Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 9:53:08 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

I'm relieved to hear you report that some aspects of these laws have been successfully challenged in the courts, though I'm unclear whether mandatory drug testing or the "depraved heart" laws were the subject of the Court's ruling. If you have that information, I'd really appreciate a clarification.


Not sure which Court you are referring too, or what ruling. Could you clarify?

I think the following may help you understand the attitude in the US. The hospital mentioned, MUSC, is the largest teaching hospital in South Carolina, a place I worked.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+construction+of+pregnant+drug-using+women+as+criminal...-a0147746250

Its a long article.

< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 6/27/2011 10:01:13 PM >


_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 10:48:02 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
In post # 117, you wrote:
"The intent is to harm the fetus. Thats how the courts view it. And it IS something the lawmakers wanted to do.. mandatory drug testing with referral to the courts if found positive. It didnt hold up under the Supreme Court. "

That's the matter I was asking about. It sounds like you are referring to mandatory drug testing but I'm uncertain that's the case.

Thanks for the link.

_____________________________



(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 10:52:02 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
The link is about the Supreme Court

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:02:16 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"You keep leaving out the most important part of that ruling. "

Which is ? Explain please. Sorry if I thought human life was the crux of the matter. When this came down I was busy rebuilding my carb. YES at 13. Well it was Mom's carb, but I got my own a year or so later. The ability to take a human life which is entrusted to you seems pretty important. What is more important ?

"There are a few forms of this oath, not all restrict a Dr from performing abortions. "

If the oath changes, it is not the same oath. You think Hippocrates would condone this ? Not that it's relevant when it comes to law, but to me the law is irrelevant anyway. Your thoughts ?

"When you figure out the important part you left out, you will see how the above isnt true. "

I don't see it. The fetus can be killed at will under the law. What else is there ? You can kill legally, what are there regulations or some shit ? Maybe there were but that is a waste of time. Life begins at a certain point, it is either conception or birth. Don't start with this weeks of gestation. How is it that if this Woman had gotten an abortion and she had ALREADY killed her son or dughter she would be in the clear, but since she didn't she is in hot water over it ?

"Again, the missing important part makes this not true as well."

Then enlighten me. What restrictions on abortion did Roe v Wade set ? What's more, how does that make a chemical dependancy a worse crime than going out driving or shooting while drunk and killing a preson who just got lucky enough to actually get born ?

T^T

< Message edited by Termyn8or -- 6/27/2011 11:20:16 PM >

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:05:39 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
The age of viability. Its the part you keep leaving out.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:16:07 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

"There are a few forms of this oath, not all restrict a Dr from performing abortions. "

If the oath changes, it is not the same oath. You think Hippocrats would condone this ? Not that it's revevant when it comes to law, but to me the law is irrelevant anyway. Your thoughts ?


Many physicians take different oaths.

The oath of the Hindu physician, also known as the vaidya's oath, was an oath taken by Hindu physicians. It is dated from the 15th century BCE and requires physicians not to eat meat, drink, or commit adultery. Similar to the Hippocratic Oath, the vaidya's oath entreats physicians not to harm their patients and be solely devoted to their care,[1] even if this put their lives in danger.[2]

1) You must put behind you desire, anger, greed, folly, pride, egotism, jealousy, harshness, calumny, falsehood, sloth and improper conduct.

With short-cut nails, ritually clean and clad in the orange garment, you must be pledged to truth, and full of reverence in addressing me...

2) If, however, you behave perfectly, while I profess false views, I shall be guilty of sin and my knowledge shall bear me no fruit.

3) (after having finished your studies) with your medicaments you shall assist brahmins, venerable persons, poor people, women, ascetics, pious people seeking your assistance, widows and orphans and any one you meet on your errands, as if they were your own relatives. This will be right conduct.


.............

Hospital Corpsman Pledge

"I solemnly pledge myself before God and these witnesses to practice faithfully all of my duties as a member of the Hospital Corps. I hold the care of the sick and injured to be a privilege and a sacred trust and will assist the Medical Officer with loyalty and honesty. I will not knowingly permit harm to come to any patient. I will not partake of nor administer any unauthorized medication. I will hold all personal matters pertaining to the private lives of patients in strict confidence. I dedicate my heart, mind and strength to the work before me. I shall do all within my power to show in myself an example of all that is honorable and good throughout my naval career."


..........

