Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
More In News
Editors' Picks
Popular Articles
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Fricking nanny state terrorist supporting Ayn Randers!
Oh sorry I forgot to log onto my loveschild account before posting this.
Yeah, I'll bet she'll be a touch more guarded when talking to doctors in the future.
Madness.
However, yay Washington! Our law states: Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9A.32.060 declares that a person is guilty of manslaughter in the first degree when he intentionally and unlawfully kills an unborn quick child by inflicting any injury upon the mother of such child.
are you calling Dan a liar?
I'm just throwing it out there that any woman who wants to induce abortion by a method other than the standard ones is probably going to punish herself pretty seriously in the process. If a moderate stomach-punch were all it took, that would have been a widely used historical method. Natural law is much better at protecting fetuses from staircases than the state of Iowa could ever dream of being.
Speaking of babies: for those slogging along at home, I finally had my chicken cutlet early yesterday morning. 7 pounds, 12 ounces. I had her on the living room floor, and Mister TVDinner is deeply traumatized.
Don't forget the NJ woman whose child was taken away because she refused a c-section and was acting "irrational". What woman doesn't act "irrational" during labor? AFTER her child was taken away, it was learned that for the past 12 years she'd been receiving psychiatric treatment and that a former psychiatrist questioned her ability to parent a child. However, none of this would have been discovered had she not been reported for child neglect, simply because she refused a c-section. While the eventual outcome in this case may have been in the best interest of the child, it's alarming that you can be reported for child neglect for simply refusing a c-section. (By the way she wound up having a vaginal delivery and the baby was fine.)
There are numerous examples of courts who have FORCED women to have a c-section. Google it. You'll probably be surprised.
Apparently, a woman is simply a tool for spitting out babies and her right to decline invasive abdominal surgery is thrown out the window when she's pregnant.
congrats!
This story disgusts me, too, Dan. Stories like this make terrified to set foot outside New England...not that we don't have our own problems.
And “ugh” to all these laws and legislators that idolize fetuses while demonizing women. As a nurse, I particularly think it's to call this attempted feticide. Pregnancy is a time when a women's body is rapidly changing so slips and falls aren't unheard of.
Also, in most north American jurisdictions, there is less clarity re: mandatory reporting of crimes than most people assume. Iowa would have to have a mandatory reporting clause for attempted feticide on the books, or these health professionals could find themselves liable. I certainly hope she's placed complaints with both of their licensing boards.
She was absolved of the charges and that's fine, but lets not kid ourselves here, it was clear that she confided to both the nurse and the doctor that she had wanted to abort that child. There have been just too many innumerable cases (example the one in Utah) were these types of abortions late in the second and even third trimester have happened, and unless clearly shown to be proven an accident, those are clear murders.
We as a society have decided that infanticide is not something that we are willing to tolerate. There's a distinction that needs to be made between a right and an unlawful act. Choosing right to have or not children is a right, and if you do decide to have them, then having them on your terms (at what age and with the adult man of your choice) is clearly a personal decision (a right), some even take it as far as having a right to do away with the pregnancy in the way early stages (and many of us might agree with that). But once you make a conscious decision to follow thru with the pregnancy and get to the point where there's a clear identifiably formed human life then it stops being entirely a personal matter and a right.
If you decide to induce harm to that a new life then your rights end because you have no right to take it away just because you had a change of mind. That's the reason for these careful laws in many states and the vast majority of people both female and male no matter whether pro-life or pro-abortion support their implementation and thorough enforcement.
I read about this case in conjunction with the Utah law and it was horrifying. Even if charges were dropped (on, what was essentially a technicality), she still had to spend a couple of days in jail at a time. How would they ever have proven this case? I mean, I've hurt myself falling down the stairs a couple of times in my life, so I sure hope I don't find myself in jail if it should happen while I'm pregnant...
Ever thought about throwing yourself down the stairs?
Freedom to own guns.
@ 30
"you have no right to take it away just because you had a change of mind."
Say you need a kidney or you will die, and I agree to give you one of mine. However, just before they put me to sleep, I change my mind. There is no time to obtain a kidney from another donor because you're dying. Are you saying that medical staff should hold me down while I'm kicking and screaming, put me to sleep and remove my kidney without my consent?
