Woman charged with felony for having a stillbirth

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is that the baby was 20 weeks old and she delivered at 22 weeks. At 20 weeks it’s considered a miscarriage at 22 weeks. It’s considered stillborn.

What she flushed was only 20 weeks old.

And had 2 weeks of decomposition.

Please show me proof of this assertion.

The facts of this woman having an already-dead fetus (as testified to in a court of law by the forensic doctor who did the autopsy) falling out of her uterus is not enough proof to prove whatever weirdo point you’re trying to make?

Okay.

Why does it matter to you how much decomposition the dead fetus had when it was expelled from this mother’s body? It was dead already regardless.

It’s 100% relevant if someone is claiming that it had 2 weeks worth of decomposition. If it died right before delivery it would have looked like an actual fetus, not a partially decomposed mess as some are claiming. That matters.

Really the only thing that matters is the age of the clump.

Which every article I have read says 22 weeks.

How do they know? Have u thought of that? Has your doctor ever been able to tell you the age of your clump of cells?

The prosecutors were required to choose the age of 22 weeks. Otherwise they don’t have a case.

You do know the police can lie in a police report, they can’t lie in an investigation, but they can lie in a police report.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty clear this prosecution is about getting a case on the record that gives personhood to a 2nd trimester fetus.

Yup. So a DEAD second trimester fetus will have more rights to its bodily autonomy than a living human woman. MAGA!

I love all you people coming on here who have never held a second-trimester fetus. Once it is outside the uterus it is no longer a fetus, it is a baby. I held my 22 week baby, the nurse dressed her, and took photos. Yes, that baby is worth the dignity of not being flushed down the toilet. It has nothing to do with being "MAGA," it has to do with being a mother. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, human about flushing a baby down the toilet. You haven't seen a baby outside the uterus at that stage of gestation, so I suggest you keep your small-minded, uninformed opinion to yourself.

You received medical care. The Catholic hospital this woman sought care at sent her home. Her baby died inside her body. From the report it was two weeks before her body ejected it. It was not the sane experience though you both suffers great losses, it’s not comparable.

You made up that it was a Catholic hospital and you made up she was sent home. So I will say she was offered a d&c twice and refused because she didn't want to pay.

It was not made up friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty clear this prosecution is about getting a case on the record that gives personhood to a 2nd trimester fetus.

Yup. So a DEAD second trimester fetus will have more rights to its bodily autonomy than a living human woman. MAGA!

I love all you people coming on here who have never held a second-trimester fetus. Once it is outside the uterus it is no longer a fetus, it is a baby. I held my 22 week baby, the nurse dressed her, and took photos. Yes, that baby is worth the dignity of not being flushed down the toilet. It has nothing to do with being "MAGA," it has to do with being a mother. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, human about flushing a baby down the toilet. You haven't seen a baby outside the uterus at that stage of gestation, so I suggest you keep your small-minded, uninformed opinion to yourself.

You received medical care. The Catholic hospital this woman sought care at sent her home. Her baby died inside her body. From the report it was two weeks before her body ejected it. It was not the sane experience though you both suffers great losses, it’s not comparable.

You made up that it was a Catholic hospital and you made up she was sent home. So I will say she was offered a d&c twice and refused because she didn't want to pay.

D&Cs can't be offered safely beyond 14 weeks. D&E which is much different is only offered up to 18 or so weeks and beyond that you give birth to a dead baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a woman who delivered two babies at 20 weeks and I can promise you, that woman did not sit on the toilet and just pop that dead baby out into the toilet and surprisingly hear a splash. Delivering a baby at that term, dead or alive, is every bit as painful as a full-term delivery--I know this, as I have done both, multiple times. You don't just go, oh, I have to pee, and then, hey what was that splash, oh, a baby! Then flush. This wasn't shock. This was foul play. She tried to flush a dead baby down the toilet. And everyone here knows why but won't say. She was very likely covering up a dead baby who had drugs in its system.

Wait what? This escalated quickly. IF (big if), why would she motivated to hide the drug in system issue? Are dead babies tested for drugs?

When the mothers may be drug users and are flushing their babies down the toilet, yes.

Why are you calling this mother a drug user? State your sources and check your racial bias. Disgusting.

None of the sources I’ve read or watched mention any drug use. Stop spreading lies and propaganda.

I know you find it hard to stick to the facts when you’re agenda is not supported by them, but you need to do better. You’re shameful.

You the same people who said she was poor and black.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty clear this prosecution is about getting a case on the record that gives personhood to a 2nd trimester fetus.

