Utah law to criminalize miscarriages

[tumbleddown]

@Shodan

You think she couldn’t buy a condom?

I don’t know if she could or couldn’t, and neither do you. But according to the Guttmacher Institute, as of February 1, 2010 – a better marker than your cite from 2003 – the state of Utah does not expressly protect the rights of minors to access contraceptive services from a health care provider unless they are married. Cite - pdf link. And we know certain things: condoms have a deplorably high failure rate especially when used by teenagers. The most effective contraceptives across the board are those only available from a healthcare provider. And a teen who is trying to get contraceptive care and isn’t able to get to a doctor or clinic on her own, or speak to her healthcare provider in private to get what she needs isn’t someone who’s going to be able to bring a lawsuit to get her federal (but not state) rights recognized and honored.

Time doesn’t pass any differently for a teen ager than for a normal person. She had two full trimesters.

Two full trimesters in which she could do nothing unless she had parental permission. Her own hands were tied. She had no rights to terminate that pregnancy. None. Her rights were handed to someone else.

@Shodan

This law does not apply to those who miscarry, as has been cited twice. And your assertion that it would carry a possible life sentence is also stupid and wrong.

Who else could it possibly apply to? This law specifically amends the Criminal Homicide statutes to allow the prosecution of women who miscarry – have a “spontaneous” abortion, as opposed to a medically induced abortion – subsequent to an act (or acts) carried out with intention to cause that miscarriage or a reckless act that she should have known carried a high risk of miscarriage but chose to engage in (or allowed to be carried out upon her) anyway. So there is certainly a wide gulf of things that could make a woman suspect of having violated the law, maybe not having regular lattes, but how about regular drug use? Or alcohol use? The effect here could be to keep women who most need prenatal care and monitoring from getting them because they don’t want to be in a position where they’re blamed and prosecuted when their pregnancy fails.

The text of the actual law:

A person commits criminal homicide if the person intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, with criminal negligence, or acting with a mental state otherwise specified in the statute defining the offense, causes the death of another human being, including an unborn child at any stage of its development.

Utah code states:

Criminal homicide is aggravated murder, murder, manslaughter, child abuse homicide, homicide by assault, negligent homicide, or automobile homicide.

Aggravated murder, murder and child abuse homicide all carry potential sentences of life in prison. So depending on what the specific charge is for a woman caught in a situation where her miscarriage is deemed to be criminal homicide, yes, a life sentence is possible.

[Nicest_of_the_Damned]

@Chessic_Sense

In case you might accidentally intentionally grossly deviate from the standard of care that a normal person would receive?

Yes, luckily our legal system is perfect and never does anything stupid.

The fact is a legal abortion has a zero percent chance of being prosecuted under this law. Going on with the pregnancy has a greater than zero percent chance of losing the baby and getting prosecuted. For someone who already does not want to be pregnant, that could be a significant difference.

If that’s your thought process, you probably shouldn’t have kids anyway. Of course, anyone morally bankrupt enough to have an unnecessary abortion shouldn’t be raising people anyhow.

You have to realize this just sounds completely silly to anyone who is not rabidly anti-abortion.

[Shodan]

@tumbleddown

I don’t know if she could or couldn’t, and neither do you.

No, we both know perfectly well that she could - hence my two cites proving it.

And we know certain things: condoms have a deplorably high failure rate especially when used by teenagers.

We also know that condoms plus foam - both freely available at the local drug store - have a failure rate comparable to the Pill, as well as protecting against STDs (cite). Therefore, this statement

The most effective contraceptives across the board are those only available from a healthcare provider.

is false.

And a teen who is trying to get contraceptive care and isn’t able to get to a doctor or clinic on her own, or speak to her healthcare provider in private to get what she needs isn’t someone who’s going to be able to bring a lawsuit to get her federal (but not state) rights recognized and honored.

If she can’t get to the drugstore on her own, how is she going to make it all the way to the doctor’s office?

This law specifically amends the Criminal Homicide statutes to allow the prosecution of women who miscarry – have a “spontaneous” abortion, as opposed to a medically induced abortion – subsequent to an act (or acts) carried out with intention to cause that miscarriage or a reckless act that she should have known carried a high risk of miscarriage but chose to engage in (or allowed to be carried out upon her) anyway.

Again, this is categorically false and has already been disproven. An induced abortion is not spontaneous, and acts taken against medical advice that result in a miscarriage are specifically excluded from this act.

The effect here could be to keep women who most need prenatal care and monitoring from getting them because they don’t want to be in a position where they’re blamed and prosecuted when their pregnancy fails.

Again, this garbage has already been disproven - when abortion was illegal in Utah, no such monitoring every took place.

I suppose it shouldn’t, but it constantly amazes me when pro-abortion types make these demonstrably false statements in support of their position. Is your case really as weak as that?

Regards,
Shodan

[rip_2006]

Shodan, I find it interesting that some of your arguments point to an unrealistic expectation: that a teen-aged girl would feel empowered to take control of her body, to exercise her power of choice to tell a boy, “No, not without a condom,” in an environment as morally and religiously conservative as Utah’s.

Yes, by national law, by your citations, she is permitted access to contraceptives, regardless of her gender, age, or marital status. However, a typical teenager in an ultra-conservative community isn’t going to know national law, especially when it comes to law on subjects that community finds distasteful.

