s body is designed to carry life,"Outside the state SD Gov Kristi Noem said "I don't believe a tragic situation should be perpetuated by another tragedy."The intent of the law is to force children to carry their rapist's babies to term. Ohio AG Yost's claims that the law was misconstrued and the child could have terminated the pregnancy in Ohio is also disingenuous, as the purpose of these laws is not only to ban abortion, but to be ambiguous about the legality of any abortion making doctors risk malicious prosecution if they perform the procedure at all.
>>1170794What is your evidence for the claim that the mother tried to defend him? How do you respond to >>1170790 which contradicts it?
>>1170798>because a 10 y.o cannot reasonably expect to take a child to term.Does the law explicitly provide a specific age where exemptions for abortion beyond 6 weeks can be made? If not, then I could absolutely imagine healthcare providers being reluctant to provide care when it could result in them being prosecuted by the state, the obvious solution in that case would be to refer the patient for care in a state that isn't run by psychopaths.
>>1170802The law is designed to be unclear so dishonest tards like >>1170798 and >>1170785 can say "the law doesn't ban this" but leave enough room for AGs to maliciously prosecute
>>1170800https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11016277/Mom-Ohio-girl-10-got-abortion-Indiana-raped-defends-SUSPECT.html>>1170802>Does the law explicitly provide a specific age where exemptions for abortion beyond 6 weeks can be made?Any woman can have an abortion in Ohio if the pregnancy represents a danger to the mother's life, regardless of their age. Just like literally every other state in the union. >I could absolutely imagine healthcare providers being reluctant to provide care when it could result in them being prosecuted by the stateAgain, the law has exemptions in place. Honestly, all of these activist troons trying to use rape victims as political pawns deserve to be booted from polite society.
>>1170808lies, lies and more lies. keep up the charade murdoch shill
>>1170808>troonsare they here with us now?the law is purposely ambiguous to allow for the pilpul you're demonstrating as well as malicious prosecution by anti-choice DAs.
These fucking dishonest snakes. Out of one end of their mouth they say the abortion bans except 10 year old rape victims, but then out of the other they praise a witch hunt against a doctor who provided an abortion to such a 10 year old.
>>1170808>dailyfailthe only thing funnier than that link is you thinking it proves anythingMurdoch Media deliberately lies to rile up morons like you
>>1170808https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11016277/Mom-Ohio-girl-10-got-abortion-Indiana-raped-defends-SUSPECT.html>Telemundo reporter María Vargas-Pion visited the Columbus residence where the 10-year-old rape victim and her mother allegedly live on Wednesday.>A woman claiming to be the girl's mother hid behind her front door as she defended Fuentes.>'Did the girl live here as well?' Vargas-Pion asked.>The woman, speaking in Spanish, replied: 'Yes, but she's fine. Everything that they're saying against him is a lie.' Is a second hand source reporting on a Telemundo story really the best you can do?>Any woman can have an abortion in Ohio if the pregnancy represents a danger to the mother's life, regardless of their age. Just like literally every other state in the union.But how can you be certain that a 10 year old girl can't give birth safely? You might think that the question is absurd, but there have been cases of girls even younger than that giving birth successfully via caesarean section. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_MedinaIt's technically free game if the law doesn't specify an exact age that's considered unsafe to give birth, and most people aren't willing to risk their medical licenses if they can just refer them to an out of state clinic instead. This is why it's important to write laws as unambiguously as possible.>Again, the law has exemptions in place.No, it doesn't. If the law doesn't specify an exact age where it's considered unsafe to give birth, than the age of the mother can't really be used as a metric to evaluate the danger posed by a pregnancy from a strictly legal standpoint.
>>1170827>I'm going to try attacking the source!!!Here's the original source:https://www.telemundo.com/noticias/noticias-telemundo/crimen-y-violencia/la-madre-de-la-nina-de-10-anos-violada-en-ohio-defiende-al-joven-que-c-rcna38236
>>1170984>No, it doesn't.The law reverts to the opinion of the physician on the matter of safety.Thanks.
>>1170986And what if a physician always grants abortions to women on request simply by claiming medical necessity?
>>1170988That's actually one thing that isn't clarified in the text of the bill as far as I can remember.
>>1170988i'm imagining his process for formulating a response. will it be science based? just calling you a tranny?
>>1170990oh shit. i'm proud of you. 991 here
>>1170990It's almost like the bill was intentionally written ambiguously to restrict abortion as much as possible while providing a veneer of plausible deniability to the state in situations like this one.
>>1170781>Broke federal law by reporting it>Broke state law by not reporting itlol
>>1170798>a 10 y.o cannot reasonably expect to take a child to term.thats true, but isnt written explicitly in the law. someone performing that abortion opens themselves up to litigation and has to hope that the patient being 10 years old will qualify as "a clear and present danger to the mother," which is a huge risk to take on the part of the doctor. much easier to send them to a state that isnt retarded and avoid the huge risks to livelihood
>>1170993Well, you're probably a tranny anyway.>>1170995Not really. Have you read it?
>>1170988>>1170995>(F) "Medical emergency" means a condition that in the physician's good faith medical judgment, based upon the facts known to the physician at that time, so complicates the woman's pregnancy as to necessitate the immediate performance or inducement of an abortion in order to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to avoid a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman that delay in the performance or inducement of the abortion would create.
>>1171087so the kid would have to be dying in labor at the time for the physician to legally perform an abortion. doesnt help your case
>>1171127Where do you see that?
