Remains of 4 Infants Bodies Examined

[nerve]

Police dig up lot after finding 4 infants’ bodies is it bad that i'm not completely apalled by this? i mean, she just performed abortions on herself. isn't abortion legal? is it legal to perform surgery on yourself? i would think so. i mean yeah, this woman seems to be completely fucking nuts, but should she be charged for murder for doing things that are legal? there is this A 2005 Maryland law allows murder charges against someone who causes the death of a fetus considered viable. but it's her own fetus. so it's an abortion performed on herself. am i the only one more annoyed that she's being charged with murder? ...none was thought to be a full-term baby. (i guess this argument is only for people who are pro-choice)

[joey11223]

wow that's a tough one. I mean she may have just given birth to four stillborns. Or since they said there may be signs of domestic abuse, the boyfriend may have beaten her, thus causing the fetus's to die. That's going to be a difficult case, i mean they have never know exactly why she had these stillborn babies.

[SilverZero]

"Full-term" doesn't mean "viable," it means 39-40 weeks old. Viablility is the point at which the baby could potentially survive outside the mother's womb (even if medical intervention is necessary). This can be as early as 28 weeks. Depending on Maryland law, the babies may have been old enough to be considered late-term or, at least, viable. But, as a quick search suggests, Maryland seems to allow abortion at any point either with parental consent or for documented "health reasons" (including the mother not wanting the baby, apparently). Still, I think that it has to be performed by a medical professional, which it seems like was not the case here, so they might have a case. (Unless they were stillborn, like joey11223 said, in which case it might not be a criminal issue at all, just a sanitation issue.) But I don't think it's an ethical case. It's a question of whether the law was circumvented, just like, even if a state allows physician-assisted suicide, you could be charged with murder for giving a friend a lethal dose of morphine if they were terminal and just wanted to die. Even if this woman was legally allowed to have an abortion performed, if the law requires it to be done by a medical professional, and she did it herself, she's culpable.

[skysaw]

They are still questioning whether or not she actually gave birth to at least one of them, and whether or not that baby was alive at the time. If so, I'd consider going with the murder charge.

[nerve]

Even if this woman was legally allowed to have an abortion performed, if the law requires it to be done by a medical professional, and she did it herself, she's culpable. but, murder? come on. and why is it illegal to perform surgery on yourself? you should be able, by law, to do basically whatever the hell you want to yourself. (i say basically because it depends on how it affects others, as in doing something in public...you know). but if i decide to chop up my arm, i should be able to. it's my fucking arm. if it's illegal to harm yourself, then they should make junk food illegal too. it clogs your arteries and makes you fat and whatnot.

[nina]

but, murder? come on. and why is it illegal to perform surgery on yourself? you should be able, by law, to do basically whatever the hell you want to yourself. (i say basically because it depends on how it affects others, as in doing something in public...you know). but if i decide to chop up my arm, i should be able to. it's my fucking arm. if it's illegal to harm yourself, then they should make junk food illegal too. it clogs your arteries and makes you fat and whatnot. I thoroughly agree with you on this. But, I also think suicide should be legal. Though I know many people think that's insane.

[Tornado Joe]

I thoroughly agree with you on this. But, I also think suicide should be legal. Though I know many people think that's insane. Well, suicide in the privacy in one's own home. Why create some traumatic experience for some innocent bystander walking beneath the bridge or at the bottom of a tall building? So what's next, arresting men who cause the death of sperm through masturbation?

[SilverZero]

but, murder? come on. and why is it illegal to perform surgery on yourself? you should be able, by law, to do basically whatever the hell you want to yourself. (i say basically because it depends on how it affects others, as in doing something in public...you know). but if i decide to chop up my arm, i should be able to. it's my fucking arm. if it's illegal to harm yourself, then they should make junk food illegal too. it clogs your arteries and makes you fat and whatnot. The question at hand is whether the fetuses (feti?) should be considered as humans or not. On one extreme, you could say life begins at conception; on the other, life doesn't begin until delivery at full term. In between is where all the ethics of abortion land. The law decides that (much to the chagrin of people who disagree, but that's the way it is - you don't break laws you don't like, you push for changes). It's irrelevant why it's illegal to perform your own abortions - you can wax philosophical all day about that. The question is whether the woman broke the law. If she did, and the courts decide those babies could be considered human lives, then she was the direct agent in causing their deaths. And that's murder. (Unless they decide they were still-births, or not human lives.) And, yes, I do think it's silly that it's a legal abortion if it's performed by a medical professional, but the same general procedure performed by a lay-person is murder. So what's next, arresting men who cause the death of sperm through masturbation? Too easy: Every woman past puberty would then be a murderer every month for losing another egg.

[Howie]

I thoroughly agree with you on this. But, I also think suicide should be legal. Though I know many people think that's insane. The other pro choice.

[Burns]

Don't you think after the first at-home abortion, she'd close her legs and stop getting pregnant?? Come ON!!

[SilverZero]

Don't you think after the first at-home abortion, she'd close her legs and stop getting pregnant?? Come ON!! Somebody tells it like it is!

[Tornado Joe]

Too easy: Every woman past puberty would then be a murderer every month for losing another egg. Ah, but technically that is an involuntary function of the body.

[skysaw]

I'm pro-choice through and through. But I sounds like she was ready to drop, which would make this late-term in the extreme. That's definitely not good. Abortion should remain legal, but it should be limited to early pregnancy I think.

