4 ms·

Purvi Patel was sentenced to 20 years in prison in Indiana for inducing a miscarriage through abortion drugs. Indiana also charged Bei Bei Shuei with murder and

Purvi Patel was sentenced to 20 years in prison in Indiana for inducing a miscarriage through abortion drugs. Indiana also charged Bei Bei Shuei with murder and attempted feticide after her baby died following her suicide attempt. Not every state seems intent on charging women, but I think it’s hopelessly naive to believe that none will.

core-utility 4y ago
In both cases, intentional harm or neglect was caused by a person resulting in the death of the baby. I see no difference between this and someone being charged for double homicide in killing a pregnant mother. Still doesn't prove the point of any state aiming to prosecute a mother seeking legal options in another state.
- swearwolf 4y ago
  The goalposts will move. These two were the test cases, to find out how much appetite there was for prosecuting a mother for losing her pregnancy, using two less sympathetic defendants. States like Indiana will continue to follow that line of reasoning as far as they can. The people who have worked for decades to overturn Roe believe in their hearts that abortion is murder. They aren’t going to be okay with “murder” being legal in other states, or “murder” tourism. The end result of all of this is a federal ban on abortion.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    Slippery slope argument aside, do you in your heart think that throwing a live baby in the trash to suffocate should be legal (assuming the facts are correct)?
    - swearwolf 4y ago
      No
      - s1artibartfast 4y ago
        Well that's something to think on when advocating for these cases and people. It makes sense to be scared of potential consequences but people need to find common ground and understanding as well.
vorpalhex 4y ago
Purvi Patel was sentenced for wrapping a live, viable baby in a plastic bag and then throwing it in a dumpster.
- swearwolf 4y ago
  There is not a consensus that the baby was alive when she delivered it. The prosecution claimed that it was, based on a very old testing methodology called the “lung float” test, which posits that if the lung floats in water, the baby must have drawn at least one breath. It is an old and discredited methodology.
  - vorpalhex 4y ago
    The lung float test is 98% accurate when used within an appropriate time span (before the body off gasses). They found the dead child wrapped in a plastic bag, in a dumpster. The child was over the viability line for both weight and size. Patel didn't report it. The Obgyn realized the STILL ATTACHED umbilical cord was too large and the baby was missing and called police to do a search.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    >There is not a consensus that the baby was alive when she delivered it What does this mean? There was a consensus on the Jury that sentenced her, but perhaps not on the internet forming opinions about it. Even on the appeal where her charge was vacated, the consensus of the court was that the baby was alive when delivered. Just not that the law applied

core-utility 4y ago

In both cases, intentional harm or neglect was caused by a person resulting in the death of the baby. I see no difference between this and someone being charged for double homicide in killing a pregnant mother. Still doesn't prove the point of any state aiming to prosecute a mother seeking legal options in another state.

swearwolf 4y ago
The goalposts will move. These two were the test cases, to find out how much appetite there was for prosecuting a mother for losing her pregnancy, using two less sympathetic defendants. States like Indiana will continue to follow that line of reasoning as far as they can. The people who have worked for decades to overturn Roe believe in their hearts that abortion is murder. They aren’t going to be okay with “murder” being legal in other states, or “murder” tourism. The end result of all of this is a federal ban on abortion.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  Slippery slope argument aside, do you in your heart think that throwing a live baby in the trash to suffocate should be legal (assuming the facts are correct)?
  - swearwolf 4y ago
    No
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      Well that's something to think on when advocating for these cases and people. It makes sense to be scared of potential consequences but people need to find common ground and understanding as well.

vorpalhex 4y ago

Purvi Patel was sentenced for wrapping a live, viable baby in a plastic bag and then throwing it in a dumpster.

swearwolf 4y ago
There is not a consensus that the baby was alive when she delivered it. The prosecution claimed that it was, based on a very old testing methodology called the “lung float” test, which posits that if the lung floats in water, the baby must have drawn at least one breath. It is an old and discredited methodology.
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  The lung float test is 98% accurate when used within an appropriate time span (before the body off gasses). They found the dead child wrapped in a plastic bag, in a dumpster. The child was over the viability line for both weight and size. Patel didn't report it. The Obgyn realized the STILL ATTACHED umbilical cord was too large and the baby was missing and called police to do a search.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  >There is not a consensus that the baby was alive when she delivered it What does this mean? There was a consensus on the Jury that sentenced her, but perhaps not on the internet forming opinions about it. Even on the appeal where her charge was vacated, the consensus of the court was that the baby was alive when delivered. Just not that the law applied