Helenjw
|
posted on March 13, 2004 03:59:06 PM new
"The doctor wasn't the one KILLING these babies."
linda
No one was killing the baby, linda. You need to read the story again...One baby survived and the other baby was a still birth. I believe that is the medical term for a dead baby.
The doctors didn't kill the baby.
The mother didn't kill the baby.
No one intended to kill the baby.
The baby was dead when it was born.
[ edited by Helenjw on Mar 13, 2004 04:00 PM ]
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 13, 2004 04:25:14 PM new
The mother didn't kill the baby.
There appears to be disagreement on that statement, because the first link says she's was arrested for MURDER.
Re-elect President Bush!!
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 13, 2004 04:28:12 PM new
Here ya go helen....first sentence in the first post on this topic. And you talk about ME not reading. 
Utah Woman Charged With Murdering Fetus.
Re-elect President Bush!!
|
kiara
|
posted on March 13, 2004 04:34:06 PM new
There's more info here on the woman.
The charges are another sad event in a life marked with mental problems, Sikora said.
He said Rowland, herself a twin, was born to a mentally retarded mother. She was placed in foster care almost immediately and adopted before her first birthday. Her twin brother had serious medical problems and died when he was 7, Sikora said.
Rowland was committed to a Pennsylvania mental hospital when she was 12, weighing almost 200 pounds, and diagnosed with "oppositional defiant disorder," Sikora said. The American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry defines the condition as an ongoing pattern of uncooperative, defiant and hostile behavior toward authority figures that seriously interferes with day-to-day functioning.
His client was hospitalized in a mental facility at least one other time and told him she was diagnosed with bipolar disorder, Sikora said. The defense attorney is waiting for records to confirm that.
http://www.sltrib.com/2004/mar/03122004/utah/147031.asp
Whether all the statements are true or not, it doesn't sound like this woman was fully competent and able to make decisions for herself.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on March 13, 2004 04:47:45 PM new
linda
The entire thread is about the fact that this woman was charged with murder.
I suppose you have heard the expression, innocent until proven guilty?
Sometimes that is true.
You are such a dizzy head, linda. Talk to someone else...please.
Helen
Thanks for that link, kiara.
|
kiara
|
posted on March 13, 2004 06:05:28 PM new
Helen, sometimes I wonder if we're maybe talking to several robot people. No matter what the discussion is, it's like they have one thought programmed in for a certain situation. There is no consideration for "ifs, ands or buts" or even a "maybe". It's like the one thought on that situation will fit, no matter what.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on March 13, 2004 06:16:09 PM new
LOLOL Kiara! What a cool robot.
That's it.
Helen
|
kiara
|
posted on March 13, 2004 06:33:12 PM new
Just having a bit of fun here. 
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on March 14, 2004 04:25:46 AM new
I didn't know it was ok to murder children in Canada... wow learn something new everyday...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
http://www.nogaymarriage.com/
|
logansdad
|
posted on March 14, 2004 06:35:46 AM new
The sad thing is that if this woman would have aborted her pregnancy she would not have been arrested.
It is OK to kill a fetus, but if a woman decides to have a natural birth and then the babies die, it is different?
Suppose you spouse needed an operation, the doctors said it would save his life. You tell the doctors no. Your spouse later dies. Would you then be charged for murder because you didn't listen to the doctor?
Where do we draw the line with this?
If we allow a woman the right to chose, shouldn't we allow woman the right to choose how they want to deliver their baby?
Impeach Bush
Marriage is a Human Right not a Heterosexual Privledge.
Bigotry and hate will not be tolerated.
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on March 14, 2004 09:25:42 AM new
Suppose you spouse needed an operation, the doctors said it would save his life. You tell the doctors no. Your spouse later dies. Would you then be charged for murder because you didn't listen to the doctor?
Not even close to being the same thing...
Your spouse would be the one making the decision if able to...
If not able to then there would have to of been a living will or power of attorney, which would of needed their signature.
The point is in this country that we allow the "mother" to make the decisions for her children.
If she had had the c section and child had died she would just be another sad story. She was told without the c section one or both babies could die... she made a choice to murder.
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
http://www.nogaymarriage.com/
|
bunnicula
|
posted on March 14, 2004 10:12:49 AM new
So I guess if person was told they had to have an operation to save their life and they refused the operation, it would be ruled suicide if they died.....
Asininity
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on March 14, 2004 10:36:53 AM new
I see coming from the left an overlooking of a small male child that died because his b*tch of a mother decided not to have an operation....
All they can come up with is dealing with consenting adults who can make their own decisions...
We can only hope that jailhouse justice will take place and get this over with.
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
http://www.nogaymarriage.com/
|
davebraun
|
posted on March 14, 2004 11:01:32 AM new
Had the male child survived and grown up to become gay would he then be fair game to some moron bigot such as yourself.
Friends don't let friends vote Republican!
|
Helenjw
|
posted on March 14, 2004 11:13:26 AM new
You have touched a nerve with that question, dave. All the right wingers are gung ho to save the fetus in the womb but after birth every kid is left to shift for himself. Health care is vetoed, funds for education vetoed...maybe they just need him for fodder in a war.
What really amazes me is that doctors and nurses at several hospitals were unable to help this poor woman who is being called mentally ill. She was going from hospital to hospital afraid and seeking help and nobody knew what to do.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 14, 2004 11:38:35 AM new
Health care is vetoed, funds for education vetoed.
Two untrue statements. False statements....out and out lies.
But say it often enough YOU might begin to believe they're true.
Re-elect President Bush!!
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on March 14, 2004 11:39:04 AM new
Big words from someone that just sponged medical services for their liver...