Yup. So a DEAD second trimester fetus will have more rights to its bodily autonomy than a living human woman. MAGA!

I love all you people coming on here who have never held a second-trimester fetus. Once it is outside the uterus it is no longer a fetus, it is a baby. I held my 22 week baby, the nurse dressed her, and took photos. Yes, that baby is worth the dignity of not being flushed down the toilet. It has nothing to do with being "MAGA," it has to do with being a mother. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, human about flushing a baby down the toilet. You haven't seen a baby outside the uterus at that stage of gestation, so I suggest you keep your small-minded, uninformed opinion to yourself.

You received medical care. The Catholic hospital this woman sought care at sent her home. Her baby died inside her body. From the report it was two weeks before her body ejected it. It was not the sane experience though you both suffers great losses, it’s not comparable.

You made up that it was a Catholic hospital and you made up she was sent home. So I will say she was offered a d&c twice and refused because she didn't want to pay.

+1
It is amazing the facts that have been literally fabricated out of thin air on this thread. The fetus was 20 weeks but was delivered at 22! The hospital refused her care! The hospital sent her home! The fetus was partially disintegrated! It was a Catholic hospital! The mother needed to be at work and couldn’t miss her shift!

You people are UNREAL.

You forgot: She was on drugs! She went on with her normal day!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a woman who delivered two babies at 20 weeks and I can promise you, that woman did not sit on the toilet and just pop that dead baby out into the toilet and surprisingly hear a splash. Delivering a baby at that term, dead or alive, is every bit as painful as a full-term delivery--I know this, as I have done both, multiple times. You don't just go, oh, I have to pee, and then, hey what was that splash, oh, a baby! Then flush. This wasn't shock. This was foul play. She tried to flush a dead baby down the toilet. And everyone here knows why but won't say. She was very likely covering up a dead baby who had drugs in its system.

So is that why you miscarried your two babies? Because you were doing drugs? I guess that's what you're trying to say.

[Anonymous]

Plus, do we even know she was the one who flushed the toilet? Was it a shared bathroom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How did the police end up at this woman’s home? Did she call 911 for help herself?

If so, and if she ended up being criminalized for this, add this to the long list of reasons that black people do not trust law enforcement or the legal and judicial system in this country. Alot also don’t trust the medical establishments either, and this case is an example of why.

A household member called 911 when she was plunging the dead body down the toilet per the news story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is that the baby was 20 weeks old and she delivered at 22 weeks. At 20 weeks it’s considered a miscarriage at 22 weeks. It’s considered stillborn.

What she flushed was only 20 weeks old.

And had 2 weeks of decomposition.

Please show me proof of this assertion.

The facts of this woman having an already-dead fetus (as testified to in a court of law by the forensic doctor who did the autopsy) falling out of her uterus is not enough proof to prove whatever weirdo point you’re trying to make?

Okay.

Why does it matter to you how much decomposition the dead fetus had when it was expelled from this mother’s body? It was dead already regardless.

It’s 100% relevant if someone is claiming that it had 2 weeks worth of decomposition. If it died right before delivery it would have looked like an actual fetus, not a partially decomposed mess as some are claiming. That matters.

Really the only thing that matters is the age of the clump.

Which every article I have read says 22 weeks.

That's probably 22 weeks from last period. Doesn't mean it died at 22 weeks. Could have died earlier. Dating of pregnancy could have been off if she had irregular periods.

And, I had one child who was given 3 different due dates in utero -- one based on last period, one based on size, and one from date I ovulated after the ovulation shot I had. Based on dating by size she was born at 38 weeks but dr and I knew based on the ovulation shot that she arrived at 40 weeks. Meanwhile, another DC was IVF and based on size was consistently dated a week or 2 older than the IVF ovulation/fertilization day. Which didn't align with the typical "last period" dating either. Women are not machines with all the exact same menstrual cycles and fetuses grow at different rates.

[Anonymous]

Mercy Health - St. Joseph Warren Hospital, is where it’s been suggested she went too. Unverified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty clear this prosecution is about getting a case on the record that gives personhood to a 2nd trimester fetus.

Yup. So a DEAD second trimester fetus will have more rights to its bodily autonomy than a living human woman. MAGA!

I love all you people coming on here who have never held a second-trimester fetus. Once it is outside the uterus it is no longer a fetus, it is a baby. I held my 22 week baby, the nurse dressed her, and took photos. Yes, that baby is worth the dignity of not being flushed down the toilet. It has nothing to do with being "MAGA," it has to do with being a mother. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, human about flushing a baby down the toilet. You haven't seen a baby outside the uterus at that stage of gestation, so I suggest you keep your small-minded, uninformed opinion to yourself.