The Oath of Asaph, also known as the Oath of Asaph and Yohanan, is a code of conduct for Hebrew physicians. It may have been written in the 6th century CE,[1] which would make Asaph the oldest known Hebrew medical writer.[2]

[edit]Oath Text

[1] This is the pact which Asaph ben Berakhyahu and Yohanan ben Zabda made with their pupils, and they adjured them with the following words:
[2] Do not attempt to kill any soul by means of a potion of herbs,
[3] Do not make a woman [who is] pregnant [as a result of] of whoring take a drink with a view to causing abortion,
[4] Do not covet beauty of form in women with a view to fornicating with them,
[5] Do not divulge the secret of a man who has trusted you,
[6] Do not take any reward [which may be offered in order to induce you] to destroy and to ruin,
[7] Do not harden your heart [and turn it away] from pitying the poor and healing the needy,
[8] Do not say of [what is] good; it is bad, nor of [what is] bad: it is good,
[9] Do not adopt the ways of the sorcerers using [as they do] charms, augury and sorcery in order to separate a man from the wife of his bosom or a woman from the companion of her youth,
[10] You shall not covet any wealth or reward [which may be offered in order to induce you] to help in a lustful desire,
[11] You shall not seek help in any idolatrous [worship] so as to heal through [a recourse to idols], and you shall not heal with anything [pertaining] to their worship,
[12] But on the contrary detest and abhor and hate all those who worship them, put their trust in them, and give assurance [referring] to them,
[13] For they are all naught, useless, for they are nothing, demons, spirits of the dead; they cannot help their own corpses, how then could they help those who live?
[14] Now [then] put your trust in the Lord, your God, [who is] a true God, a living God,
[15] For [it is] He who kills and makes alive, who wounds and heals,
[16] Who teaches men knowledge and also to profit,
[17] Who wounds with justice and righteousness, and who heals with pity and compassion,
[18] No designs of [His] sagacity are beyond His [power]
[19] And nothing is hidden from His eyes.
[20] Who causes curative plants to grow,
[21] Who puts sagacity into the hearts of the wise in order that they should heal through the abundance of His loving-kindness, and that they should recount wonders in the congregation of many; so that every living [being] knows that He made him and that there is no saviour [other] than He.
[22] For the nations trust in their idols, who [are supposed] to save them from their distress and will not deliver them from their misfortunes
[23] For their trust and hope is in the dead.
[24] For this [reason] it is fitting to keep yourselves separate from them; to remove yourselves and keep far away from all the abominations of their idols,
[25] And to cleave to the name of the Lord God of spirits for all flesh,
[26] And the soul of every living being is in His hand to kill and to make live,
[27] And there is none that can deliver out of His hand.
[28] Remember Him always and seek Him in truth, in righteousness in an upright way, in order that you should prosper in all your works
[29] And He will give you help to make you prosper in [what you are doing], and you shall be [said to be] happy in the mouth of all flesh.
[30] And the nations will abandon their idols and images and will desire to worship God like you,
[31] For they will know that their trust is in vain and their endeavor fruitless,
[32] For they implore a god, who will not do good [to them], who will not save [them].
[33] As for you, be strong, do not let your hands be weak, for your work shall be rewarded,
[34] The Lord is with you, while you are with Him,
[35] If you keep His pact, follow His commandments, cleaving to them,
[36] You will be regarded as His saints in the eyes of all flesh, and they will say:
[37] Happy the people whose [lot] is such, happy the people whose God is the Lord.
[38] Their pupils answered saying:
[40] We will do all that you exhorted and ordered us [to do],
[41] For it is a commandment of the Torah,
[42] And we must do it with all our heart, with all our soul and with all our might, To do and to obey
[43] Not to swerve or turn aside to the right hand or the left
[44] And they [Asaph and Yohanan] blessed them in the name of God most high, maker of heaven and earth.
[45] And they continued to charge them, and said:
[46] The Lord God, His saints and His Torah [bear] witness, that you should fear Him, that you should not turn aside from His commandments, and that you should follow His laws with an upright heart,
[47] You shall not incline after lucre [so as] to help a godless [man in shedding] innocent blood.
[48] You shall not mix a deadly drug for any man or woman so that he [or she] should kill their fellow-man.
[49] You shall not speak of the herbs [out of which such drugs are made]. You shall not hand them over to any man,
[50] And you shall not talk about any matter [connected] with this,
[51] you shall not use blood in any work of medicine,
[52] You shall not attempt to provoke an ailment in a human soul through [the use of] iron instruments or searing with fire before making an examination two or three times; then [only] should you give your advice.*
[53] You shall not be ruled - your eyes and your heart being lifted up - by a haughty spirit.
[54] Do not keep [in your hearts] the vindictiveness of hatred with regard to a sick man,
[55] You shall not change your words in anything,
[56] The Lord our God hates [?] [this?] being done,
[57] But keep His orders and commandments, and follow all His ways, in order to please Him, [and] to be pure, true and upright.
[58] Thus did Asaph and Yohanan exhort and adjure their pupils.


