Woman charged with murder of her own pre-term infant--hypocrisy or justice?

Magus · 08-11-2007, 12:20 AM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20075994/

Now this is a strange case, somewhat. From what I could tell on this story it seems to me the woman has been giving herself abortions and/or other people--all the infants found were pre-term.

Thus, it seems one could charge her with illegal medical procedure without license, and probably breaking the third trimester rule--all in all something that would add up to, I dunno, 15 years in prison or 20 years or something, probably with parole.

However, watching the news the other day it is said the woman is going to probably be charged with FIRST DEGREE MURDER along with the various other charges.

To me, it seems hypocritical to charge a person with murder for something that properly licensed officials do on a daily basis without repercussions. Sure, she isn't a licensed official, she should be brought up on charges of that and if she did the abortions on other people probably reckless endangerment of their lives--but Murder in the First Degree? For an abortion(s)? Hypocrisy.

The third trimester thing is just semantics to me--killing the child is killing the child. Birth is the real line most people draw (even if I find it hypocritical, it is at least understandable). So I think it would be hypocritical for this woman to be charged with murder when there are various doctors not being charged with it.

On a side note, what exactly was the justification for the third trimester as the line, anyway?

EDIT: Oh, possibly viable outside the womb is the justification? I could kind've see that, but it still sounds like semantics to me.

Lady Cygnet · 08-11-2007, 01:46 AM

According to this article, she admitted to delivering the baby and letting it drown in the toilet. She also admitted to doing the same with another baby that she delivered, according to the story. Even worse, it seems that it's not uncommon.

While I can empathize with post-partum depression and know that it is possible that she slipped into post-partum psychosis when she let her newborn babies drown, there are other, less cruel methods to prevent having unwanted children, such as tubal ligation.

What really creeps me out, though, is that she kept the remains of her children at her house. If I were one of her living children, I think I'd go live with someone else. She needs a lot of mental help, and I hope that the courts see to it that she gets the help she needs.

Roy_D_Mylote · 08-11-2007, 02:41 AM

This could quickly segue into IS ABORTION RITE!? and that would be bad.

But this here is weird. I agree, if she's doing what licensed doctors do every day and the doctors don't get charged with murder, she shouldn't be.

Tendronai · 08-11-2007, 07:38 AM

The thing about this case, though, is that she isn't doing what doctors do - she's drowning them in a toilet. As such, she shouldn't really be given the protection that doctors recieve due to her lack of training and her, um, "technique".

Really, I too think that they're getting overwrought, but it doesn't seem to me like she should be allowed to be walking free if she's keeping them in towels under her sink. She needs serious psychological help, or, failing that, a quarantine from society.

Lady Cygnet · 08-11-2007, 12:33 PM

I think I need to point out that what Freeman did was not abortion. She delivered her children, some prematurely, then allowed them to die after they were born, rather than seeking medical help to save their lives. Even if she took a drug to induce labor, such as pitocin (a synthetic form of oxytocin), at least two of her babies were born alive. So far, I haven't read anything about any evidence that she tried to induce premature labor or was, in fact, trying to perform do-it-yourself abortions.

I'll be keeping track of this story, though. I hope they figure out why she felt that she had to let her newborn children die rather than taking them to a hospital (I thought Maryland had a Safe Haven law for unwanted babies, but I could be wrong), then kept their corpses. There has to have been something that caused her take this course of action with four newborn children.

Why didn't anyone notice something was amiss before? It's kind of hard to hide a pregnancy once, much less three times.

Nique · 08-14-2007, 12:12 PM

...

You know, I don't even want to read the article now.

I'm responding emotionally, but what is it that just BREAKS people like this? It's freaky and it makes me want to sleep with the light on

08-11-2007, 12:20 AM	#1
Magus Archer and Armstrong vs. the World Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 7,164	Woman charged with murder of her own pre-term infant--hypocrisy or justice? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20075994/ Now this is a strange case, somewhat. From what I could tell on this story it seems to me the woman has been giving herself abortions and/or other people--all the infants found were pre-term. Thus, it seems one could charge her with illegal medical procedure without license, and probably breaking the third trimester rule--all in all something that would add up to, I dunno, 15 years in prison or 20 years or something, probably with parole. However, watching the news the other day it is said the woman is going to probably be charged with FIRST DEGREE MURDER along with the various other charges. To me, it seems hypocritical to charge a person with murder for something that properly licensed officials do on a daily basis without repercussions. Sure, she isn't a licensed official, she should be brought up on charges of that and if she did the abortions on other people probably reckless endangerment of their lives--but Murder in the First Degree? For an abortion(s)? Hypocrisy. The third trimester thing is just semantics to me--killing the child is killing the child. Birth is the real line most people draw (even if I find it hypocritical, it is at least understandable). So I think it would be hypocritical for this woman to be charged with murder when there are various doctors not being charged with it. On a side note, what exactly was the justification for the third trimester as the line, anyway? EDIT: Oh, possibly viable outside the womb is the justification? I could kind've see that, but it still sounds like semantics to me. __________________ The Valiant Review Last edited by Magus; 08-11-2007 at 12:24 AM.

08-11-2007, 02:41 AM	#3
Roy_D_Mylote Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: The sky. Posts: 1,030	This could quickly segue into IS ABORTION RITE!? and that would be bad. But this here is weird. I agree, if she's doing what licensed doctors do every day and the doctors don't get charged with murder, she shouldn't be. __________________ I hate roleclaims.

08-11-2007, 07:38 AM	#4
Tendronai I will crush your economy. Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Magical mystical land of Canada. Posts: 1,364	The thing about this case, though, is that she isn't doing what doctors do - she's drowning them in a toilet. As such, she shouldn't really be given the protection that doctors recieve due to her lack of training and her, um, "technique". Really, I too think that they're getting overwrought, but it doesn't seem to me like she should be allowed to be walking free if she's keeping them in towels under her sink. She needs serious psychological help, or, failing that, a quarantine from society. __________________ Give me your wallet before I destroy you, mortal.

08-11-2007, 01:46 AM	#2
Lady Cygnet Hasn't changed her avatar in years Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Beyond Thunderdome Posts: 1,234	According to this article, she admitted to delivering the baby and letting it drown in the toilet. She also admitted to doing the same with another baby that she delivered, according to the story. Even worse, it seems that it's not uncommon. While I can empathize with post-partum depression and know that it is possible that she slipped into post-partum psychosis when she let her newborn babies drown, there are other, less cruel methods to prevent having unwanted children, such as tubal ligation. What really creeps me out, though, is that she kept the remains of her children at her house. If I were one of her living children, I think I'd go live with someone else. She needs a lot of mental help, and I hope that the courts see to it that she gets the help she needs.

08-11-2007, 12:33 PM	#5
Lady Cygnet Hasn't changed her avatar in years Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Beyond Thunderdome Posts: 1,234	I think I need to point out that what Freeman did was not abortion. She delivered her children, some prematurely, then allowed them to die after they were born, rather than seeking medical help to save their lives. Even if she took a drug to induce labor, such as pitocin (a synthetic form of oxytocin), at least two of her babies were born alive. So far, I haven't read anything about any evidence that she tried to induce premature labor or was, in fact, trying to perform do-it-yourself abortions. I'll be keeping track of this story, though. I hope they figure out why she felt that she had to let her newborn children die rather than taking them to a hospital (I thought Maryland had a Safe Haven law for unwanted babies, but I could be wrong), then kept their corpses. There has to have been something that caused her take this course of action with four newborn children. Why didn't anyone notice something was amiss before? It's kind of hard to hide a pregnancy once, much less three times.