or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Woman charged with murder after refusing C-section
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Woman charged with murder after refusing C-section - Page 2

post #21 of 357
And what if one of my twins would have died? WOuld I now be faced with MURDER CHARGES b/c I trusted my gut?

They were both breech. Soren had serious comlplications and didn't breath for a long while. The midwives were amazing and there is NO guarantee that he would have lived in a hospital.

God is the author of life and death not the friggin' AMA.

I AM REALLY MAD about this.

REALLY FRIGGIN' MAD.

I have to go put the kids to bed. Someone PLEASE e-mail me more info and/or thoughts if you are so inclined. I am seriously getting involved in this but want to 1) COOL OFF and 2) do some research.

post #22 of 357
Is this woman in jail?

It sounds like she is. It sounds like they have taken the living baby's mama away to punish her for not obeying the almighty medical profession.

I am sick.
post #23 of 357
Like previous posters have said, it is impossible to say whether the babe would've lived, even if born at the "critical" time. I just don't know. Go hotmamacita...
post #24 of 357
It looks like she is in jail. I'm reading multiple sources that say bail has been posted at $250,000.

I don't care if she's a friggin' nutcase, her living baby needs her.

Can we set up a paypal account for her bail?
post #25 of 357
Is it really neccessary to charge the woman with murder even if it was over a scar? I think that is a frivolous reason not to want a c/sec, but I am pretty sure the woman is feeling badly enough over it as it is. Jail I'm sure can not compare to the pain she is feeling right now.

I'm not one for slippery slope theories, but I have to agree that this sets a dangerous precedent.

Can anyone find whether or not she has been bailed yet??
post #26 of 357
Quote:
is that really the issue here? we're talking about massively invasive surgery. i don't see what difference her reason makes, civilized societies simply do not cut open the bodies of their citizens without willing consent.
That was kind of my point... did you read the rest of my post? Obviously I do not agree with forced surgery. My point was that it is most likely the prosecution is claiming that was her reason because it is obviously something that will rile up the general public.
post #27 of 357
Quote:
Originally posted by cat_astrophe
[B]Is it really neccessary to charge the woman with murder even if it was over a scar? I think that is a frivolous reason not to want a c/sec, but I am pretty sure the woman is feeling badly enough over it as it is. [b/]
So what? If she chose avoiding a scar over her baby's life (it was the autopsy that said that the baby had been alive 2 days before), why shouldn't she be punished? Is the degree of remorse the new standard for determining punishment of a person who causes another person's death?

I know there has to be more to this story... which is why I'm not willing to pass judgment on this woman. What it sounds like to me is that she was mentally disturbed and incapable of understanding that a c-section doesn't involve gutting a patient. And I'm also worried about the precedent that it would set.... but both ways. It would seriously disturb me if someone was able to have the option of ordering her baby's death 2 days before delivery for something so superficial as a scar.
post #28 of 357
Quote:
Originally posted by Dragonfly
It would seriously disturb me if someone was able to have the option of ordering her baby's death 2 days before delivery for something so superficial as a scar.
yes, it would be disturbing. what would you suggest as a course of action? would you advocate a court-ordered surgery?
post #29 of 357
woa...what a tough issue...and of course it's even harder to decifer my opinion because news reports (especially short blerbs) are so sensationalized and leave so many questions!!!!!! From reading that article, it sounds like at all three hospitals she was advised three different times from three different sources that her twins were in jeopardy and needed to be delivered ASAP. That's not to say that the one twin who died would'nt have just lived for a few days and died....it's just one of those things no one knows. I wish they had said wether or not the twins were finally delivered via c-section or vaginal birth and wonder why (or if) she was offered an emergency induction to get the twins born, etc. I also wonder why they did not (or if they did) offer her couseling services, etc. It's strange because it appears that she did care about the health of her babies (she did go to three different hospitals, etc) but they did just keep saying in the article that she just didn't want to be cut....and if she did truly believe, as a pp said, that she was going to be cut from breast bone to pubic bone it sounds like she had some mental issues to deal with.
I am with you guys about the scare of if they do convict her that would set a precident for being prosecuted anytime you refuse a c-section your almighty doctor recomends...SCARY!!
post #30 of 357
Dragonfly, she didn't order her baby's death. From what I've read, they already couldn't get the heartbeat on the monitor for one, and for two, ceasareans are very traumatic for babies and a baby on the brink of death may have died during the cesarean anyway. Regardless, women have the right to make medical decisions for themselves and their children, sometimes they make good decisions and sometimes bad. It could be that this child would have died anyway, and that may not be the case. Truthfully, they can't prove either way. I don't think anyone has the right to sit in judgement of this woman. I honestly cannot say that I would have chosen a c/s in her shoes. I would bet I am probably more educated than she is, but maybe not. Some nurse giving an anecdote is not grounds for criminal prosecution or conviction by the public.

