INDIANAPOLIS – Indiana lawmakers are moving legislation that would take away the parental rights of rapists – except if the child was conceived during a marriage.
The marriage exemption added in a Senate committee in January is complicating an otherwise straightforward bill.
Anita Carpenter, CEO of the Indiana Coalition Against Sexual Assault, said the bill is meant to stop a rapist from trying to have a legal relationship with a child.
“Rape is an issue of power and control, and when you think about the rapist wanting to assert control over the victim by being able to have a part in that child’s life without the victim being able to say no in some form, then that rapist has ultimate control,” she said.
Senate Bill 190 – which passed the Senate unanimously and is now pending in the House – says if a rapist seeks custody, parenting time or contact with the child, a judge shall prohibit it.
To do so, the judge has to find “by clear and convincing evidence” that the child was conceived as the result of an act of rape by that individual. No conviction is required.
The legislation also says if a judge denies a rapist’s parental rights, a court can’t require the person to pay child support.
Carpenter said there might be only an occasional case involving rapists seeking parental rights, “but one is too many because it’s a lifetime issue the victim has to endure.”
The Senate put in an exception for a child conceived of rape during marriage – which has some domestic violence advocates concerned.
It is estimated that between 10 percent and 14 percent of married women are raped by their husbands, according to the Indiana Coalition Against Sexual Assault website. Many of these women have also been battered by their husbands.
Indiana law doesn’t make a distinction for marital rape. But up until the 1980s, a spouse couldn’t be charged with rape unless a separation or divorce had been filed.
“My question is what message are we sending?” said Laura Berry, executive director of the Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence. “Personally it invalidates the seriousness of sexual assault against married women.”
Sen. Ed Charbonneau, R-Valparaiso, said he believes rape is rape regardless of marriage.
But he said the bill is aimed at the random act of a rapist where there is no ongoing relationship between the victim and perpetrator. He said rape in marriage can already be handled through divorce proceedings.
Some are also concerned that without the marriage exception some women could falsely claim rape to complicate a custody case.
Rep. Rebecca Kubacki, R-Syracuse – the House sponsor of the bill – said she hopes the bill will encourage women who might otherwise have abortions to keep children because they don’t have to worry about future interference.
She and another co-sponsor of the bill plan to remove the marriage amendment in committee on Monday to avoid any confusion.