The Max, I never knew we had the option of expanding the USSC. That is an interesting idea to pursue, and I always did like prime numbers.
Call me naïve, but I still have faith that the US Supremes can be more reasonable than to merely toe their party lines. Being an adjudicator makes one contemplative, and the courts have already proven eager to dispel zero-tolerance policies that land kids with butter-knives in jail. I suspect they'll find laws that send late-term pregnant women into the pen a bit distasteful as well.
There was a legal precedent regarding this, I can't remember the details but a man was taken to court because he refused to donate an organ to his ill relative. Interestingly, as 21 pointed out, this is exactly what is happening - women are forced to undergo major surgeries in order to preserve the child's life.
I wonder why pro-lifers think that the fact that pregnancy results from sex should have any relevance. What if my obligation to save Loveschild's life resulted from a night of passionate lesbian sex, because I promised her I would give her my kidney if she had sex with me? Does it mean in that case the kidney should be removed from my body without my consent? After all, I knew that would be the consequence of my decision to have sex with Loveschild...
Blessings to you all.
Really, Loveschild? Even supposing that late-term abortion was murder (which it generally isn't), you're advocating getting rid of the old "innocent until proven guilty" concept that has served our legal system so well.
In that case, I charge you with witchcraft. You turned my favorite teacup into a pony, and while I am very glad to have a pony, it is still made of flower-patterned china, and so it breaks whenever I try to ride it. Also, it ate my pants, and so I am currently freezing my ass off in this Chicago winter. I hereby sentence you to watching all three High School Musicals plus the two Twilight movies plus the "Peanut Butter Jelly Time" video, all at once. If you disagree with the verdict, you have the right to attempt to prove your innocence, but until such a time as you do, you will be considered a convicted witch. And I want my teacup back; my girlfriend and a lot of her stuffed animals will be by for a tea party tomorrow and I'm short on china. Not to mention pants.
See how ridiculous that is? And gee, I'd been abbreviating that one insult I use for you because you'd been keeping the worst of your craziness on the Down Low, but you just said something really egregious. Give me back my teacup, you cuntwhorebitch.
http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/lawmc…
Re: doctor/patient confidentiality: I'm pretty sure doctors (like psychologists) are mandated reporters, meaning they are required by law to report things like this.
@45: reporting what, exactly? that a woman who fell down the stairs contemplated an abortion at some point in her pregnancy? Sorry, I don't buy it. My professional training began in Charleston, SC in the 1990s, when medical professionals were roundly chastised for ratting on pregnant cocaine users (predominantly poor and African American) who were drug-tested w/o consent while seeking medical care and found themselves in court or jail.
http://tinyurl.com/yc7nz7p
Suddenly I'm hungry.
But I may need to buy some new pants first. That damn pony!
And how many of you would step in to help this poor woman and her (current) 2 kids out?
Answer: none.
Seattle Druggos talk big. Do little.
I'm familiar more with California law, so Iowa law could be slightly different, but immanent harm is a fairly common standard.
Twenty years ago, I would expect a doctor to panic and call the police rather than consult with a social worker, a staff psychiatrist or heck, a chaplain before notifying law enforcement authorities. Police automatically seize control of a situation, whether warranted or not. It's usually their job to do so.
Ten years ago, I would have expected this kind of panicked response only in more rural or religious-centric areas than Des Moines.
In 20-fucking-10, there's no excuse.
Again, I have to re-ask the question Has there been a rash in recent years of attempts of maternal feticide? What's with the laws?
Thanks for the invite samktg, venomlash. I have some spare pants which might fit. If they don't we can feed them to the pony.
and i'm sorry i didn't congratulate you before , mama tvdinner. congrats for your giant ovaries in delivering ON THE FLOOR,DRUG FREE!!!!!! someone hand this lady a bucket of hospital ice!
@28: The home birth was very much planned, although almost didn't happen because I developed preeclampsia. I was, in fact, hospitalized on Friday, but the good doctor said I could go home and try to have the chicken cutlet this weekend under my midwife's "immaculate" (his word, not mine) care.