This woman's living child needs her and I don't see how prosecuting hef helps anyone. It just spends tax dollars taking a mother away from her baby. If she had a BFing relationship with this child, I'm betting it will be over if she stays in jail much longer.

I wish I lived nearby, I'd have a vigil outside the county jail for this woman, even if it was over a scar.
post #31 of 357
Edited because Veganmama may be right
post #32 of 357
Holy cow! I don't know; where does one draw the line?

Ideally, our society would realize that putting sick people in jail doesn't do anything except waste valuable tax dollars to line the pockets of very wealthy judges and lawyers. If this woman *did* know that her baby would die if she didn't get him out ASAP, but she decided not to have a c/section, then she needs help, not jail time.

But like other posters have said, I need to hear the whole story. Who knows..... maybe they were playing the "dead baby" card and were actually right? So now they are charging her with manslaughter? I'd love to hear more. It's just so hard to form a real opinion with only these sensationalistic "news" stories to go by, ya know?



Oh, btw, Nemmer, I'm Zippy Apple Lips.

:LOL
post #33 of 357
Quote:
edited because I may be right
I don't know if this is true or not, but regardless, the state is still setting an incredibly dangerous precedent. I know you are trying to offer information, but you might want to delete this, and I will delete it from my post. If this woman's lawyers find this link they may go after your friend for spreading rumors or giving up confidential info.

From what you say, if it is true, she may be nuts, but she doesn't deserve jail time in that case, but psychiatric help.
post #34 of 357
Wende, I just feel sorrier for her than I did before... what a terrible position she must have felt herself to be in. And I'm not going to judge the words and actions of a freshly postpartum mother sitting in jail. The more I hear about this, the more it sounds like the woman needs help.
post #35 of 357
Quote:
Originally posted by dado
yes, it would be disturbing. what would you suggest as a course of action? would you advocate a court-ordered surgery?
I honestly don't know. I'd be inclined to say yes, but that's a simple gut reaction. I'd have to think a lot more about the constitutional implications of it before being able to say for sure...
post #36 of 357
If you issue a court ordered cbirth here, it could spiral out of control and doctors would be able to threaten lawsuits to any mama who 'didnt progress'. It is sad and horrible, and this woman may be very disturbed, but I think the risks of court ordered cesereans are just too great.
post #37 of 357
Quote:
Originally posted by veganmamma
I don't know if this is true or not, but regardless, the state is still setting an incredibly dangerous precedent.
After thinking more, I'm not so sure that if her decision was over a scar, that prosecuting her is actually setting a dangerous precedent. We're not talking entry into wholly unchartered territory. The state has a right (under Roe v. Wade) to regulate abortion past the point of viability. This is different in that it's forcing a medical procedure (whereas regulating late-term abortion is forcing absence of a medical procedure), but the concern is the same - potential life.

Hmmm... have to think more about that.
post #38 of 357
Quote:
Originally posted by Gr8flmom
If you issue a court ordered cbirth here, it could spiral out of control and doctors would be able to threaten lawsuits to any mama who 'didnt progress'. It is sad and horrible, and this woman may be very disturbed, but I think the risks of court ordered cesereans are just too great.
I think this is a valid concern - though I'm not particularly fond of "slippery slope" arguments. I tend to think that people's heads are a bit more level than that.... but, then, in these times, who knows?
post #39 of 357
Veganmamma, you may be right and thanks for pointing that out to me. I don't know if what I said was right either, it was second hand info on my part. I just think that if it is true, she obviously didn't care about those babies to begin with and I think if that is the case than she showed gross negligence with full intent and knowlege of what would happen. I feel the same way about people who refuse to get their child medical attention in the name of religion and the child dies when they could have been saved. I also believe that if someone kills a pregnant woman that he or she should be charged with both deaths. I am extremely pro-choice, but I think that there has to be a line. If I decide 2 days after my child is born that I don't want to be a mother and suffocate him with a pillow I would be charged with murder, why is it any different 2 days before he's born? I know I'm in the minority here on this, but I think that baby deserved much more respect than what it was shown.
post #40 of 357
Quote:
Originally posted by Gr8flmom
If you issue a court ordered cbirth here, it could spiral out of control and doctors would be able to threaten lawsuits to any mama who 'didnt progress'. It is sad and horrible, and this woman may be very disturbed, but I think the risks of court ordered cesereans are just too great.
There has already been a court ordered cesarean.
http://www.ican-online.org/news/011604.htm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Birth and Beyond
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Woman charged with murder after refusing C-section