.........

Hippocratic Oath
Main article: Hippocratic Oath
The Hippocratic Oath, a seminal document on the ethics of medical practice, was attributed to Hippocrates in antiquity although new information shows it may have been written after his death. This is probably the most famous document of the Hippocratic Corpus. Recently the authenticity of the document's author has come under scrutiny. While the Oath is rarely used in its original form today, it serves as a foundation for other, similar oaths and laws that define good medical practice and morals. Such derivatives are regularly taken today by medical graduates about to enter medical practice.[13][53][54]


..........

The Hippocratic oath is possibly the one most people hear about... its not the only one that is taken.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:21:07 PM   
ClassIsInSession


Posts: 305
Joined: 7/26/2010
Status: offline
I guess no one here ever saw the picture of a very premature baby (what you would call a fetus) in emergency surgery reaching out with it's hand to touch the scalpel. You can call something anything you want, but if it has a heart beat, it's alive. If abortion is legal, I just think we should raise the limit on it to 50. There are quite a few people I'd like to abort that contribute very little to the world. (On either side of the aisle.)

Life begins at conception, I have no doubt of that.

What puzzles me the most about the abortion issue is the total lack of responsibility that led to the situation to begin with. Condoms are very inexpensive. Other forms of birth control are readily available. If you want to have sex, you can do so, many times, over many years and never conceive. I know this very well as I've led a pretty promiscious life and I never had an unwanted pregnancy...the only time I ever fathered a child, I clearly intended to.

The freedom of choice begins in the bedroom. If you don't want to get pregnant or have children, then a) don't have sex...that's a surefire way to prevent it. b) Use appropriate birth control methods.

Abortion is the equivalent of foreclosure, bankruptcy and every other after the fact, "oh heck, I wasn't responsible and now I want out of it" line of thinking.

Yes, there are exceptions, rape and incest, conditions where either the mother or the child will die....but these are the exceptions not the norm.

I personally think it's disgusting that abortions are happening at the rate they are, simply because it demonstrates a massive lack of self control and personal responsibility on the behalf of many MEN, and WOMEN. Same goes for divorce rates. The total lack of any ethics is the writing on the wall that Rome will fall again.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:23:15 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

Then enlighten me. What restrictions on abortion did Roe v Wade set ? What's more, how does that make a chemical dependancy a worse crime than going out driving or shooting while drunk and killing a preson who just got lucky enough to actually get born ?


No one said it was a worse crime. Im saying the crime is no different. The Supreme Court set the time frame to have an abortion by the time of viability. That is an important distinction.

Eighty-eight percent of abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, 2006.

Again, another important fact. 61.8% occur before the 8th week. Again, another important distinction.

None of those cases in the OP were anywhere close to the age of viability, which stands around 24 weeks. Most were 30 or more.

The United States Supreme Court stated in Roe v. Wade (1973) that viability (i.e., the "interim point at which the fetus becomes ... potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid"[3]) "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:27:19 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
So there is no oath. That explains a few things huh.

Right here and now I swear that I will strive to never hurt anyone who does not want to hurt me, or mine. Since the Hippocratic oath means nothing, I guess I am on top of things.

Can a soldier going off to war pick his oath ? Can the President pick his oath ? Or any politician ? ( that really opens up some doors huh )

How would I find out which oath a doctor of mine took ?

T^T

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:27:46 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ClassIsInSession

I guess no one here ever saw the picture of a very premature baby (what you would call a fetus) in emergency surgery reaching out with it's hand to touch the scalpel. You can call something anything you want, but if it has a heart beat, it's alive. If abortion is legal, I just think we should raise the limit on it to 50. There are quite a few people I'd like to abort that contribute very little to the world. (On either side of the aisle.)




I worked high risk labor and delivery for 9 years. I assure you I have seen such. I have also seen the effects of cocaine on a still born baby. I have seen FAS up close and personal. I have seen a crack addicted baby who screamed when not held and shook all the time.

quote:

What puzzles me the most about the abortion issue is the total lack of responsibility that led to the situation to begin with. Condoms are very inexpensive. Other forms of birth control are readily available. If you want to have sex, you can do so, many times, over many years and never conceive. I know this very well as I've led a pretty promiscious life and I never had an unwanted pregnancy...the only time I ever fathered a child, I clearly intended to.