You received medical care. The Catholic hospital this woman sought care at sent her home. Her baby died inside her body. From the report it was two weeks before her body ejected it. It was not the sane experience though you both suffers great losses, it’s not comparable.

You made up that it was a Catholic hospital and you made up she was sent home. So I will say she was offered a d&c twice and refused because she didn't want to pay.

It was not made up friend.

Please post the article that says the name of the hospital and what happened to her when she went there (where it specifically says the hospital sent her home and did nothing for her).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is that the baby was 20 weeks old and she delivered at 22 weeks. At 20 weeks it’s considered a miscarriage at 22 weeks. It’s considered stillborn.

What she flushed was only 20 weeks old.

And had 2 weeks of decomposition.

Please show me proof of this assertion.

The facts of this woman having an already-dead fetus (as testified to in a court of law by the forensic doctor who did the autopsy) falling out of her uterus is not enough proof to prove whatever weirdo point you’re trying to make?

Okay.

Why does it matter to you how much decomposition the dead fetus had when it was expelled from this mother’s body? It was dead already regardless.

It’s 100% relevant if someone is claiming that it had 2 weeks worth of decomposition. If it died right before delivery it would have looked like an actual fetus, not a partially decomposed mess as some are claiming. That matters.

They made it up. No news report says that there were no time line's for the hospital visits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a woman who delivered two babies at 20 weeks and I can promise you, that woman did not sit on the toilet and just pop that dead baby out into the toilet and surprisingly hear a splash. Delivering a baby at that term, dead or alive, is every bit as painful as a full-term delivery--I know this, as I have done both, multiple times. You don't just go, oh, I have to pee, and then, hey what was that splash, oh, a baby! Then flush. This wasn't shock. This was foul play. She tried to flush a dead baby down the toilet. And everyone here knows why but won't say. She was very likely covering up a dead baby who had drugs in its system.

So is that why you miscarried your two babies? Because you were doing drugs? I guess that's what you're trying to say.

What’s sad is eventually we’ll be investigated for every loss or late period that eventually arrives. This is the groundwork.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty clear this prosecution is about getting a case on the record that gives personhood to a 2nd trimester fetus.

Yup. So a DEAD second trimester fetus will have more rights to its bodily autonomy than a living human woman. MAGA!

I love all you people coming on here who have never held a second-trimester fetus. Once it is outside the uterus it is no longer a fetus, it is a baby. I held my 22 week baby, the nurse dressed her, and took photos. Yes, that baby is worth the dignity of not being flushed down the toilet. It has nothing to do with being "MAGA," it has to do with being a mother. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, human about flushing a baby down the toilet. You haven't seen a baby outside the uterus at that stage of gestation, so I suggest you keep your small-minded, uninformed opinion to yourself.

You received medical care. The Catholic hospital this woman sought care at sent her home. Her baby died inside her body. From the report it was two weeks before her body ejected it. It was not the sane experience though you both suffers great losses, it’s not comparable.

You made up that it was a Catholic hospital and you made up she was sent home. So I will say she was offered a d&c twice and refused because she didn't want to pay.

It was not made up friend.

Please post the article that says the name of the hospital and what happened to her when she went there (where it specifically says the hospital sent her home and did nothing for her).

Would this make turning a woman in danger away any more ok?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is that the baby was 20 weeks old and she delivered at 22 weeks. At 20 weeks it’s considered a miscarriage at 22 weeks. It’s considered stillborn.

What she flushed was only 20 weeks old.

And had 2 weeks of decomposition.

Please show me proof of this assertion.

The facts of this woman having an already-dead fetus (as testified to in a court of law by the forensic doctor who did the autopsy) falling out of her uterus is not enough proof to prove whatever weirdo point you’re trying to make?

Okay.

Why does it matter to you how much decomposition the dead fetus had when it was expelled from this mother’s body? It was dead already regardless.

It’s 100% relevant if someone is claiming that it had 2 weeks worth of decomposition. If it died right before delivery it would have looked like an actual fetus, not a partially decomposed mess as some are claiming. That matters.

They made it up. No news report says that there were no time line's for the hospital visits.

Of course they did. They’ve fabricated an entire narrative with zero evidence.

Pro tip: if you have to make stuff up to prove your point, you don’t have much of a point.