They're finally doing it. Mississippi law could mean jailtime for miscarriages

I've always brought this up as a ridiculous hypothetical, but it seems that it may become reality soon enough.

I'm not even sure what to say. What can you say? It's mind blowing. Maybe it's because I just read about this, but I can't form a complete thought about this that doesn't include the F-bomb. It's derangement, pure and simple. No respect is deserved here. This is just heinous and wrong on every single level that exists.

Pro-lifers have shamed America with this. Shame on them. SHAME SHAME SHAME.




http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/05/buckhalter-mississippi-stillbirth-manslaughter

On March 14, 2009, 31 weeks into her pregnancy, Nina Buckhalter gave birth to a stillborn baby girl. She named the child Hayley Jade. Two months later, a grand jury in Lamar County, Mississippi, indicted Buckhalter for manslaughter, claiming that the then-29-year-old woman "did willfully, unlawfully, feloniously, kill Hayley Jade Buckhalter, a human being, by culpable negligence."

The district attorney argued that methamphetamine detected in Buckhalter's system caused Hayley Jade's death. The state Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments on the case on April 2, is expected to rule soon on whether the prosecution can move forward.

If prosecutors prevail in this case, the state would be setting a "dangerous precedent" that "unintentional pregnancy loss can be treated as a form of homicide," says Farah Diaz-Tello, a staff attorney with National Advocates for Pregnant Women, a nonprofit legal organization that has joined with Robert McDuff, a Mississippi civil rights lawyer, to defend Buckhalter. If Buckhalter's case goes forward, NAPW fears it could spur a wave of similar prosecutions in Mississippi and other states.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Mississippi's manslaughter laws were not intended to apply in cases of stillbirths and miscarriages. Four times between 1998 through 2002, Mississippi lawmakers rejected proposals that would have set specific penalties for damaging a fetus by using illegal drugs during pregnancy. But Mississippi prosecutors say that two other state laws allow them to charge Buckhalter. One defines of manslaughter as the "killing of a human being, by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another"; another includes "an unborn child at every stage of gestation from conception until live birth" in the state's definition of human beings.

The cause of any given miscarriage or stillbirth is difficult to determine, and many experts believe there is no conclusive evidence that exposure to drugs in utero can cause a miscarriage or stillbirth. Because of this, prosecuting Buckhalter opens the door to investigating and prosecuting women for any number of other potential causes of a miscarriage or stillbirth, her lawyers argued in a filing to the state Supreme Court—"smoking, drinking alcohol, using drugs, exercising against doctor's orders, or failing to follow advice regarding conditions such as obesity or hypertension." Supreme Court Justice Leslie D. King also raised this question in the oral arguments last month: "Doctors say women should avoid herbal tea, things like unpasteurized cheese, lunch meats. Exactly what are the boundaries?"

Laws that criminalize hurting or killing fetuses are pitched as ways to protect pregnant women from abuse but are often used to prosecute those same women, NAPW says. The group has documented more than 400 cases across the country in which these laws have been used to detain or jail pregnant women. Earlier this year, Mississippi's neighbor to the east, Alabama, set its own precedent for prosecuting pregnant women for drug use. In January, the Alabama Supreme Court upheld convictions against two women—Amanda Kimbrough and Hope Ankrom—for "chemical endangerment" of a child, under a 2006 law that was written to punish people who expose children—not fetuses—to illegal drugs. Kimbrough gave birth prematurely to a baby boy who died shortly thereafter; she was charged after testing positive for meth. Ankrom gave birth to a healthy baby boy, but she was charged after he was found to have marijuana and cocaine in his system.
If a woman can legally terminate an unwanted pregnancy, how can she be jailed for unintentionally ending a wanted one?

In Mississippi, Diaz-Tello says, "we're trying to avoid another ruling like Alabama." The decision in Buckhalter's case is expected to influence a second pending case in the state against Rennie Gibbs, a young woman charged with "depraved heart murder" after a experiencing a stillbirth in 2006, at age 16. A medical examiner claimed a small amount of cocaine, found during the autopsy, caused the death. Gibbs' case is supposed to go before a trial court later this year.

Buckhalter's lawyers contend that both Buckhalter and Gibbs are collateral damage in the abortion wars in Mississippi, one of the most anti-abortion states in the country. A 2011 state ballot measure there would have granted full rights to fertilized eggs, making all abortions illegal all the time. That measure failed, but abortion foes have pledged to try again in 2015, and lawmakers are working hard to close the state's last remaining abortion clinic. Charging a woman with manslaughter for using drugs while pregnant is just a backdoor way of establishing legal "personhood" for fetuses, says Diaz-Tello.

