12-03-2004 23:44									#61
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara I see a nurse telling her it would ruin her life. That would be a fairly strong motivation not to go under the knife.

Really? Because I see a nurse reporting that the woman said that a Caesarean would “ruin her life” and she would rather “lose one of the babies than be cut like that.”

	12-03-2004 23:44									#62
	Inflate your Upload Space

"Interesting" as in "completely insane and certain to be thrown out"? I agree.

	12-03-2004 23:49									#63
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Gimp, so you support a woman's right to murder for cosmetic reasons?

	12-03-2004 23:53									#64
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Really? Because I see a nurse reporting that the woman said that a Caesarean would “ruin her life” and she would rather “lose one of the babies than be cut like that.”

Ah, read it backwards. Dyslexic like that.

I still see no evidence that this was done for cosmetic reasons other than the DA's assertion.

	12-03-2004 23:57									#65
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Ned Gimp, so you support a woman's right to murder for cosmetic reasons?

Begging the question.

	12-03-2004 23:58									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

This does bring up the question of where the defense of "health" must be asserted and whether it is legitimate.

	13-03-2004 00:00									#67
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

If a woman has a right to control her own body, then she has the right, for any reason, to elect not to undergo surgery.

	13-03-2004 00:04									#68
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Che, you may be right.

But the question I raise is this:

Does the state have to show that the woman had no legitimate health reason for causing the death of her child as a preliminary matter, or is this a proper affirmative defense to a charge of murder?

	13-03-2004 00:05									#69
	Get a bigger avatar today!

First of all, the doctor only informed her that the baby may die without a c-section. Secondly, the woman wasn't killing the baby, she merely did nothing while it died. It's like you refuse to donate a kidney to save some other person's life. Should you be charged with murder, or anything at all?

So, unless the state's law stipulates that a person must save the life of another person if he or she is capable of doing so, she should not be charged.

	13-03-2004 00:06									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger First of all, the doctor only informed her that the baby may die without a c-section. Secondly, the woman wasn't killing the baby, she merely did nothing while it died. It's like you refuse to donate a kidney to save some other person's life. Should you be charged with murder, or anything at all? So, unless the state's law stipulates that a person must save the life of another person if he or she is capable of doing so, she should not be charged.

Absolutely... some people in here are confusing morality, with legality... they are two entirely different things.

	13-03-2004 00:07									#71
	Inflate your Upload Space

UR women have be tried for murder before for neglecting their children and permitting them to die. They do have an affirmative duty of due care.

	13-03-2004 00:11									#72
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Ned UR women have be tried for murder before for neglecting their children and permitting them to die. They do have an affirmative duty of due care.

Exactly. This isn't a defense.

Since one of the twins did live, the prosecution has a severe burden of proof showing that death was the probable outcome of her actions.

More important, however, is the fact that no adult in their right mind can be compelled to have medical treatment or surgery against their will. If you can charge the woman for this, you should charge the doctors as well, who had the power to force the surgery upon her anyway and save both babies.

	13-03-2004 00:16									#73
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Anyway, if you support the riht to choice, you have to respect this women's decision and realize that this charge is just a back door assault on the right to abortion.

Supporting the Right to Choose isn't black and white, as most folks who are pro-choice also recognize there is a reasonable time limit of a pregnancy in which to allow such a choice.

It's irresponsible to allow a baby to be brought to full term knowing full well it is likely to die unless one undertakes a fairly routine medical procedure to save the baby. My mother and sister-in-law both had Caesarians, and while not fun, balancing them against the lives of their children is a non-issue.

	13-03-2004 00:27									#74
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Exactly. This isn't a defense. Since one of the twins did live, the prosecution has a severe burden of proof showing that death was the probable outcome of her actions. More important, however, is the fact that no adult in their right mind can be compelled to have medical treatment or surgery against their will. If you can charge the woman for this, you should charge the doctors as well, who had the power to force the surgery upon her anyway and save both babies.

As I said, you might be right on the surgery part. I am not convinced at this time, though, without more.

As to the charge of murder, they still have to go through a grand jury or equivalent and prove their case to a certain degree. Perhaps they can only prove manslaughter.

	13-03-2004 00:34									#75
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: "Interesting" as in "completely insane and certain to be thrown out"?

No... I don't know if it is certain to be thrown out at all. It's in a grey area.

quote: Secondly, the woman wasn't killing the baby, she merely did nothing while it died. It's like you refuse to donate a kidney to save some other person's life. Should you be charged with murder, or anything at all?

However, she, carrying the children to full term, definetly assumed a duty to them. It's like the first person who responds to an accident. They then have a duty to take reasonable care to try to save the person's life (ie, they can't simply drive away). If she didn't want an abortion, the case can be made that she was duty-bound to take reasonable measures to make sure both lived.