I'll say this, though: there was a point when I was screaming to be taken back to the hospital, "BECAUSE I WANT SOME FUCKING DRUGS RIGHT FUCKING NOW!" I also have to figure out how, exactly, to apologize to my dear friend who assisted the birth for biting her on the shoulder at one point. *shame*
Hallmark doesn't make greeting cards for that.
@54: I am not above such behavior. I do, however, live in Spokane, which is a complicating factor. One of these days, though, I'll make it over in time for a Slog Happy.
We risk giving adults the benefit of the doubt every day (such as allowing them access to car-keys), thereby entrusting to them their own lives but the lives and well being of those around them. and, yes, people sometimes die from this, even when all involved meant well. Most of the time, through, people not only live but thrive with the additional responsibility.
And we really do prefer the personal liberty over the additional modicum of safety.
oh, @43, i hope you write books, because you clearly have an amazing talent in story telling. really. if you don't write for a living you should look into a career change. thanks for making me laugh!
First: yes, if this story happened exactly as it is presented, this is fucked up. No one should be locked up for 48 hours because they admit to considering an abortion in the past and accidentally fell down the stairs.
HOWEVER - a lot of suicidal gestures do end up in the ER. They take a bottle of pills, then get nervous, change their minds and show up. Or slit their wrists, wait a bunch of hours, then...off to the triage nurse. There's usually some tearful admissions, and then sometimes...they get all angry and insist they want to go home NOW.
If this patient did hurl herself down the stairs in some not-very-effective dramatic suicidal gesture, and if she conveyed that impression to the medical staff, then they're obligated to get psychiatric clearance before they can discharge her home. If the patient is determined to be a danger to herself or her pregnancy, the psychiatrist is obligated to report the case to the police - just as if she had announced that she was thinking about strangling the infant in the house next door to hers. HIPPA goes out the window when someone else's life is at stake.
Now, whether a late-term viable fetus deserves the same legal protections as a newborn infant is one of those weird ethical issues that should be debated separately. Not going there. However, keep in mind that there's always two sides to every story. I don't know what happened here, but it's possible that the spectacle we're hearing about is heavily slanted by this nice lady's attorney. The medical staff may have truly thought she was unstable and a threat to her own safety. You never know.
A couple of things that struck me. 1) Christine Taylor had already considered and rejected the option of abortion. She had considered adoption and made the choice to keep the child. Considering a difficult situation from all angles before making a reasoned choice should not be a crime. 2) What the heck happened to the two other kids while mom was in jail?
Much talk about abortion lately, all with the same, endless, never-settled talking points. Dial it down, folks. It's still legal, Utah and their silly laws notwithstanding.
75
"when you dig a little, you learn there was more to the story than initially reported. ..."
business as usual on Slog:
HomoLiberal Hate Mongering Demagoguery, Inc.
Congrats! Now get some sleep.
Tis true about the code. I made some pretty interesting statements while in labor and in my defense both of my children were 9 lbs and 2 feet long, and most of those statements involved the window being closed. The intensity of pain was surprising, but I don't regret natural or the fact that my two watermelons were so large (they easily slept 4-6 hours from moment one).
And, they are still long. My 'littlest' will be 12 years old tomorrow and appears to be starting his big growth spurt and puberty, he is 5' 5" now and has had a sudden uptake in his food consumption. He and his sister are always amazing me, and before long they will both be staring down at me. Cest la vie...
Welcome to the journey, it is a one heck of a ride.
I am being obnoxiously nosy, but when you say you don't regret natural, is it simply because all turned out well or are there any advantages to natural birth compared to epidural? All birth stories I have heard so far (no first hand experience) praised epidural like it's the best thing since sliced bread, so I'm curious to hear reasons for opposite opinion.
I don't regret it, because I was immediately up and moving around. I felt great. My children were awake and alert. I have no first hand experience with epidurals to know what they are like, nor have I been in the room with someone who has had an epidural to observe.
My theory is women should do what is best for them. Labor is hard, and they should feel free to do what they fill will benefit them and the child(ren). They have a right to their birth plan. My plan included soaking in a warm tub and walking (attempting to dance) around ... I thought gravity would come in handy.
They tell me I have a high pain tolerance, I always thought I had a high tolerance for physical pain, so I decided to go natural, and when I could not take the pain anymore (at about 18 hours in with my first) they informed me that the "window was closed". My second child arrived fast and furious, there was no option, but having done it before I knew that I'd be fine.
