中新网北京7月9日电（蒋鲤）美国俄亥俄州一名因遭强奸怀孕的10岁女童要求流产遭拒，因此不得不长途跋涉至印第安纳州接受手术，引发美国社会震动堕胎被拒，无疑是对女童的二次伤害当司法凌驾女性意志，美国女性的人权如何得到保障？，下面我们就来说一说关于10岁打胎?我们一起去了解并探讨一下这个问题吧!
10岁打胎
中新网北京7月9日电（蒋鲤）美国俄亥俄州一名因遭强奸怀孕的10岁女童要求流产遭拒，因此不得不长途跋涉至印第安纳州接受手术，引发美国社会震动。堕胎被拒，无疑是对女童的二次伤害。当司法凌驾女性意志，美国女性的人权如何得到保障？
当地时间6月24日，美国联邦最高法院发布裁决，正式推翻“罗诉韦德案”，结束对堕胎权的保护。俄亥俄州随即宣布，该州女性只要怀孕满6周就不得堕胎，无论是遭受性侵，还是自然受孕，未成年人也不例外。
该女童堕胎遭拒，凸显了这一裁决带来的严重后果，即受害者遭受惩罚，被迫生育，这暴露出美国在保护妇女儿童权利方面职责缺位。
该项裁决剥夺了美国女性的自由和选择权，无疑是一种社会倒退。美国总统拜登也发表讲话，称最高法院的裁决是“悲剧性错误”，让美国倒退150年。这种公然违背美国宪法精神的裁决一出，无疑给了美国宪法当头一棒，它削弱了宪法的权威，挑战了宪法所规定的“保障人权”这一重要原则。
美国长期以“人权卫士”自居，但禁止堕胎侵犯美国女性的生殖权利，让本可以自由选择的权利，变成了强迫承担的义务。对此，美国有线电视新闻网(CNN)6月27日表示，此举与全球更自由堕胎的趋势背道而驰，使美国成为了西方发达国家中的“异类”。
联合国人权事务高级专员米歇尔·巴切莱特也就美国联邦法院这一裁决发表评论。她表示，获得安全、合法和有效的堕胎服务深深植根于国际人权法，是妇女和女孩在不受歧视、暴力和胁迫的情况下自主选择自己身体和生活的能力的核心。
她指出，美国最高法院的裁决剥夺了美国数百万妇女的这种自主权，特别是那些低收入和少数族裔的妇女，损害了她们的基本权利，是对女性人权和性别平等的巨大打击。
与此同时，民主党和共和党所主政的各州在对最高法院这一裁决立场不一，这会导致跨州堕胎，由此引发的关于人权、伦理和政府责任的冲突和争议势必进一步激化州与联邦政府的矛盾，也加剧美国社会的分裂。
在现行的立法、行政、司法三权分立制度下，联邦法院这一裁决恐怕很难再被推翻。“美式民主”陷入危机，美国女性的人权如何得到保障？
How can American women's human rights be guaranteed?
By John Lee
(ECNS) -- The case of a 10-year-old child rape victim in Ohio who was six weeks pregnant but ineligible for an abortion in her own state and forced to travel to Indiana for the procedure has shocked the U.S. and the world. The abortion ban does secondary harm to the girl.
How can American women's human rights be guaranteed when judicature act prevails over women's birth preference?
The U.S. Supreme Court officially reversed Roe v. Wade on June 24, putting an end to federal abortion rights. It immediately came into force in Ohio, which declares that women with a gestation age of six weeks are not allowed to abort.
The case of the 10-year-old girl has spotlit the shocking impact of the U.S. supreme court ruling on abortion, which states that the victim has to give birth against their will. It reveals the negligence of the U.S. government in protecting the human rights of women and children.
The overturning of Roe v. Wade deprives U.S. women of freedom and choice, forcing U.S. society to regress. The U.S. President Joe Biden also addressed the decision, saying it was a “tragic error” and the court is literally “taking the country back 150 years.”
The ruling, which openly violates the spirit of the American Constitution, has undoubtedly weakened its authority and challenged the vital principle of "safeguarding human rights" stipulated by the Constitution.
The U.S., who has long regarded itself as a "guardian of human rights”， has invaded women’s reproduction rights with such an abortion ban, turning it a compulsory obligation. CNN also criticized this decision, saying the move counters a global trend towards freer access to abortion and makes the U.S. an “outlier” in the West.
Michelle Bachelet Jeria, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, also criticized the ruling by the federal court. "Access to safe, legal and effective abortion is firmly rooted in international human right law and is at the core of women and girls' autonomy and ability to make their own choices about their bodies and lives, free of discrimination, violence and coercion," Jeria said in a media statement.
"This decision strips such autonomy from millions of women in the U.S., in particular those with low incomes and those belonging to racial and ethnic minorities, to the detriment of their fundamental rights," she added.
Besides, states dominated by the U.S. Democratic Party and Republican Party are divided on the abortion ban, which may lead to cross-states abortion. The resulting conflicts and disputes on human rights, ethics and government responsibilities will inevitably further intensify the contradiction between the state and the federal government, and further split the country.
However, the decision made by the federal court, protected by the country’s system of separation of powers, is hard to be overturned once again. As U.S.-style "democracy" is beset with a crisis, how can American women's human rights be guaranteed?
,
