Woman charged with felony for having a stillbirth

[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.

The thread should be locked and deleted at this point.

[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.

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.

Compassionate tip: don’t be a ghoul.

This woman lost her child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

The point is we don’t know if they turned her away. They could have offered her treatment that she refused.

But go ahead and continue to make up facts.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Especially when ignorant men are in charge, like the ones prosecuting this case and the judge who decided to send it on to a grand jury. Men who have no experience giving birth, bleeding from their vaginas into a toilet, or being sent away from a hospital after going to check on worrisome symptoms while pregnant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

The point is we don’t know if they turned her away. They could have offered her treatment that she refused.

But go ahead and continue to make up facts.

Could….but did they?

[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.

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.

Most of this thread is fake news. I think it's time for Jeff to take a look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Compassionate tip: don’t be a ghoul.

This woman lost her child.

Yes. That she flushed down the toilet. Talk about being a ghoul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Link?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Compassionate tip: don’t be a ghoul.

This woman lost her child.

Yes. That she flushed down the toilet. Talk about being a ghoul.

Did she though?

Was it actually witnessed or assumed?

None of us were there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

The point is we don’t know if they turned her away. They could have offered her treatment that she refused.

But go ahead and continue to make up facts.

We already have a number of stories in Ohio of hospitals turning away women suffering a miscarriage after the 6 week abortion ban went into effect, and told to return once they were really in trouble. Here's one such story: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/11/15/1135882310/miscarriage-hemorrhage-abortion-law-ohio

Given that she returned to a hospital it seems unlikely that she was refusing treatment. Why would she have gone to a hospital in the first place if she was going to refuse treatment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Compassionate tip: don’t be a ghoul.

This woman lost her child.

She's didn't have an compassion when she went about her day and came back with a plunger to unclog her dead toilet baby. She had no compassion for her child at all. Some would say that's gloulish.

[Anonymous]

Still waiting to hear if the ghouls thinks this is felony-level “wrong”.

[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.

+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.

The thread should be locked and deleted at this point.

Agree. Reporting now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Compassionate tip: don’t be a ghoul.

This woman lost her child.

She's didn't have a compassion when she went about her day and came back with a plunger to unclog her dead toilet baby. She had no compassion for her child at all. Some would say that's gloulish.

Was this is felony-level “wrong”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is not being charged with having a stillborn. She is being charged for abuse of a corpse for leaving the dead baby in the toilet.

Still stupid. She had a miscarriage. The "baby" was never alive. She was probably not feeling great, confused, panicked, etc. There was likely blood, she didn't know what to do. Hell, maybe it was too slippery to pick up. Maybe she felt faint. Why the hell should someone be subjected to criminal prosecution for this?

Did you even bother to read the story? She went about her day. Then came home to plunged the clogged toilet.

We don't know that she went about her day. The only person who said that is the prosecutor. Someone had to be the one to call police, maybe it was her.