woman who miscarried convicted of manslaughter

[ktgrok]

I can't even. 

Yes, she did drugs. That's terrible. But not the cause of the miscarriage from what they are reporting. 

The medical examiner found she had a placental abruption and infection - those infections are caused by UTIs. It's why they screen you closely for bladder issues. She was sentenced to 4 years. 

https://www.oxygen.com/crime-news/brittney-poolaw-convicted-of-manslaughter-over-miscarriage-in-oklahoma

Edited October 16, 2021 by ktgrok

[bolt.]

I'm shocked. I had no idea that there were modern developed nations that prosecuted women for "actions during pregnancy" -- yet apparently not uncommon in the United States? I wonder if this happens in other countries too??? It's barbaric.

Thankfully, this is apparently not a reality in Canada. (I had to look it up!) Apparently in 2008 there was an attempt to create a law regarding 'unborn victims of crime' that failed. This article from that time period about that failed Canadian legislation attempt quite neatly sums up why people are standing against this type of law.
https://www.arcc-cdac.ca/talking-points-against-the-unborn-victims-of-crime-act/

Edited October 16, 2021 by bolt.

[Dmmetler]

As someone who has had a history of miscarriages, pregnancy complications, and pre-term deliveries, I have honestly never been so relieved that secondary infertility is also part of my package. 

[Happy2BaMom]

This is the natural end result of the pro-life movement. 
And don’t bullshit me that it’s not. I’ve watched in my lifetime the endless moving of the goalposts to today, where incest and rape victims getting abortions can be turned in by anonymous vigilantes (for rewards) and women go to jail for miscarriage. And the pro-life movement is silent (read: supportive) about all of it. 
 

Edited October 16, 2021 by Happy2BaMom

[MEmama]

13 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

This is the natural end result of the pro-life movement. 
And don’t bullshit me that it’s not. I’ve watched in my lifetime the endless moving of the goalposts to today, where incest and rape victims getting abortions can be turned in by anonymous vigilantes (for rewards) and women go to jail for miscarriage. And the pro-life movement is silent (read: supportive) about all of it. 
 

I am positive this is not the end game. 

They will stop at nothing for complete control.

Anyone who doesn’t believe it isn’t paying attention. I’m terrified. 

[Melissa Louise]

Horrific. Gilead level stuff. 

[Happy2BaMom]

33 minutes ago, MEmama said:

I am positive this is not the end game. 

They will stop at nothing for complete control.

Anyone who doesn’t believe it isn’t paying attention. I’m terrified. 

Yes, the true desired end result has been the control and punishment of women. 

[TravelingChris]

50 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

This is the natural end result of the pro-life movement. 
And don’t bullshit me that it’s not. I’ve watched in my lifetime the endless moving of the goalposts to today, where incest and rape victims getting abortions can be turned in by anonymous vigilantes (for rewards) and women go to jail for miscarriage. And the pro-life movement is silent (read: supportive) about all of it. 
 

I am pro-life but not extreme pro-life.   I do not believe that rape and incest voctoms should be forced to carry a babt but also think that no abortions should be allowed past 20 weeks for whatever reason except mother's life or to remove a dead baby.

I am also against the Texas law.

[TravelingChris]

I think this jury decision is very wrong.

[Kassia]

2 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

I am pro-life but not extreme pro-life.   I do not believe that rape and incest voctoms should be forced to carry a babt 

I am also against the Texas law.

How would you know if someone is a rape or incest victim, though?  Would they be required to prove it?  Is that fair to a victim to be forced to bear the burden of proof and the trauma and loss of privacy that would go along with that?  And what about false accusations from women who want an abortion but haven't been raped (I assume that wouldn't be something that happened frequently, but it would definitely be an issue).  

[Frances]

48 minutes ago, MEmama said:

I am positive this is not the end game. 

They will stop at nothing for complete control.

Anyone who doesn’t believe it isn’t paying attention. I’m terrified. 

And in my state, they are very involved in funding people running for school boards, although they often try to hide it by creating new PACs to funnel the money. In many areas their PACs are the largest contributors to candidates. I mean what the heck does being being anti-abortion have to do with school boards? And not surprisingly, their candidates are now the same ones opposing mask and vaccine mandates and many are also involved with the anti-CRT rhetoric.

Edited October 17, 2021 by Frances

[Spryte]

That is just heartbreaking. It’s absolutely barbaric.

[MercyA]

 

1 hour ago, MEmama said:

They will stop at nothing for complete control.

