LafayetteLady
Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007 From: Northern New Jersey Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote:
How do we prove that drugs were involved? Uh...an autopsy. You find drugs in the infants system, how else would they have gotten there if not taken by the mother? My impression is that this law does more than test for the presence of cocaine... from the OP quote:
Gibbs became pregnant aged 15, but lost the baby in December 2006 in a stillbirth when she was 36 weeks into the pregnancy. When prosecutors discovered that she had a cocaine habit – though there is no evidence that drug abuse had anything to do with the baby's death – they charged her with the "depraved-heart murder" of her child, which carries a mandatory life sentence. Then from another link quote:
Amanda Kimbrough is one of the women who have been ensnared as a result of the law being applied in a wholly different way. During her pregnancy her foetus was diagnosed with possible Down's syndrome and doctors suggested she consider a termination, which Kimbrough declined as she is not in favour of abortion. The baby was delivered by caesarean section prematurely in April 2008 and died 19 minutes after birth. Six months later Kimbrough was arrested at home and charged with "chemical endangerment" of her unborn child on the grounds that she had taken drugs during the pregnancy – a claim she has denied. "That shocked me, it really did," Kimbrough said. "I had lost a child, that was enough." It seems to me that these women are being prosecuted with information obtained external to an autopsy... which was what I personally found so outrageous. In a criminal investigation, it is customary to look beyond an autopsy to determine what happened. Sorry that is so outrageous to you. I find it interesting they say, "no evidence," not that an autopsy showed there was no cocaine in Gibbs' baby's system. Not one article I could find indicated what started the investigation to begin with. Law enforcement isn't looking at every baby that dies or is stillborn. Something had to trigger that investigation. I would like to know what that was, wouldn't you? As for Kimbrough, initially I thought what was happening was horrible and that there was a chance that something bizarre had occurred similar to that woman who was convicted, and later exonerated, for feeding her baby anti-freeze (the baby had some rare disease). Then I looked around for articles on these women other than the OP's. Low and behold, Kimbrough admits to smoking meth 3 days before she went into labor. Asserting that the baby had Down Syndrome and that caused the premature labor seems to be a bit of a long shot when you get that information. Kimbrough already has 4 children. Surely she knew by then that smoking meth was not a good idea while pregnant. I also find it interesting that she did this only days after getting the test results that her child might not be "normal." For the record, I have stated over and over, I don't think the whole "depraved heart" law should exist. quote:
quote:
One can only assume by your continued assertion on this that you believe an abortion can be sought at any time during the pregnancy. Medical tests can determine the development of the fetus and its liklihood of survival. If one child is born at 24 weeks and survives, statistically, 24 weeks has just become "viable." But that is in no way to be confused with "likely to survive." If a doctor induced labor at 24 weeks just because the mother wanted to continue being a drug addict, he would lose his license. Actually your assumption is incorrect, like Tazzy, I do not think that if a fetus can survive outside of the mother that there should be an abortion. I make health exceptions. At the same time I do not think it is okay to charge women with a 20 year sentence for using drugs while pregnant because it is granting personhood to a fetus through the backdoor. I am pro choice. "Personhood" is, to a degree, granted at viability. That portion of Roe v. Wade allows for the concept that if a woman chooses NOT to abort, she is taking responsibility to attempt to have a healthy baby. Because in all these cases we are talking about pregnancies that have reached viability, Roe v. Wade doesn't even come into play. There is no back door. You want a case of trying to back door Roe v. Wade, go to the thread about the clinics in Kansas. You weren't talking about aborting viable fetuses. You said a woman should be able to have her doctor induce labor. Since medical tests can determine the chances of survival, inducing labor for a woman to give birth KNOWING that in all liklihood will result in the baby's death is not much different than abortion. quote:
quote:
You are really reaching here. According to your statements, a woman can do ANYTHING she wants while pregnant and not be held accountable. Being held accountable for knowingly engaging in behavior that will cause harm to an unborn child is NOT the same as "backdoor rights." You are really reaching here, this thread is not about the cost of caring for sick infants, it is about incarcerating pregnant women. What pregnant women have been incarcerated? All of these women were charged AFTER their child was born. Viable fetus, stillborn or death after birth. They weren't pregnant when charged. Further, I haven't mentioned the cost of caring for sick infants at all. quote:
quote:
You do not grasp all the factors of first degree murder (which is NOT simply premeditation). Premeditation is one element of murder one. Again, the elements of first degree murder are not "and," they are "or." Premeditation doesn't apply, but the other element does. quote:
quote:
Again the LAW has available remedies for alcohol abuse of a pregnant woman who gives birth to an FAS baby. The woman will not maintain custody of her child. Obviously, she isn't going to be charged with murder if the baby is alive. If that baby dies as a result of FAS or the alcohol use of the mother, which can be proven through an autopsy, yes she can and should be charged with murder. I know....taking away kids from alcoholics happens all of the time, it is still not criminal to drink while pregnant This thread is not about FAS Yet you are the one who continually wants to point out how it is legal to drink while pregnant. You continue to imply that there are no repurcussions for a woman who "legally" drinks while pregnant. I simply pointed out (repeatedly) that there are repurcussions. quote:
quote:
The key point here is that there is ZERO evidence of a baby DYING because a mother smokes or drinks coffee or eats chocolate. Cigarette smoking isn't proven to cause low birthweigh t babies. premature babies, asthmatic babies, and increase the likelihood of SIDs? I will have to tell my OBGYN that, because of these risks I quit while pregnant here, I actually provide the info I assert exists unlike some people http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080129125422.htm http://quitsmoking.about.com/od/tobaccostatistics/a/SGRpregnancy.htm http://sids-network.org/experts/smok.htm It is highly dangerous and cause lifelong pain and suffering for a child to smoke while pregnant... But there aren't any reported DEATHS associated with it. I know you are super anti-smoking, and since you like to post supporting links, where are the links about coffee and chocolate. Since you always like to talk about how a link someone else posts isn't coming from a reputable source, why should I, or anyone else post a link for you. You want to find out if what I said is true, go look. I went and looked for more information about these women. Found some updated information, like the fact that now Kimbrough admits to smoking meth. quote:
As far as the rest, I quit reading when you wrote "squawking"... I figured if you wanted to have a real conversation you would post like a person in search of one...and I know, it isn't with everyone you are like this, just people you do not respect... me being one of those people. Not that I give a flying fuck, I don't respect you, either I wouldn't bother posting in response to what you write at all, except for the fact that I have this issue with people stating as "fact" things that aren't or perceiving they "know" something when what they "know" is blatently wrong. I will sleep better at night knowing you have no respect for me. Wasn't looking for it. Unlike some people, I don't feel a need to be in the "cliques" that abound around here. Kissing ass or playing "follow the leader" has never been my style. But you are so obviously comfortable with it, so I wish you all the happiness in the world as you continue to do so.
|