	13-03-2004 01:41									#76
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Ned Gimp, so you support a woman's right to murder for cosmetic reasons?

Of course. Any man criticising how a woman applies her mascara is just plain asking for it, if you ask me. That's Darwinism at work.

	13-03-2004 01:48									#77
	Increase Your PM Length

If this case is held to be murder (or manslaughter) then the police have a duty to prevent it. The logical progression is for women to be arrested and bundled into operating theatres against their will (possibly kicking and screaming). In fact, we'd have "surgical snatch squads".

Or would that only happen if they placed the unborn child in danger for bad reasons, not good ones? Should women be arrested for enduring workplace stress while pregnant, thus endangering the precious, precious foetus?

	13-03-2004 03:27									#78
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Murder, yes indeed, someone has to protect the unborn...

I say 100 days home probation, which is what will happen... Ever noticed that?

	13-03-2004 03:29									#79
	Increase the size of your Attachments

****all, let's just take away their right to vote and own property and make women chattle slaves again.

	13-03-2004 03:36									#80
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara ****all, let's just take away their right to vote and own property and make women chattle slaves again.

	13-03-2004 03:48									#81
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara I still see no evidence that this was done for cosmetic reasons other than the DA's assertion.

It's an easy leap to make though.

	13-03-2004 06:02									#82
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp If this case is held to be murder (or manslaughter) then the police have a duty to prevent it. The logical progression is for women to be arrested and bundled into operating theatres against their will (possibly kicking and screaming). In fact, we'd have "surgical snatch squads". Or would that only happen if they placed the unborn child in danger for bad reasons, not good ones? Should women be arrested for enduring workplace stress while pregnant, thus endangering the precious, precious foetus?

Good points.

	13-03-2004 08:19									#83
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: For example, if you gave your friend some home brew and it wrecked his kidneys and he needed to be hooked up to another person for dialysis, then the state would be fully justified in compelling you to be that other person.

What? That's outrageous! If you intentionally poisoned him, you should be charged with that crime. But it is unreasonable to force people to use their bodies to help another person. That's slavery. I can easily imagine an 8th Amendment argument, as well.

	13-03-2004 08:36									#84
	Suffering from ads?

quote: people to use their bodies to help another person. That's slavery.

Good point but what if the "person" did not know the difference, or was unable to defend themselves?

	13-03-2004 08:42									#85
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Good point but what if the "person" did not know the difference, or was unable to defend themselves?

Huh? I'm not sure I see what you are saying. Is it OK to use someone in a coma? No. Is it OK to force a person to help the mentally retarded? No. Any way you cut it, forcing me to donate a part of my body - whether it's an organ, blood, or anything - is absolutely wrong.

	13-03-2004 08:47									#86
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Well, unless you already voluntarily agreed to do it (and are now trying to back out), of course.

	13-03-2004 08:55									#87
	Suffering from ads?

I suppose that would depend on circumstances. If I agree to donate blood, but at the last minute I freak out when I see the needle, it would be wrong to force me to do so.

Actually, it's hard for me to envision a situation in which it would NOT be OK for me to change my mind, WRT my own body.

	13-03-2004 08:59									#88
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

If you agree to connect yourself to another for say, 10 years and sign a contract and all that, and then after 30 days say, nope, gonna unconnect, then I would say it would NOT be ok to change your mind. By taking on the the responsibility, you have prevented others from tying to help and you've also violated your contract.

You're damn tootin' I'd toss you in jail for that... you had a duty to fulfill that term and you didn't... leading to the death of that guy (because others thought you were helping him and thus did not help themselves).

	13-03-2004 09:00									#89
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

You donated to term and now it is a matter of life or death to another human. You will not lose your life, a simple more than likely, treated bobble. Thier death, hey we are not saying it is easy, but respect on the lowest level of life forms makes this act look horrendous.

Saved a puppy lately? Try killing one and see how the community reacts. But alas this is a mere human being in the making, whatever...

Get your priorities together for Pete's sake.

Would you jump in front of a car to push the baby and the mother away from the on coming car? Would you rush into a burning building to save them?

A mear scar for a life, to me it takes no thought, you?

	13-03-2004 10:21									#90
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Boris, forcing Christian Scientist's to treat thir children is different, as children are wards and cannot make competnet decisions for themselves. It's one thing for an adult to refuse treatement, its another for an adult to refuse treatement to a child.

And is this not what is happening?

A c-section IS medical treatment for the child being denied by the mother.

To put matters into perspective, BC just went ahead and allowed C-sections for elective purposes because they are that safe.

So I find the argument that the surgery would have consequences for the mother that would justify her declining the medical treatment untenable.

I don't see murder one, because of no-premediation, but definitely gross negligence and child endangerment at least, and manslaughter at worst.