America is one step closer to criminalizing pregnancy: a 33-year-old woman from Indiana has been charged with “feticide” and “fetal murder” after she endured a premature delivery and sought hospital treatment.
Purvi Patel, the woman, faces between 6 and 20 years in prison for the charge of feticide and up to 50 years for neglect of a dependent when she goes to trial, on the September 29.
Let’s put this in perspective: this woman is facing up to 70 years imprisonment for a miscarriage.
Purvi is the second woman in Indiana to be charged with the crime of “feticide,” following the prolonged criminal prosecution of Bei Bei Shuai, who lost her baby when she tried to kill herself with rat poison. Women’s rights activists see this decision — rightly — as part of the creeping criminalization of pregnancy in the United States. Lynn Paltrow, of the group National Advocates for Pregnant Women, said of the case:
Once again prosecutors in Indiana are using this very sad situation to establish that intentional abortions as well as unintentional pregnancy losses should be punished as crimes. In the US, as a matter of constitutional law and human decency, no woman should be arrested for the outcome of her pregnancy.
Other legal analysts, like Katherine Jack, said that the state’s feticide law wasn’t intended to be used against pregnant women. It was initially framed to catch illegal abortion providers, and later expanded to include men who domestically abused their pregnant partners. That still hasn’t stopped the prosecutors in St. Joseph County, Indiana, from going forward with the case against Patel.
At least 38 out of the 50 states have introduced fetal homicide laws intended to protect “unborn children” and a growing number of those states — like Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina — have unsurprisingly turned those laws against mothers. Since that’s how “pro-life” rolls. It’s neither “pro” nor “life,” unless that “pro-life” is “pro-life in prison” for violating their barbaric Lower Paleolithic “morality.” It is truly just anti-choice; anti-woman.
And on the notion of “unborn child” — no such thing. Clap your hands, pretend super-dooper hard, wish, pray, beg, plead, it won’t change the fact that “unborn” and “child” is a contradictory worthy of Nineteen-Eighty-Four’s Newspeak, right there beside “goodsex” and “sexcrime.”
Legal documents lodged with the St. Joesph superior court record that Patel’s first charge was “endangering the life of a dependent.” They report that Patel arrived in an ER room on July 13, 2013, bleeding severely from her vagina. The court documents allege that she initially denied she’d given birth, but later told medical staff that she’d delivered the fetus at home but believed it was dead.
Patel told medical staff that she put the fetus in a bag and placed it in dumpster behind a local store.
Shortly after, the fetus was found.
Police homicide detectives interrogated Patel and carried out warranted searches of her home and mobile phone, alleging that they found text messages between the defendant and a friend. The content of the text messages allegedly includes Patel discussing her pregnancy, and admitting she obtained drugs from Hong Kong that she took in an attempt to abort the baby.
You mean to tell me that in lieu of legal abortion options, women will pursue illegal ones that put their health in danger? Good god, man, someone get me the smelling salts. It’s not like liberals haven’t been saying this from day one.
Patel now faces two charges — the initial count of neglect of a dependent and the new charge of feticide — that, on the surface appear to be legally contradictory. Under Indiana law, a woman can only be convicted of neglecting a dependent if it can be proven that she gave birth to a live baby, while feticide requires the baby to have been born dead. Not that blatant contradictions have stopped the anti-life crowd before — they learned Blackwhite from the pros in Oceania — but the state is now put in a situation where it has to prove that she had a live birth. And her lawyer, Jeffery Sanford, doubted that:
I don’t think the state can prove a live birth.
The co-president of the state’s Religious Coalition for Reproductive Justice, Dr. Sue Ellen Braulin, said the treatment of Patel and her baby as a criminal matter “feels like an intrusion of law enforcement into the realm of healthcare. This is a distortion of the law.”
Sanford asked for a delay in the trial date to give the defense more time to prepare against the feticide charge during the pre-trial court hearing on Tuesday.
More from AATTP…
- Hobby Lobby Precedent Allows Satanic Church to Request Religious Exemption from Pre-Abortion Counseling
- How Poor Women are Getting Screwed by Conservative Hypocrites Who aren’t Really Against Abortion
h/t The Guardian