More information comes to light...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0312042utah1.html

She did eventually have the emergency C-section, but it was too late for the one twin who was already dead (which the doctors already knew at that point, they were just trying to save the other one). She's being charged with child endangerment (not murder,) and not because she didn't want the C-section but because the surviving twin tested positive for cocaine and alcohol. In addition to that, she admitted to smoking pot while pregnant and in fact kept demanding to go outside and smoke a cigarette first before they could begin the C-section.

(edit: oops, sorry--she's simply ALSO being charged with child endangerment of the second one. She's still being charged with murder.)

She should claim religion. She could say it's her religious belief that it be natural. It was the will of god, or what not, that the child live if it were meant to live, and die if it were meant to die.

How is this any different than people who say they'll pray for their kid to get better, rather than use the latest (or even old) medical treatments to ensure that it get better? There's people that forgo medical treatment that would guarantee their survival, because it's their belief that they shouldn't do so.

How is this different? No, she probably doesn't believe that, but she could claim it, and the end result would be the same.

Or, she could claim something along the lines of natural selection. Though I doubt people would like this. But basicly, the child wasn't strong enough, lucky enough, whatever enough for it to survive in nature. In nature, there is no such thing as a C-section.

Anyway...

Utah? She's fucked. Again. I slay me. I really do.

Quzah.

Cocaine aside, the surviving child is going to be one fucked up kid.

Mom, from prison: "Hi daughter."
Daughter: "Now tell me again why I don't have a [brother/sister]?"
Mom: "Well I didn't really feel like having a C-section. Sorry."

Fucked up I tell you. That kid will need some serious therapy.

Quzah.

A murder charge in this scenario is stupid, even with the additional details Clodfobble provided via thesmokinggun.com. Wreckless Endangerment, sure. But murder? No.

But, it IS Utah, the (self-)righteousness capital of the US. Damn Utahns. *cough*

Radar, Hmm, so the government (funded by us) has no right to stop a woman from smoking or drinking during her pregnancy, but then the government (again our $$$) has to later spend money on the child because of all sorts of physical and mental damage the kid ends up with.


I guess to be fair, the governement should tell parents of fetal alcohol syndrom kids that it's their problem and no help will be given, let them handle it themselves. The school system is not going to treat that child any different than a normal one, because it would be unfair to all the other parents to have to pay for the consequences of the free choices taken by the one parent.

Quzah the humanitarian has spoken.

BTW it's "daisies".

Humanitarian? Where'd you ever get that idea? Here you go.

On a side note, I can't keep speeling everything right. You'd have nothing to do around here.

Quzah.

I was being ironic.



Roxanne Kowalski: I was being ironic.
C.D. Bales: Oh, ho, ho, irony! Oh, no, no, we don't get that here. See, uh, people ski topless here while smoking dope, so irony's not really a, a high priority. We haven't had any irony here since about, uh, '83, when I was the only practitioner of it. And I stopped because I was getting tired of being stared at.

How is that ironic? Or did you mean ironic in the sense of "He knows CPR, but won't use it?"

Which again, isn't ironic. It's actually quite fitting to the topic at hand. She knew that a C-section would save the kid, but she opted not to use it.

Perhaps ironic in the sense of likes animals, doesn't care about people? Which really isn't ironic either. I donno. I just don't see the irony.

Quzah.

Some people (incorrectly) use the word "ironic" interchangably with "sarcastic." I believe dar512 meant "sarcastic."

Is it ironic to define sarcasm? *cough*

Which in itself would be hilarious, coming from a post where "Conan the Grammarian" corrected my spelling. :D It may or may not not be irony, but it would definately be hilarity.

Quzah.

I didn't say it was perfectly fine. I think it's a stupid and selfish decision, but it's her decision to make and nobody can make it for her. Nor may anyone punish her for choosing what to do with her own body. The death of a child is unfortuate, but does not justify government intervention into this woman's sole dominion over her own body. It is my personal opinion that such selfish people should not have children, but that doesn't mean the government should prevent it or get involved. It only means everyone would be better off if they didn't have kids. The one that died is most likely the luckier of the two. She can base her stupid decision on vanity, or the direction of the wind for that matter and it doesn't give anyone else claim over her body including something growing inside her.

I don't care how they feel. Their feelings don't matter, nor do yours, mine, or the combined feelings of everyone on earth other than the person whose body it is.

Wrong. The only criminal here is the one who charged her with any crime at all. She not only should get away without a single punishment, she should get a lot of money for being wrongly arrested.

Perhaps. In my opinion she made a poor decision, but government isn't here to punish us for our poor decision with our own bodies or anything growing inside them. Government has no say in the matter.

Says who? You? She alone decides whose needs come first and who has the greatest claim on her body. Not you, not me, the father, or the government. Since it's her body she can decide that her needs come first and are above those of an unborn fetus inside her.

Yes, the choice is hers (not yours) to become pregnant, to remain pregnant, and whether or not to have a C-Section regardless of what happens as a result. And nobody on earth or anywhere else has any legitimate authority to tell her she can't make that decision or to punish her for anything that happens as a result of her decisions pertaining to her body.

The use of cocaine again is a personal decision which again is her decision to make regardless of whether or not she has a fetus or other parasite inside of her. Again, I think it's a poor decision, but it's irrelevant to the major topic at hand which is her decision not to have a C-Section

Yes, the government (regardless of who funds it) has no right to stop any woman from smoking, drinking, or using any drug during her pregnancy and the government also has no right to take our money to pay for the healthcare of anyone regardless of who they are. Nobody is entitled to anything they didn't pay for (or otherwise obtain honestly) and healthcare is not a right. Government has no legal authority to be involved in healthcare, retirement, charity, etc.

I agree. They should tell that to anyone who needs medical care and they should stop preventing people who know how to give care but don't hold a license from giving it.

I'm against publically funded schools anyway.

Hey look, I'm quoting myself to point out my own error... how ironic. I guess that by it's definition, "irony" can technically be synonymous to "sarcasm:"
...though that's not common usage. At least not in well-educated circles. *Cough* :D

*Ducks*

Well, just as you don't think she should be punished, neither should whomever arrested her. Doing one's job isn't a crime.

quote:She also must take on the responsibility to put that unborn child's needs FIRST above her OWN, and if that means get the damned C-section if the doctor strongly recommends it!


Common sense says so. Guess I don't need to bring up again how fucked up parents send out fucked up children into the world.

I agree, somebody has to protect the gene pool.