[SilverZero]

Ah, but technically that is an involuntary function of the body. I knew that would come up. But the egg is as much a human life as is the sperm, however you define them, so I guess my argument was the other way - neither is murder. I'm pro-choice through and through. But I sounds like she was ready to drop, which would make this late-term in the extreme. That's definitely not good. Abortion should remain legal, but it should be limited to early pregnancy I think. The baby was 26 weeks old, and examiners determined he would have been viable (but may have been stillborn). The law says anybody who causes death of a viable fetus can be charged with murder. The mother told police first that she had never been pregnant, but then indicated that she had caused the death of the baby (not just delivered stillborn - although I should read the indictment). If prosecutors can go from A (confession) to B (baby was viable) to C (law says it's murder), the charges should stick. But we all know there's probably no way she'll be convicted right out. She'll plead mental instability or postpartum depression or something. Although, the other three dead babies might make that difficult to swallow. Hmm. . . .

[PharoahSunrise]

I am entirely for the legalization of all victimless crimes(with discretion), but abortion is something I've thought about heavily and I don't think it is victimless. I believe it is the destruction of life, like stepping on a potentially beautiful rose right before its had the chance to flower. The argument of "well you might as well get arrested for ovulating or masturbating" is just ridiculous; the rules of life are that two beings must conceive to create life, those are simple ingredients, this is the fusion of an egg and sperm that creates something with perceptions, something that has survival needs and a heartbeat, something in my eyes(the 'scientific' decision of what isn't life doesn't convince me) is not only alive, but may be alive for 80 years to come. Sperm and egg have only one instinctive drive; to meet each other. They move and act as blood cells might, there's no desire to survive and countless sperm are lost even in the process of conception. If you don't see a difference in a million little things floating around in someone's balls and the small likeness of a human, you just aren't thinking. Next time you whack off, make a mental image of what you're wad looks like, and then visit an abortion and compare it to a dead fetus. In cases where it will kill the mother to have a baby, most definitely should it be allowed. In cases of teenage mothers who fear bringing a child up, it HAS been done before, despite ruining many life plans its not impossible to raise a child at 16(with much help from parents of course), and if they really don't want the child they can consider adoption. I do not think that life should be halted due to irresponsibility, that we should start playing god once someone decides they don't want to work hard to support a result of their own actions. One of the smartest girls I've ever met and one of my best friends was raised from a 14 year old mother. She could have very well not existed. I am 16, and male, so I don't really deserve a say in this to most people, as I've neither had the firsthand experience of having a child nor will I ever be able to experience bearing a child, which apparently leaves me a bit detached emotionally to the whole subject(despite feeling seriously about its wrongfulness), but from an ethical standpoint I do not think it should be performed. And I'm not spouting this off for the Christian vote.

[Tornado Joe]

The argument of "well you might as well get arrested for ovulating or masturbating" is just ridiculous; Of course it SOUNDS ridiculous, but you have to look at what the principle of the matter is: something that is techincally 'alive' is being terminated. I believe it is the destruction of life, like stepping on a potentially beautiful rose right before its had the chance to flower. See, you said it yourself. Just because an embryo has the potential to live 80 years compared to a sperm of which it's what, minutes, doesn't change the fact that it is, indeed, alive - no? Now, destroying an egg is more like destroying the seed of the rose - so that's not quite the same thing. This whole isssue is a battle between morals (which every religion, race, person, etc. shares different views on) and science (of which sometimes not all scientists concur). So, basically we can argue and argue- but only raise more questions without answers.

[Alex D]

In all honesty I believe abortion is a personal decision. If you really don't want one, you obviously won't be forced to have one, I can't help but feel that it should be the same the other way round. Murder is far, far to harsh a sentence for this.

[skysaw]

26 weeks is 6 months... the beginning of the third trimester. I don't think abortion at that point is legal anywhere in the states, am I wrong? Abortion should remain legal, no doubt. By why did she wait so darn long?

[SilverZero]

26 weeks is 6 months... the beginning of the third trimester. I don't think abortion at that point is legal anywhere in the states, am I wrong? Abortion should remain legal, no doubt. By why did she wait so darn long? I don't think she was mentally sound.

[PharoahSunrise]

Of course it SOUNDS ridiculous, but you have to look at what the principle of the matter is: something that is techincally 'alive' is being terminated. I don't think it just sounds ridiculous... I think it is ridiculous, they're instinctive little ingredients for life, not life itself. My idea of the rose being trampled does not include eating the plant's seeds or blowing away its pollen, because the actual plant itself, despite yet to flower, is about to live. See, you said it yourself. Just because an embryo has the potential to live 80 years compared to a sperm of which it's what, minutes, doesn't change the fact that it is, indeed, alive - no? Now, destroying an egg is more like destroying the seed of the rose - so that's not quite the same thing. Individually, sperm and eggs alive as blood cells are about as alive as blood cells, and I don't think bleeding is immoral. This whole isssue is a battle between morals (which every religion, race, person, etc. shares different views on) and science (of which sometimes not all scientists concur). So, basically we can argue and argue- but only raise more questions without answers. Its true... and it will always, morally, end up one way, so both Murder is far, far to harsh a sentence for this. It is, because its not done out of hostility or hatred and is often not desired but simply seems the best choice. But I believe, looking at an ultrasound, that its a bit messed up. In all honesty I believe abortion is a personal decision. If you really don't want one, you obviously won't be forced to have one, I can't help but feel that it should be the same the other way round. If you want one, you'll be forced to not have one? Now that'd be pretty fucked up.

[Neruo]

Isn't calling unborns "infants" just bad reporting? I think the woman was a bit of a nutcase, and personally I don't approve of aborting after a few months. She should be in a mental institution, not in jail. - Also, maybe if some religious fundamentalists didn't make abortion look like a shameful sin, the woman wouldn't have been stupid enough to do abortion-DIY.

[PharoahSunrise]

This one's a bit of a stretch to blame on the fundamentalists.