But as McDuff pointed out in oral arguments before the Supreme Court last month, even the state's law defining homicide as including the killing of a child at "every stage of gestation" includes a specific exemption for women seeking a legal abortion. If a woman can legally terminate an unwanted pregnancy, he argued, how can she be jailed for unintentionally ending a wanted one?

Perhaps the most perverse impact of prosecuting Buckhalter, her lawyers say, is that it could lead to more abortions. Fear of prosecution "may cause a mother to seek an abortion that she might not have otherwise have sought," particularly if she is dealing with drug or alcohol addiction, Buckhalter's lawyers argued in a court filing.

A dozen medical and public health groups—including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists—made the same argument in a friend-of-the-court brief submitted in the Buckhalter case. And even for women who want to continue their pregnancy, the medical groups contended, the threat of prosecution could actually deter them from seeking prenatal care or drug addiction treatment, or from sharing important information with their doctors, for fear they may be reported.

As for Buckhalter, her lawyers say she's gotten the help she needed since losing Hayley Jade. She became pregnant again, completed a residential drug treatment program, and gave birth to a healthy baby. She also finished an associate's degree at Hinds Community College, where she was inducted into the honor society. She's a testament to the fact that women in her situation need help, McDuff says, not jail time.

"Obviously, you shouldn't be taking drugs while you're pregnant," McDuff says. "But the notion of prosecuting somebody for murder or manslaughter, trying to send them to prison, is just crazy."

 

Southern justice is definitely unique.

 

Junkieturtle said,

You just described the slaughier of the unborn in the womb. That is what I would like to hurl at those who condone killing the unborn in the womb...even until nine months.

No the BLOOD IS ON YOUR POSITIONS HANDS. THE BUCKETS FULL OF DEAD BABIES...THE BODY PARTS...THAT IS WHAT YOU CONDONE. THAT IS WHAT IS SHAMEFUL...SO SHAME SHAME ON YOUR POSITION. But pro-aborts don't care its power...its the ability to dismember a human life...for any reason. THIS IS WHAT YOU CONDONE. So don't point your finger at those who just want to protect life from the evil powers that be.

She killed a viable human being after the 24 week cut off...where abortion is illegal in the United States. Your position should support her even if she did it. LMAO

This is your abortion stance.

Junkieturtle said, “It doesn't eliminate the fetus at all from the argument. Without the fetus, there is no argument to begin with, because there is no need for abortion. What you refer to as "eliminating the child from the equation" is realizing that the woman', the person's, rights trump those of the fetus, which has none. That's not eliminating it, it's acknowledging that while it does exist, it is not more important than the woman.” How Could A Woman Kill Her Child? #59

You also said this....“You don't find many people squabbling over this because in the situations you just described, women still have quite a bit of time in which to make their choice AND they still have the right to make the choice in the first place. Most choicers want the ability to make that choice protected, arguing over the timeline is just small details. That's how I feel. I honestly am not that concerned whether it's 20 weeks, 24 weeks, 28 weeks, 36 weeks, 5 years, whatever. As long as the moral totalitarian people have not robbed a person of a choice that is 100% inherent to them, I am happy.” Post #10 “Which person is right?”

You put the cut off at 24 weeks...so based on YOUR POSITION LIFE IN THE WOMB SHOULD BE SAVED. OF COURSE YOUR POSITION IS HYPOCRITICAL BECAUSE YOUR SECOND STATEMENT CONTRADICTS YOUR FIRST.

See today if you hire someone to kill your baby...its ok and legal. If you try to save money and do it yourself its illegal.

She did not miscarry...she caused the death, she premeditated the entire thing. She killed her child after 24 weeks. Can't you do the math for crying out loud?

SHE KILLED HER CHILD ON PURPOSE if she took that drug. THIS SHOULD BE AGAINST THE LAW AND THE JUSTICE SYSTEM WOULD NOT BE DOING ITS JOB IF IT DID NOT PROSECUTE HER. Her child was viable. If they allow this...than any woman could just do this to cause a late term abortion.

 

Personally I believe this will be defeated as other attempts like this have been, it won't stop them trying to undermine abortion laws but I am forever hopeful that judges will see through these charades.

What I am waiting for is an adamant pro-lifer being charged under the same BS for drinking too much coffee or taking to much exercise.

 

CM, you didn't even bother to read the article. The woman didn't have a damned abortion, she was a recovering drug addict who had a STILLBORN baby and is going to trial for it!

Do you want to dictate what pregnant women can eat and drink during their pregnancies? Some foods might make her ill and cause a miscarriage. Do you want to ban pregnant women from smoking? How about ban them from driving? Or even having a life? Because having a life could, you know, result in her having a miscarriage.

 

I'm afraid as per the course there are some posters who never do read the comments they are replying to, its all about quantity not quality for them.