So you followed up with every woman you fucked to determine if an offspring resulted.

Yeah, right.

quote:

The freedom of choice begins in the bedroom. If you don't want to get pregnant or have children, then a) don't have sex...that's a surefire way to prevent it. b) Use appropriate birth control methods.


You could always have it snipped. There are NUMEROUS reasons why birth control fails... But I dont suppose you would know but maybe two or three of those reasons.



< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 6/27/2011 11:30:18 PM >


_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to ClassIsInSession)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:29:06 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or



How would I find out which oath a doctor of mine took ?

T^T



Ask.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:32:19 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"I worked high risk labor and delivery for 9 years. I assure you I have seen such. I have also seen the effects of cocaine on a still born baby. I have seen FAS up close and personal. I have seen a crack addicted baby who screamed when not held and shook all the time. "

I would probably strangle the cunt who did this to these babies. That's fucking terrible. I am aware of it, and I think we really agree, but this was about what happens in court.

T^T

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:35:47 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
By 33 weeks, a woman is 7 weeks away from delivery.... 3 weeks away from being considered "full term". This is the largest growth period. Taking something into your body, like alcohol, rat poison or cocaine is, to me, abuse. These babies... which is what they are... are able to survive outside the womb. For me, that is the distinction.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:43:11 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
Understood. I am not saying I agree, but I understand.

At 33 weeks then, the sperm and egg know each other well enough or what ? The formation of limbs, sexual organs or something like that is the cutoff point ? And at 32 weeks, the fetus was not human yet and as such not worthy of protection.

Well if the government says so..........

T^T

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/27/2011 11:47:45 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Did you read anything I posted?

33 weeks was the youngest gestational age of the group of women in the OP.

24 weeks is the typically agreed upon age of viability for a fetus outside of the womb.

OBGYN's typically wont stop pre-term labor that starts before 20 weeks. If a woman shows up at the hospital having contractions at 4 months pregnant, a Dr wont stop that labor. The lungs are in no way able to work. At 21 weeks, they will give steriods to try and force the lungs to mature, but thats a long shot.

The reasons behind this do have a medical basis.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/28/2011 8:39:23 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel

The Republican philosophy: Protect the unborn. Once a child is born, however, deny it health care, education, a safe and warm place to live and food.

what is this country coming to???


Its coming to the same place it came from: A place where you have the right to say whatever vile lies you like without fear.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to erieangel)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/28/2011 8:41:48 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

Many people consider addiction a disease. Are we going to try people for first degree murder for having a disease? Drunk drivers that kill innocent people are not even treated so harshly as that.


You mean many liberals consider addiction a disease. Hint: it isnt, its a choice.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/28/2011 8:05:27 PM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
~FAST REPLY~

There is a huge difference in the eyes of the law.  A woman who gives birth to an FAS or drug addicted baby can be charged with negligent child abuse or even criminal abuse.  Therefore, if a woman gives birth to a baby who dies suffering from the effects of those things, she is guilty of negligent homicide.

Now having said that, there doesn't need to be a separate law protecting fetuses or infants.  Current law allows for appropriate punishment if such a crime is committed.  The law does not consider addiction a "disease."  Alcoholism or drug addiction is not a valid defense for vehicular manslaughter or killing someone in a bar fight.  So it doesn't matter if "some people" consider addiction a disease.   The only "people" that matter in this respect are the people in the black robes sitting on the bench.

These cases in Mississippi are disturbing.  Not because these women have been charged with a crime, but because the Mississippi legislature has made a distinction in a "type" of person.  A viable fetus, one that can live independantly of the mother's womb (with or without medical aid) is a person, the same as anyone on this board.  No added comment needed.  I have been involved in the law for nearly 20 years, and while I agree that there are "degrees" of murder, making special laws based on age, race or sexual orientation is conflicting.  Why?  Because the law already has something in place to cover those things.  They are called "enhancements."  An enhancement is when there are extenuating circumstances attached to the crime, such as gay bashing, racially motivated killings or the murder of children.  Having "special" laws for something like this puts the two laws in conflict, allowing prosecutors and defense attorneys the ability to attempt to argue one law over another.

Bottom line, you kill someone, we need to look at the crime and pick the appropriate murder choice, and if necessary attempt to apply the enhancement that fits.  Mississippi is, by this specialized law, allowing prosecutors and government entities to attempt to back door Roe v. Wade.  I realize others have said this, but their reasoning behind their statements aren't based on factual knowledge of the law, merely their personal feelings. 