We have no plans to have a third, but if things change I would plan to go natural again.
Hope that helps.
If I saw in there a psych professional, or (as I mentioned above) even a chaplain was consulted to assess her emotional stability, I could maybe consider the right thing was done.
But no. The authorities panicked for the fetus and disregarded the mother, and, I suspect, her not-unborn children.
You're right, it'd be great to have a psychiatrist on call. Many ERs don't, because psychiatrists refuse to take call like a lot of specialists these days. I have no idea if that was the situation here. However, the law is clear: ANY physician who suspects that a patient has tried to harm a 'child' is obligated to report the case. It's not just for psychiatrists - I guess my original post wasn't clear about that. ER staff are well-versed regarding this obligation, because that's where so many 'abuse' cases first appear.
Some older ER doctors may be generalists (internal medicine), but most of them now are certified in Emergency Medicine - a specialty with its own residency. This residency includes training in psychiatry, and in a pinch when there is no psychiatrist available, ER-certified MDs are allowed to make a psychiatric assessment of a patient.
It puts the doctor in a tough position: he or she knows that the late-term fetus is protected by the law as if it were newborn infant, and that this woman may have other kids at home. If the doc discharges her home and she harms herself, or injures the pregnancy, or hurts one of the other kids, then the doc gets hung out to dry. The deadbeat dad, grandparents, etc. can sue for wrongful death over the loss of a late term pregnancy, and the patient herself can sue as well. License gone. Trashed on the news. But, if the doc notifies the police, then he or she gets trashed on the news anyway for being mean to pregnant lady (and probably sued anyway, just for the hell of it). It sucks. You just can't win.
What is also worth noting here is that the decision to arrest the patient was made by the police, not the physician. No doctor can "force" an arrest. Once the doc has 'medically cleared' the patient, and even if he or she feels the patient is no longer suicidal, the police may have chosen to arrest her because her 'reckless endangerment' of the 'child.'
It's REALLY weird in this case because the 'minor' in question (the fetus) cannot easily be relocated from the environment it lives in (mom's uterus). What a disasterous, fucked-up situation for everyone.
"Help officer, my car has been stolen, ...by the way ...I never really liked it and and I have some debt that I need to pay off." DUH.
Also, a doctor should call the cops if they suspect abuse, criminal behavior etc. How would you feel if the guy that came in with a broken nose "confided" in the doctor that he received the injury raping somebody? Shouldn't the doctor "break" his patient confidentiality then?!
Almost all ERs (certainly one in Des Fucking Moines, a dense urban region) has a social worker or a chaplain on staff.
No, he made a premature decision, and she suffered for it.
Neither social workers or chaplains are considered qualified to evaluate a patient for suicidal intent or exclude a suspected psychiatric diagnosis. I don't think there's a single state with that law on the books.
While most ER docs (and psychiatrists on call) are residents, there is always an ER attending available to make the final call. If there is doubt about the safety of discharging a potentially suicidal or homicidal patient, *especially* with children involved, the law is absolutely clear: the physician must detain the patient, against their will if necessary, or if unable to do so must notify child protective services and the police.
I'm not saying this law is necessarily right or just, but that's what the medical staff has to work with. Is it possible the doctor made the wrong call? Sure. But really, from what little we've heard about this case, I think it's impossible to say that for sure. I think I more reasonable approach would be to try and consider both perspectives instead of immediately condemning the ER staff as wrong.
It's stupid, dangerous and backwards to have a society at war with women for the sake of their babies.
She was treated like a criminal. Not a patient.
I would say the doctor failed to take appropriate action once he called the police.
I would say the police failed to take appropriate action as well. I have a tendency to expect that of them, though.
Ironically, both are about equally trained to evaluate someone (that is, as first responders), as are contemporary chaplains (which would have been, at least, a second opinion). A social worker usually is better trained in the psych department; it comes with the letters.
If it is as you say it is in Des Moines, that Social Workers aren't allowed to evaluate regarding immanent danger yet general practitioners are, that's fucked up.
But regardless, the well being of the mother wasn't considered. This whole situation is full of fail.