 

Hopefully, these new laws can be used in support of some new loopholes that can also illegalise some abortions again!

 

"They're finally doing it. Mississippi law could mean jailtime for miscarriages"

another name for miscarriage is natural abortion, so it doesn't surprise me they would do this

 

A natural abortion is not one with which a doctor induces the death process. There is nothing natural about induced abortion...the abortionist causing the unborn to die. You should not jail someone for losing a child from the womb naturally...only if you caused its death. And today abortion is illegal after 24 weeks in some states. So if a woman caused the death for her viable child in the womb...after this cut off point she should pay.

 

I know what she did. And they obviously found drugs in her system...enough so that it could have caused the child to die. They have to have some evidence that indicates this. Did they do an autopsy? Any medical examiner could determine what caused a childs death. I know she did not go to an abortionist...but women have done self induced abortions...and if she took certain drugs that would have caused the child to die...then she basically caused the child to abort.
I did read the story.....I even googled the chicks name and read more on her. I wanted to find out if they had done an autopsy...what those results were.

 

I strongly respect you, Makedde, for not being some sick hypocrite. At least you're a person with some consistent beliefs.

 

LMAO...You are kidding aren't you Sam? Consistency is not something pro-aborts are good at.

 

If a woman takes a substance on purpose after 24 weeks and their unborn child dies because of it....they should have to pay.

Abortion is against the law after 24 weeks remember.

 

Most abortions are spontaneous and no fault of the mother.. And there is NOTHING more heartbreaking than for a woman to carry a baby to term and have a stillborn..

Have you ever been pregnant ? Do you have children?

 

At least she doesn't support these laws that protect fetuses, while then also supporting some pro-abortion laws. Anything that does that is a very sick hypocrite. She's not like that-she not only supports these so-called abortion "rights" laws, but she'a also against all of these anti-miscarriages laws. She's way more consistent than some pro choicers that are out there.

 

But on this forum we are not talking about spontaneous abortions and the stillborn. For the most part we are talking about induced abortion for the "soul" reason to kill the living child.

I have two children and I am a grandmother. I also have had an abortion so this is very personal to me. I know first hand how abortion destroys. Have you ever had an abortion?

 

Sam Sam....you are totally wrong. Makedde supports late term abortions...she does not want any laws preventing a woman from killing at nine months. How more rabidly pro-abortion can you get?

She said this in the thread I started about Late Term Abortion.

“If she wants an abortion, she should be allowed to get one. That is my reason for my position.” Post 15# Late term abortion thread

Come on Sam....she is a cheerleader for late term abortion....NO RESTRICTIONS. Pasithea also believes this way as grannie does as well.

 

In this THREAD, we ARE talking about spontaneous abortions and stillbirths. THAT IS the topic. That and women being charged with crimes for spontaneous abortions and stillbirths. Abortions are done to terminate a pregnancy, the death of the fetus is incidental.

 

My main point that I was trying to make is that at least she doesn't believe that some fetuses are only persons if it's mother wants it or not, which is exactly what I was alluding to.

 

The women in question is being prosecuted because SHE CAUSED THE DEATH OF HER UNBORN VIABLE CHILD. THERE IS NOTHING SPONTANEOUSLY NATURAL ABOUT IT. IN THAT CASE.. her case should be in another thread one that deals with MOTIVES...AND RESPONSIBLITY AND BREAKING THE LAW.

NO WOMAN SHOULD BE JAILED FOR LOSING A CHILD...THAT SHE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH KILLING.

 

Sometimes I think there should be laws against parasitic fetuses invading the body of recovering addicts... they're HUMAN BEINGS, at least they could take some responsibility.

 

From the article:

The cause of any given miscarriage or stillbirth is difficult to determine, and many experts believe there is no conclusive evidence that exposure to drugs in utero can cause a miscarriage or stillbirth.

So you DON'T KNOW what caused the death of her unborn ?viable? child. You don't know. You don't know and the jury cannot know.

 

Mississippi is the #1 state in the country for stillborn births. *Incidentally* it's also the #1 state for obesity.

Since we're leaping to conclusions and all, should overweight women who experience a miscarriage or stillbirth be imprisoned?

 

Excellent point.

 

Let's not forget it's not just pro-lifers.

Several liberal cities in the USA and Canada have attempted to pass city ordinances that would make smoking while pregnant illegal in public places.

Smoking harms your unborn baby:
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/health_advice/facts/pregnantsmoking.htm

Over and over again, when progressives in the UK have been arguing for smoking bans in public places and restaurants, they bring up "Well, what about pregnant women who will be exposed to all that smoke?"

So for progressives to complain about women being prosecuted for putting substances in their body that could harm their fetus, it is pure hypocrisy. Many of those in favor of these smoking bans were feminists, by the way.