In the case of the woman attempting to commit suicide, that is far different from the woman who was addicted to crack.  Because the law DOES recognize that severe clinical depression, even if it is situational is a mental illness and the law is supposed to operate taking that mitigating circumstance into account.  A person who is clinically depressed has never made a choice to be that way, and God knows, there are plenty of posters here that will gladly admit that given the choice would not BE depressed.  Someone who is addicted to drugs or alcohol, however, at some point had a choice.  I say at some point because I am well aware that when the addiction takes hold, physically the choice no longer exists.  But especially with drugs such as heroin, crack, meth, etc., the addicted person knew when they started the drug was not something they should be taking since none of them are legal.

It really doesn't fly to try to claim that the activities of a woman at one stage of her pregnancy that effects the final outcome of the baby is a way to try to backdoor Roe v. Wade.  It isn't.  Roe v. Wade protects a woman's right to make the choice for herself to have a child or not.  If a woman chooses to have that baby, then she has also made the choice to take responsibility for the life and health of that fetus.  It is NOT the same as a woman making a choice to terminate her pregancy in the first trimester.  In the latter, the fetus was never going to become viable, in the former, a woman decides she wants a baby.  She does NOT have the right to say she wants a crack addicted baby or to drink herself silly to the point that she has a baby with FAS.  In those cases, a woman is making a decision to harm what will later become a living, breathing human being, and as I said above, Children's Protective Services can and does charge those women with child abuse.  Therefore, logically, if the baby dies due to their drug use or drinking, as long as the death comes after viability and can be shown to be caused by those activities, there really isn't a way to deny that woman's culpability in the death.

Regarding mandatory drug testing for pregnant women....that becomes a little bit more difficult.  Does the government have the right to violate the privacy of one person in favor of another?  In this case, I would have to opine that yes, they do.  If a woman accepts the responsibility of wanting to have a baby, she has a moral, ethical, and I believe legal obligation to conduct herself in a way that will not cause that baby harm, either in vitro, or after birth.  The problem here though, is that it would need to be continual testing, and it would have to contain provisions for women who stopped their drug use when they found out they were pregnant.  It DOES happen.  There are plenty of women, who upon learning they are going to have a child stop using drugs.  Therefore, the law must provide that a woman who was a previous drug user does not suffer consequences for things that occur before knowing she is pregnant.  Likewise, the continual testing would be necessary because some women stop and start again, so a single test will not provide the information necessary.  In conjunction with the testing, in-patient rehab would need to be offered to give them an opportunity to get off the drugs, and provisions for a woman who enters rehab and stays there to be protected from prosecution.  Yes, I do realize that getting off drugs can be a very difficult process and statistically, any in-patient program lasting less than 12 months has a high recidivism rate so a 3 month program for a pregnant woman isn't going to cut it.  Who is going to pay for all these drug tests and potential rehab stays?  Will it be mandatory for health insurance to cover these things, or will the government (who can't afford what programs it already has) have to pay the costs?  That issue alone will make any mandatory drug testing law for pregnant women too difficult to implement.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/28/2011 9:09:35 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
Thank you LaFayette Lady for a clear outline of some of the legal complexities here.

In a informative background paper (kindly sent to me by tazzygirl) it is made clear that issues of race and class also come into play here when these laws are enforced. It seems reasonable to suggest that women from disadvantaged sectors of society will be caught and prosecuted more than those from relatively affluent sectors. A number of black women from disadvantaged backgrounds are already serving sentences of 20 years -> life after being convicted under these laws. I for one find it difficult to see any public benefit here.

The difficulties that arise where universal mandatory drug testing is applied (as detailed by LaFayette Lady) seem to me sufficient reason for re-consideration of the laws. Another area of concern is the breadth of prosecutorial discretion - charges under these laws are far more likely to be laid where the ideological disposition of the prosecutors is aligned with the moral/punitive intent of the laws. That it's probable these laws will unevenly (if not selectively) applied in practice compounds the regressive nature of these laws.

Surely there are better ways of addressing this issue than punitively.



< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 6/28/2011 9:18:22 PM >


_____________________________



(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges - 6/28/2011 9:38:44 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Yes, curative or preventative. But in this climate of "women and children first" do you see that happening? Its so much cheaper, both medically and educationally, to treat a bad habit at an early stage than to do nothing. Offer treatment, be damned the cost. A FAS baby, or one addicted to any of the drugs in society, is more expensive to take care of than a treatment program. If she declines, then jail until she delivers.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109