36 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

Yes, the true desired end result has been the control and punishment of women. 

This is not true of me and not true of the other active pro-lifers I have known. 

If I painted pro-choice people with such a broad brush, I'd be immediately taken to task for it. 

[fraidycat]

2 minutes ago, MercyA said:

 

This is not true of me and not true of the other active pro-lifers I have known. 

If I painted pro-choice people with such a broad brush, I'd be immediately taken to task for it. 

A person can be pro-life for themselves until the end of time.

But the moment one advocates for, donates to, or otherwise supports anti-abortion laws, organizations, or political candidates they have advocated for, donated to, and elected FOR CONTROL of other women's body.

It really is that black and white.

[MercyA]

Just now, fraidycat said:

A person can be pro-life for themselves until the end of time.

But the moment one advocates for, donates to, or otherwise supports anti-abortion laws, organizations, or political candidates they have advocated for, donated to, and elected FOR CONTROL of other women's body.

It really is that black and white.

If we're going to talk about black and white, we can talk about how deliberately killing a living human being is morally wrong. There are two bodies involved in every abortion, and one always ends up dead. THAT is overreaching control--deciding that you have the right to end another human being's life. 

[Plagefille]

8 minutes ago, MercyA said:

 

This is not true of me and not true of the other active pro-lifers I have known. 

If I painted pro-choice people with such a broad brush, I'd be immediately taken to task for it. 

Exactly! Painting all pro-life people with such an extreme brush is unfair. I am also pro-life, but also disagree with the TX law and the linked case here. 

Many pro-life people are not extreme.

I would really prefer to focus on birth control. Why oh why do we have so many unplanned pregnancies?

[Happy2BaMom]

13 minutes ago, MercyA said:

 

This is not true of me and not true of the other active pro-lifers I have known. 

If I painted pro-choice people with such a broad brush, I'd be immediately taken to task for it. 

I don’t care what you or any other pro-lifers believe. I care what LAWS and punishments are enacted and enforced on women by pro-life people. Your “warm fuzzies” mean zilch in the real world. 
 

Although I’d love to see pro-lifers protesting these draconian laws that they swear they don’t support. 

Edited October 17, 2021 by Happy2BaMom

[Plagefille]

6 minutes ago, fraidycat said:

A person can be pro-life for themselves until the end of time.

But the moment one advocates for, donates to, or otherwise supports anti-abortion laws, organizations, or political candidates they have advocated for, donated to, and elected FOR CONTROL of other women's body.

It really is that black and white.

So it is okay to control the unwanted baby by taking away their life?

[hjffkj]

1 minute ago, fraidycat said:

A person can be pro-life for themselves until the end of time.

But the moment one advocates for, donates to, or otherwise supports anti-abortion laws, organizations, or political candidates they have advocated for, donated to, and elected FOR CONTROL of other women's body.

It really is that black and white.

we as a society  try to control people's bodies constantly:  seat belt laws, alcohol consumption laws, drug laws, vaccine mandates to continue being employed, etc. Control is not the end game for many pro-life people, it is protection.  The protection of another human being that has no control over their own body.  The control that a previous poster suggest is certainly the motive for many people but it is not black and white like you say.   

[Happy2BaMom]

3 minutes ago, Plagefille said:

Exactly! Painting all pro-life people with such an extreme brush is unfair. I am also pro-life, but also disagree with the TX law and the linked case here. 

Many pro-life people are not extreme.

I would really prefer to focus on birth control. Why oh why do we have so many unplanned pregnancies?

We’ll, you could perhaps ask the pro-life Governor of Florida why he recently vetoed a bill that would have provided long-term contraceptives for low-income or poor women in his state. 

[Plagefille]

2 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

I don’t care what you or any other pro-lifers believe. I care what LAWS and punishments are enacted and enforced on women by pro-life people. Your “warm fuzzies” mean zilch in the real world. 
 

Although I’d love to see pro-lifers protesting these draconian laws that they swear they don’t support. 

You know, people can just not have sex if they don't want to get pregnant. One possible consequence of sex is getting pregnant. 

[Happy2BaMom]

6 minutes ago, MercyA said:

If we're going to talk about black and white, we can talk about how deliberately killing a living human being is morally wrong. There are two bodies involved in every abortion, and one always ends up dead. THAT is overreaching control--deciding that you have the right to end another human being's life. 