>>1170795>claiming that they traveled to Indiana to cover this up is trueFTFY
>>1171000>someone performing that abortion opens themselves up to litigation and has to hope that the patient being 10 years old will qualify as "a clear and present danger to the mother,"The abortion isn't performed unless there's already legal documentation in place, they don't just do it and hope it's found to be legal later. You're just making shit up.
>>1171130>>1171166>medical emergency>necessitate the immediate performancewe've already seen this in Texas with the same language in the bill>With no exceptions for cases of rape, incest, or severe fetal abnormality, the law holds a carve-out for medical emergencies, vaguely defined as “risk of death or a substantial impairment of a major bodily function.” Texas hospitals and doctors have been erring on the side of extreme caution to avoid liability by either failing to intervene completely or waiting until a patient’s life is at immediate risk—or as one Texas physician put it, “on death’s door.”>Until she was ill enough for the hospital’s ethics board to consider her life in danger, Zurawski’s doctors’ felt their hands were tied by the lawhttps://www.thenation.com/article/society/texas-republicans-vague-exceptions-abortion-law/
She's gonna appeal this shit, win, and I hope sue for them maliciously targeting her.HIPAA's a checklist of shit you can't share. It's not you can't discuss anything about a case ever. Anonymized information can be shared.
>>1171277The doctor violated HIPAA by leaking it to the press, retard.
>>1171437>Dr. Caitlin Bernard testified during the second day of a court hearing on an attempt to block Indiana’s Republican attorney general from seeking patient medical recordswhy would republican AGs need to seek medical records if the doctor violated hipaa, by which you clearly mean "exposing medical records". it seems that instead the opposite is happening in an extremely goofy ruse to draw attention from the fact that republicans are enacting tyrannical laws that force 10 year olds to give birth to rape babies
>>1171440HIPAA violations also involve disclosing any kind of PII not just medical records.
>>1171437>The doctor violated HIPAA by leaking it to the press, retard.Leaking "what" to the press? Doctors are allowed to discuss cases as long as they are anonymized. So I ask you what identifying information prohibited under HIPAA was shared?Dipshits yell HIPAA whenever medical records come up but it's actually a law that actually says specific shit, not just a fucking blanket gag order on doctors. They don't take a vow of silence alongside their fucking Hippocratic oath.
>>1171452>So I ask you what identifying information prohibited under HIPAA was shared?The age of the patient, the duration of her pregnancy, the fact that she was raped and the act of performing an abortion. She also failed to disclose the fact that this girl was the victim of sexual abuse to the proper authorities.
>>1171452>So I ask you what identifying information prohibited under HIPAA was shared?What is PII in Healthcare?The definition of PHI vs PII is not defined to any single information category or technology. It requires a case-by-case evaluation of the exact risk that an individual can be identified. Non-PII can come to be PII whenever added information is made to the public from any source. When new information is combined with other available information that could be used to identify an individual, it becomes PII.Examples of Sensitive PII:Mother’s maiden nameDriver’s license numberBank account informationCredit card informationRelatives’ namesBiometric informationHome or cellular telephone numberPersonal characteristicsPassport informationSocial Security Number (SSN)Date or place of birthOther information that would make the individual’s personal identity easily traceable>Indiana Dr. Caitlin Bernard reported 10-year-old Ohio girl's abortion, records showhttps://www.indystar.com/story/news/health/2022/07/14/ohio-abortion-10-year-old-indiana-todd-rokita-dr-caitlin-bernard/65373626007/The Indiana physician who provided abortion services to a 10-year-old Ohio girl who was raped disclosed the abortion in a form filed with the Indiana Department of Health and the Department of Child Services, according to documents obtained by IndyStar through a public records request. Do you get it? Naw, probably not.
>>1171456>She also failed to disclose the fact that this girl was the victim of sexual abuse to the proper authorities.She actually did that. The original physician seems to be the one who may have failed to do so.
>>1171452>>1171457>>1171457>The definition of PHI vs PII is not defined to any single information category or technologyFormer healthcare worker here.I didn't read your entire blog post. I may or may not agree with what you wrote.Pii means any information which can be used to identify an individual. Birthdate, name, address, phone number, SSN, etc... It's pretty well defined.Phi is any information related to health care and an individual. eg "X was treated for diabetes"Information not in this category can be such as "I treated a patient for severe mental retardation"This health care worker from what I've read was reprimanded not for sharing pii or phi, as she stated it was anonymous, but for not reporting in a fully proper way a child was raped. She mentioned it to a social worker friend but didn't report it in an official capacity
>>1171464How many pregnant 10 year olds do you think they ship in from Ohio every year?The media definitely caught wind of it, and made public record requests about the case.PII was leaked by this tard. You have no defense.
>>1171464>Information not in this category can be such as "I treated a patient for severe mental retardation"Which would still qualify as PII, because a doctor can only see a limited pool of patients, and few of those patients will actually have something like "severe mental retardation".It is tragically easy to doxx someone using only two pieces of information. The only limiting factor is time and energy.
>>1171472>It is tragically easy to doxx someone using only two pieces of information. The only limiting factor is time and energy.If it's so easy, then do it. Tell me the full name of the 10 year-old girl mentioned in the article with whatever information was provided by the doctor.
>>1171478Let me submit a public records request like the news papers did, then I'll let you know immediately.
>>1171478Telemundo reporter María Vargas-Pion already visited their home, anon. They videotaped their front fucking door. > with whatever information was provided by the doctor.They literally told us the details of this case back in 2022.
>>1171509The baby murder anons are trying so hard to cope it's surreal.And they'd actually take the word of someone who murders babies professionally as truth as if someone who makes a living murdering babies has solid moral character.
>>1171509You can't just expect anons to connect the dots these days.
>>1170781This of what happens when you invited the third world, you get third world problems.