Under Palin, Wasilla charge rape victims for medical exams
By 4magoo
@4magoo (396)
September 22, 2008 3:52pm CST
It has come out that while Palin was the mayor of Wasilla the city charged rape victims for their own medical exams. The article claims that eight years ago, complaints about charging rape victims for medical exams in Wasilla prompted the Alaskan Legislature to pass a bill that banned the practice statewide. The article said that medical rape exams, which cost between $300 and $1,200 a piece, had to be paid for by the "victim of the rape." The article did not get into the feelings a rape victim might have when given a bill for her own exam after being illegally assulted. Do you feel that this shows strong fiscal conservatism or lack of understanding for victims of crimes.
2 people like this
6 responses
@samtaylorskykierajen (7977)
• Canada
23 Sep 08
This will prevent evem more women coming forward and letting more rapists go free every day . As it is many do not come forward because of the trauma they have suddered and with something like this in play you will see more women keeping silent . This is victimizing the vicitim even more . Why should the vitim pay for something she never asked for in the first place .
2 people like this
@4magoo (396)
•
24 Sep 08
I agree 100%... this is shameful and others have said it isn't just Palin and her home city. This is an embarrassment for any city that does this. The only reason Palin comes up here is she is a national lightening rod right now especially given her mantle of pro-life and reformer.
1 person likes this
@ElaanR2 (277)
• United States
23 Sep 08
There's no evidence that Sarah Palin knew about the problem. However, the fact that the Commissioner of public safety was fired, among other things, for seeking money from Washington for something related to violence against women raises eyebrows. The hypothesis? In her efforts to keep public spending down, she indirectly cut funding for the procedure at city level. Then she did it again at State level, causing the commissioner, out of frustration, to run to Washington for help. This is just a hypothesis.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
24 Sep 08
I think it's a sound hypothesis.
"Her knack for firing subordinates who do not agree with her is stunning!"
That's what disturbs me and gives me that deja-vu feeling, if you know what I mean. Do we really need more of the same of what we've had for eight years?
Annie
1 person likes this
@Latrivia (2878)
• United States
23 Sep 08
Oddly, none of the articles I look up mention how long the town had been charging rape victims for their kit. They all seem to say "under Palin", which is funny because I know Palin was not the first mayor of the city. The police department was founded 3 years before Palin ever took office - so who was to blame for charging rape victims for that time period?
I wish the news would start giving the facts, instead of what they want you to hear. I'm going to write this off as a Palin smear attempt, as it seems no one has even attempted to take a balanced look at this. I honestly don't like Palin, but this story has BS written all over it.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
23 Sep 08
"According to the Police chief that Palin fired when she came to power, the Department had funding for the procedure before Sarah Palin got into office."
That is true, but the funds were coming from a "miscellaneous funds" which had no specifications as to what they were used for. I'm sure Palin was unaware that these were the funds previously used for rape kits which is why the funds were reduced when she took office. When it comes to reducing expenses, the first things cut are always nonspecific things with words like "miscellaneous" attached.
When budgets are cut those decisions fall to the person running the organization, in this case the police chief, and they decide how to deal with said cuts.
@sharra1 (6340)
• Australia
23 Sep 08
To me this sounds terrible. Basically it is saying that if the woman has insurance or can afford the cost of the rape kit then she can bring rape charges but if she is poor and has no medical insurance and cannot afford the cost of the rape kit then do not bother reporting the rape because they won't bother to try and stop him.
Hmm so go ahead rape as many poor girls as you like in this town and we do not care. That is what this say to men. Typical rich vs poor crap that you get in America all the time. I think this is totally wrong.
I am totally opposed for girls being punished for being raped. It is just another way of saying it is the girls fault and she should be punished for being female. This is the most sickening thing I have read in a long time.
All I can say is thank God I am not American. I hope that this conservative crap never comes to my country. It is totally immoral.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
23 Sep 08
It's not just conservative crap. The practice happens many places in this country including Illinois, Obama's home state.
"Knecht says she's recently heard from caseworkers in Illinois, Georgia, and Arkansas reporting that rape victims continue to be charged for their forensic exams.
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/on-health-and-money/2008/2/21/rape-victims-can-be-hurt-financially-too.html
1 person likes this
@4magoo (396)
•
24 Sep 08
Sharral I agree with you and I also agree that this isn't just a Republican issue. The reason I think it is especially damning for Palin in that she is Pro-Life and have cloaked herself in the "reformer" mantle. It is my belief that if we had a form of universal health coverage, this wouldn't even be an issue.
1 person likes this
@irishidid (8687)
• United States
23 Sep 08
1. Are the practices of other cities and states being examine?
2. This is not a non-partisan site.
@ClarusVisum (2163)
• United States
23 Sep 08
1. Would that change anything about it being abhorrent to do this? Whether it's one state or 49 states, it's a terrible thing to do.
2. McClatchy is generally well-respected by 'guys' on both major sides--I've never seen anyone in either party criticize it for being partisan on the other side.
2a. This rape kit story is the real deal--it's gotten lots of coverage from many different sources, and it's a matter of public record, including the legislation that stopped this practice.
1 person likes this
@irishidid (8687)
• United States
23 Sep 08
How many women would pay for having a rape kit done to catch the rapist and help get him off the street? I would.
I will give the site the benefit of the doubt. All I saw was anti-McCain and anti-Palin on it. Can I assume there are anti-Obama articles? Articles that point out the questionable of all? I sure did not see any but like I said I will give it the benefit of the doubt.
@chameleonsdream (1230)
• United States
23 Sep 08
Would you also pay for the fingerprint dust and rubber gloves used to take fingerprints if your home was broken into?
As abhorrent as I think the practice is, I actually think the reason for women (or their insurance companies - that's the part most people leave out) being charged for the rape collection kits used in gathering evidence is this: it's easy to lump that charge in with medical costs and get it paid for by an insurance company rather than by the police department. Of course, the effect is the same - the cost of investigation is being charged to the victim.
The defense against this is that Palin ordered it changed after the Alaskan legislature passed a law prohibiting the practice, and that she may not have known that it was the practice under the police chief she appointed. I'm actually quite willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on that one. It just means that she told her chief to cut costs and didn't ask him how he managed to reduce that line item to practically nothing.
2 people like this