And this kind of extremist reasoning is EXACTLY how we end up with vigilantes being rewarded for turning in underage incest victims for an abortion. 
 

 

[Happy2BaMom]

Just now, Plagefille said:

You know, people can just not have sex if they don't want to get pregnant. One possible consequence of sex is getting pregnant. 

So both men and women will now be punished for abortions?

And please explain how your reasoning applies to rape and incest victims. 

[hjffkj]

2 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

I don’t care what you or any other pro-lifers believe. I care what LAWS and punishments are enacted and enforced on women by pro-life people. Your “warm fuzzies” mean zilch in the real world. 
 

Although I’d love to see pro-lifers protesting these draconian laws that they swear they don’t support. 

I actually do protest the laws and punishments that are currently coming to light and know many pro-life people who do. What has happened to this woman is absolutely disgusting.  I have disassociated with pro life people who are in favor of the laws being enacted.

I think there is a time and place to make abortion illegal.  This point in our society isn't that and we likely will never get their sadly.  The pro life community as a whole would be better served improving the social structures that help a woman and family choose life and not abortion.  

[MercyA]

1 minute ago, Happy2BaMom said:

And this kind of extremist reasoning is EXACTLY how we end up with vigilantes being rewarded for turning in underage incest victims for an abortion. 

That is faulty logic. I've never been in support of the vigilante law in Texas. 

I'm happy to be called extremist if opposing killing human beings makes me so. 

[Happy2BaMom]

1 minute ago, MercyA said:

That is faulty logic. I've never been in support of the vigilante law in Texas. 

I'm happy to be called extremist if opposing killing human beings makes me so. 

Yes, most pro-lifers are quite proud of their extremism. Which is, again, how we end up with the stated laws. 
 

 

Edited October 17, 2021 by Happy2BaMom

[hjffkj]

I imagine this conviction will be overturned on appeal. At what level of an appeal I don't know. I hope sooner than later.

[MercyA]

5 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

Yes, most pro-lifers are quite proud of their extremism. Which is, again, how we end up with the stated laws. 

Proud of my beliefs? I don't know about that. I think they're right, or I'd change them. 🙂 

I suppose you could also call me an extremist when it comes to other firmly held beliefs. I'm extremely pro-vax, anti-war, pro-animal rights, pro-BLM, pro-immigration, pro-universal healthcare...and the list goes on. I hope it's because I care about other living being's rights and don't want them to come to harm, not because I'm "proud to be an extremist." 🤷‍♀️

Edited October 17, 2021 by MercyA

[fraidycat]

14 minutes ago, MercyA said:

If we're going to talk about black and white, we can talk about how deliberately killing a living human being is morally wrong. There are two bodies involved in every abortion, and one always ends up dead. THAT is overreaching control--deciding that you have the right to end another human being's life. 

An an organism that cannot survive without using a living host to support it is, in every other scenario, considered a parasite. 

I am myself pro-life for myself. But, because I'm not walking and never have walked an inch in any other person's shoes, I do not ever get to decide for them what they do and do not do with their bodies. Nor can I pretend that I know what is "best" for them. That takes a level of ego that I will never strive to possess.

[hjffkj]

17 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

I don’t care what you or any other pro-lifers believe. I care what LAWS and punishments are enacted and enforced on women by pro-life people. Your “warm fuzzies” mean zilch in the real world. 
 

Although I’d love to see pro-lifers protesting these draconian laws that they swear they don’t support. 

I would argue that the majority of people who create and act those laws and punishments are not in fact pro-life.  They may identify as such but they aren't pro-life.  They are anti-abortion, that is very different. A pro-life person cares about ALL human life, from conception to death.  They not only care about their living status but also their quality of life. So, they also are strongly in social structures that help get people out of poverty, avoid hunger, have healthcare, and provide more stability in their lives.

[bookbard]

This is evil. How shameful that people are trying to justify their beliefs in the face of such wrong.

[Happy2BaMom]

6 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Proud of my beliefs? I don't know about that. I think they're right, or I'd change them. 🙂 

You could also call me an extremist when it comes to other firmly held beliefs. I'm pro-vax, anti-war, pro-animal rights, pro-BLM, pro-immigration, pro-universal healthcare...and the list goes on. I hope it's because I care about other living being's rights and don't want them to come to harm, not because I'm "proud to be an extremist." 🤷‍♀️

We’ll, the laws - with their extreme punishments - are reality. I’m not sure that your wide variety of beliefs (however well-intentioned) will matter to the women who suffer the effects of these laws. 