I see that hospital stay didn't make you any more intelligent... what a waste of money...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
http://www.nogaymarriage.com/
|
davebraun
|
posted on March 14, 2004 12:13:03 PM new
First off I am not on the dole. I have private insurance as I pay my way through this world and always have, thank you.
Secondly I don't get intimidated by the likes of you either in person or online.
Friends don't let friends vote Republican!
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on March 14, 2004 12:28:10 PM new
What a dumb thing to say, Twelve. Shouldn't you be in church or something?
I agree with you Helen. This woman needed help. Also, even if both of her twins lived, she might have harmed them afterwards without proper help and support.
|
logansdad
|
posted on March 15, 2004 07:05:30 AM new
Not even close to being the same thing...
Yes it was not the same thing, but an example nonetheless
If she had had the c section and child had died she would just be another sad story. She was told without the c section one or both babies could die... she made a choice to murder.
At point does it stop becoming the woman's choice? You conveniently didn't comment on the other point of my statement. If the woman decided to have an abortion earlier in her pregnancy, both babies would have died and she would not be charged with murder. How can this country allow a woman the right to choose and then be charged with murder at the same time? This is in complete contradiction.
Impeach Bush
Marriage is a Human Right not a Heterosexual Privledge.
Bigotry and hate will not be tolerated.
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on March 15, 2004 07:25:16 AM new
I didn't realize that was directed at me...
I am an anti-abortionist however if she had chosen at that time that is a legal choice... at some point we have to recognize these are breathing children...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
http://www.nogaymarriage.com/
|
Helenjw
|
posted on March 15, 2004 07:41:20 AM new
Conservatives like killing everything but fetuses.
Reminds me of Nixon talking to Kissinger during the Vietnam war -- calling it "this sh*t ass little country".
NIXON; We've got to be thinking in terms of an all-out bombing attack...I'm thinking of the dikes.
Kissinger: I agree with you.
Nixon....Will that drown people?
Kissinger: About two hundred thousand people.
I'll bet they were both against abortion and would vote to find this poor woman guilty of murder...a woman who simply had the misfortune of having a still birth because she was mentally ill and afraid.
Helen
|
kiara
|
posted on March 15, 2004 07:57:45 AM new
if she had chosen
twelvepole, you talked about dumbing down your brain in that other thread so now I understand that it's almost completely non-operative. Just a suggestion, maybe crank it up a notch and clue in that this woman wasn't mentally competent to make decisions.
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on March 15, 2004 08:24:01 AM new
They do have hospitals for the criminally insane... maybe she can go there
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
http://www.nogaymarriage.com/
|
logansdad
|
posted on March 15, 2004 08:56:31 AM new
at some point we have to recognize these are breathing children...
Twelve, thanks for the comment. I totally agree with you, but who decides what that point is. Is it 4 months into the pregancy, 6 months, or at birth?
If women have the right to choose to have an abortion, do they then loose that right once they reach the point in time above? Does a woman have a right to do as she pleases with the unborn baby until it is delivered?
Impeach Bush
Marriage is a Human Right not a Heterosexual Privledge.
Bigotry and hate will not be tolerated.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 15, 2004 09:13:09 AM new
clue in that this woman wasn't mentally competent to make decisions.
I wasn't aware that had already been determined by professionals, qualified to make those decisions.
She also was charged with child endangerment for the surviving twin. It's been reported the child had drugs and alcohol in her system.
That is another possibility as to why she didn't understand the seriousness of what the doctors were telling her in regards to the twins lives being in danger.
Whatever her problem is, that will be determined by the courts after an evaluation is done. Had she not been arrested this would evaluation most likely wouldn't have taken place.
It's obvious she can't care for the children she has now.
Re-elect President Bush!!
|
kiara
|
posted on March 15, 2004 09:40:58 AM new
Linda says.......
I wasn't aware that had already been determined by professionals, qualified to make those decisions.
Then Linda says........
It's obvious she can't care for the children she has now.
But then you are qualified to make that decision?
As I said earlier, all the facts aren't in yet but from the statements her lawyer has made about her past life and mental condition I really don't think she was capable of dealing with making decisions about her pregnancy. If she was using drugs she would have been in an even worse state of mind. I agree with Helen that the doctors, nurses and hospitals didn't help this woman either.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 15, 2004 09:49:48 AM new
But then you are qualified to make that decision?
Yes, I do. Her life is a mess. Her other children are being cared for by her in-laws. That's usually the first clue she can't care for them herself. Whether it's due to mental problems or drug/alcohol issues, she's NOT caring for her own children.
And she put this surviving twin up for adoption. Another clue she can't or doesn't wish to care for it.
This arrest is the best thing that could have happened to her because now she'll receive the help she needs.
Re-elect President Bush!!
|
kiara
|
posted on March 15, 2004 10:07:52 AM new
I wasn't aware that had already been determined by professionals, qualified to make those decisions.
Then you admit that you are qualified to do so?
Yes, I do
So what are you telling me? That it hasn't been determined by professionals qualified to make those decisions but you have made the decision for her?
Sorry, I misunderstood. I didn't realize you were designated as the one handling the case and were qualified.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 15, 2004 10:24:53 AM new
Just because her lawyer said she has a history of mental problems....doesn't make it *fact*. Lawyers can lie. Even in court they can lie to a jury. It's not illegal for them to do so.
An evaluation by a qualified person will make the call as to the reason she acted as she did - be it drugs/alcohol or mental illness.
A lot different than being able to clearly see that she DOES NOT care for any of her own children. No qualifications required on my part to see a FACT.
Re-elect President Bush!!
|