[Happy2BaMom]

10 minutes ago, hjffkj said:

I would argue that the majority of people who create and act those laws and punishments are not in fact pro-life.  They may identify as such but they aren't pro-life.  They are anti-abortion, that is very different. A pro-life person cares about ALL human life, from conception to death.  They not only care about their living status but also their quality of life. So, they also are strongly in social structures that help get people out of poverty, avoid hunger, have healthcare, and provide more stability in their lives.

I agree with you but I think few pro-life politicians (or many of the people who elect them) would. 

Edited October 17, 2021 by Happy2BaMom

[MercyA]

7 minutes ago, fraidycat said:

An an organism that cannot survive without using a living host to support it is, in every other scenario, considered a parasite. 

I am myself pro-life for myself. But, because I'm not walking and never have walked an inch in any other person's shoes, I do not ever get to decide for them what they do and do not do with their bodies. Nor can I pretend that I know what is "best" for them. That takes a level of ego that I will never strive to possess.

A newborn can't survive without another living person to support her, either. Nor can some disabled people. That doesn't make them "parasites." 

I am all for people's right to live as they choose, unless those choices lead them to harm someone else.

I in no way mean to minimize the difficulties that some women face, and we as a society should do everything we can to support them. 

[Frances]

35 minutes ago, Plagefille said:

 

 

43 minutes ago, Plagefille said:

So it is okay to control the unwanted baby by taking away their life?

And sending them straight to heaven?

[ktgrok]

Y'all, this woman didn't have an abortion. She had a miscarriage. Arguing about if abortion should be legal is sort of beside the point. 

[MercyA]

8 minutes ago, Frances said:

And sending them straight to heaven?

You could say the same thing about children killed in school shootings. They went straight to heaven. What does that have to do with the rightness or wrongness of the action taken against them?

[MercyA]

36 minutes ago, bookbard said:

This is evil. How shameful that people are trying to justify their beliefs in the face of such wrong.

I hope my convictions aren't so lightly held that I abandon them because someone claiming to be "pro-life" makes a wrong decision. (If that were the case, this past year and a half would have done those beliefs in completely, sad to say.)

Edited October 17, 2021 by MercyA

[MercyA]

32 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

Well, the laws - with their extreme punishments - are reality. I’m not sure that your wide variety of beliefs (however well-intentioned) will matter to the women who suffer the effects of these laws. 

I understand your sentiment, because I feel the same way about well-meaning pro-choice laws that remove all legal protection for almost 890,000 human beings a year in the U.S. alone.

I appreciate you giving my intentions the benefit of the doubt. It helps the conversation. 🙂 

[ktgrok]

I think we can distinguish between those who are pro life like Mercy and the politicians using pro life as a manipulation tactic. I assume that Mercy doesn't think women who miscarry should go to jail. 

[bookbard]

10 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I assume that Mercy doesn't think women who miscarry should go to jail. 

Then, honestly, she should say so rather than spending the thread justifying herself. It's not about her - that was my point. It's about this poor woman. 

[Frances]

7 minutes ago, MercyA said:

You could say the same thing about children killed in school shootings. They went straight to heaven. What does that have to do with the rightness or wrongness of the action taken against them?

I’m not sure everyone would agree that school children who are shot go straight to heaven and I don’t actually see the two as analogous. I honestly don’t have strong feelings one way or another about abortion. Personally, it’s not something I would choose. But I’m very uncomfortable with all of the fake pro-life political/religious rhetoric in the US (not at all talking about people like you) and the profound and far reaching consequences to our country and citizens. 

Given the seriously messed up world we live in, a straight shot to heaven without ever living on earth seems like a pretty good deal most days. I’m not saying this to advocate for abortion, not at all. I guess I just don’t understand the angst for the unborn when they are living in heaven.
 

 

[MercyA]

21 minutes ago, bookbard said:

Then, honestly, she should say so rather than spending the thread justifying herself. It's not about her - that was my point. It's about this poor woman. 

I never meant to say or imply it's "about me," and I'm sorry if I gave that impression.

But absolutely, when someone makes the claim that pro-lifers will "stop at nothing for complete control" and that their "true desired end result has been the control and punishment of women," I'm not just going to be silent and not defend those who hold their pro-life position based not on politics or on a desire to control women, but on a genuine concern for the protection of human beings.

I think I said the decision was wrong. [ETA: Sorry, it was only implied, not directly stated.] If not, I'll say it again. The decision was wrong. Women who miscarry shouldn't be jailed. 

Edited October 17, 2021 by MercyA

[MercyA]

@Frances, thanks for explaining your comment. You are always gracious.

[fraidycat]

1 hour ago, MercyA said:

A newborn can't survive without another living person to support her, either. Nor can some disabled people. That doesn't make them "parasites." 

I am all for people's right to live as they choose, unless those choices lead them to harm someone else.

I in no way mean to minimize the difficulties that some women face, and we as a society should do everything we can to support them. 

Being dependent upon others for care-taking on an external basis is not the same as literally feeding off a host body and I know you know that. It us intellectually disingenuous of you to equate the two.

But, at Katie's request I am discontinuing partcipation in this line of discussion.

I am horrified for this poor young woman. I should have only expressed that and left the rest if the discussion alone.

[MercyA]

1 minute ago, fraidycat said:

Being dependent upon others for care-taking on an external basis is not the same as literally feeding off a host body and I know you know that. It us intellectually disingenuous of you to equate the two.

But, at Katie's request I am discontinuing participation in this line of discussion.

I am horrified for this poor young woman. I should have only expressed that and left the rest if the discussion alone.

Pretty sure breast-feeding infants feed off their mother's body. In any case, I don't think one's degree of dependence on others or their environment should determine their value or their right to life. 

The use of "parasite" is deliberately dehumanizing language.

I try to be very careful to be intellectually honest. I think my comparison is sound, if not exact, or I wouldn't have made it. I understand you disagree.

[Murphy101]

4 hours ago, ktgrok said:

I can't even. 

Yes, she did drugs. That's terrible. But not the cause of the miscarriage from what they are reporting. 

The medical examiner found she had a placental abruption and infection - those infections are caused by UTIs. It's why they screen you closely for bladder issues. She was sentenced to 4 years. 

https://www.oxygen.com/crime-news/brittney-poolaw-convicted-of-manslaughter-over-miscarriage-in-oklahoma

I need a “news” legal site that can spell prosecutor.  I didn’t read past that.

Other than that, I think this has more to do with the “war on drugs” + sexism = this drug addicted woman in jail for a miscarriage.  Basically, there’s a lot wrong with this conviction. For one thing, legally she could get an abortion at that stage if she wanted to in Oklahoma at the time that it happened. Second the drugs are unlikely to be the cause of the fetal demise, even the prosecution witnesses said they didn’t think the drugs were the cause, or at least not the main cause.  Third, she was a minor at the time (17).  I pray this is overturned and she gets the mental and drug help she needs.  I don’t know anyone who thinks this prosecution should have even happened, much less led to a conviction. 

We do have laws that can hold someone accountable for fetal demise caused by their actions. For example, a pregnant woman gets hit by a drunk driver, killing the fetus, the drunk driver can be charged for the fetal demise.

But usually this requires evidence that it was a direct result. No one in this case is claiming the drugs were a direct result of the fetal demise.  And while I’m not for abortion, legally it’s unreasonable to say that she could have gone into the chop shop abortion clinic without consequence but if she pops the wrong pills she could go to jail for nearly 6 years.

[RootAnn]

1 hour ago, fraidycat said:

But, because I'm not walking and never have walked an inch in any other person's shoes, I do not ever get to decide for them what they do and do not do with their bodies. Nor can I pretend that I know what is "best" for them. That takes a level of ego that I will never strive to possess.

So, I assume by this statement that you are not in favor of vaccine mandates.

I do not understand how a jury could have come to this verdict based on the articles I read. I hope this young woman is able to get help for her drug usage and any other issues. I do not believe, based on what I've read, that she should have been charged with the death of her child. 

[ktgrok]

9 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Other than that, I think this has more to do with the “war on drugs” + sexism = this drug addicted woman in jail for a miscarriage.  Basically, there’s a lot wrong with this conviction.

Let's add in that she's Native American, which adds another layer of historic discrimination, as well as makes it even more likely she didn't have access to quality prenatal care (on top of the crapshow prenatal care is for so many women anyway). 

 

[Katy]

38 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Let's add in that she's Native American, which adds another layer of historic discrimination, as well as makes it even more likely she didn't have access to quality prenatal care (on top of the crapshow prenatal care is for so many women anyway). 

 

Not to mention MURDER a conviction was overturned by the supreme court because it had to be handled by tribal courts not the state of Oklahoma.  WTH is going on with this DA? 🤦‍♀️