You don’t think the pharmacist, the clerk in Wal-Mart, the old man runnning the corner store, is going to ask, “Do your parents know what you’re going to do with those?”

Put yourself in the girl’s shoes, and forget everything you might know from your experiences in a moderately more enlightened environment. Are you going to know that you’re legally entitled to birth control? Are you self-assured enough to turn the boy down? How is your social standing going to shake out if you do?

Sure, there are choices, but what good are they if you don’t know about them, or if you’re told by people in authority that there aren’t any choices?

I understand that many people will see the girl’s act as reprehensible, but it may have been the only idea she could come up with, given her environment. I’ve always felt that an effective government informs its citizenry of all available choices, and provides the education needed to allow citizens to make an intelligent, informed choice.

This legislation doesn’t attempt to address the “why” of this girl’s situation, it merely reacts to the “what.” Well, at least it will keep the courts busy.

[John_Mace]

I doubt that she could find a doctor who would perform an elective abortion at 7 months.

[Lemur866]

@Annie-Xmas

Right now any death unattended by a doctor has to be reported and investigate. The death of a fetus granted personhood would qualify. Technically, every menstrual period of a sexually active woman would have to be investigated for a fertilized cell.

I bet every one knows a woman who had a hard time when ordering coffee or wine when pregnant.

Annie, did you know that back in the 1970s abortion was illegal in many parts of the United States? Well, it was.

Now, back in the old days when abortion was illegal and women were literally second class citizens, was every menstrual period of every sexually active woman investigated?

[otternell]

@Lemur866

Annie, did you know that back in the 1970s abortion was illegal in many parts of the United States? Well, it was.

Now, back in the old days when abortion was illegal and women were literally second class citizens, was every menstrual period of every sexually active woman investigated?

Yes and this is a law criminalizing miscarriages under certain circumstances. See the difference? It is not a valid comparison.

[elucidator]

Apparently, the point of the excercise is to forbid using physical assault as a means to procure a miscarriage. Isn’t that pretty much already covered? I can’t beat somebody up save for self-defense, is that rule void if I am offered cash by the victim? Its not felonious assault if a person is crazy enough to pay me for it?

Balderdash, sir! Tommyrot!

[alphaboi867]

@villa

Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Florida):

Good God that is scary.

I disagree with that article, but nothing in it proposes requiring parental consent/notification up to age 25. All it say is “75% all abortions are performed on girls between the ages of 12-25”.

As for parental consent; if parents have to right to prevent their daughter from getting an abortion do they also have the right to force her to get an abortion against her will? How is forcing a girl to bear a child against her will any different than forcing her to get an abortion against her will?

[John_Mace]

@elucidator

Apparently, the point of the excercise is to forbid using physical assault as a means to procure a miscarriage. Isn’t that pretty much already covered? I can’t beat somebody up save for self-defense, is that rule void if I am offered cash by the victim? Its not felonious assault if a person is crazy enough to pay me for it?

Balderdash, sir! Tommyrot!

I think it’s more than that. I think it would forbid the woman from inducing a miscarriage all by herself. I could be wrong, but that’s how I’m reading it.

The law was in reaction to an incident similar to what you describe, but it would apply to instances beyond that.

[John_Mace]

@alphaboi867

As for parental consent; if parents have to right to prevent their daughter from getting an abortion do they also have the right to force her to get an abortion against her will? How is forcing a girl to bear a child against her will any different than forcing her to get an abortion against her will?

I’m going to back-peddle on my statement, above. I’m not sure that parental consent is favored by the vast majority of Americans, but parental notification is. I’m too lazy to look it up right now…

[villa]

@alphaboi867

As for parental consent; if parents have to right to prevent their daughter from getting an abortion do they also have the right to force her to get an abortion against her will? How is forcing a girl to bear a child against her will any different than forcing her to get an abortion against her will?

Well forcing her to have an abortion isn’t punishing her for being a dirty whore, is it? Why would we want to enable parents to do that?

[otternell]

@villa

Well forcing her to have an abortion isn’t punishing her for being a dirty whore, is it? Why would we want to enable parents to do that?

Try walking a mile in those shoes before you start throwing around “dirty whore”.

[Bricker]

@Annie-Xmas

When someone is murdered, the first people investigated are those with a motive. Unwanted pregnancy would be the first motive investigated for “killing” the fetus.

Yeah, those Republicans sure are evil when they talk about death panels.

Fortunately, no Democrats would ever shade the truth or lie in support of their pet ideas.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Shodan

She had six fucking months to safely terminate her pregnancy. She waited until she was past the point where even the Supreme Court thinks abortion is a bit more significant than getting your stomach pumped.

Utah has a grand total of six abortion providers, and requires a 24 hour waiting period and mandatory parental notification and consent. It also provides no public funding for abortions.

Not quite as simple as you make it out to be.

[villa]

@otternell

Try walking a mile in those shoes before you start throwing around “dirty whore”.

I am sorry the sarcasm wasn’t thick enough there. My point was that the motivation behind these laws restricting abortions for teenaged girls is often punishing them for having sex, rather than any protection of some blob of cells.

Actually, when in this thread itself there have been people expressing similar views in all seriousness, I probably should have used a roll-eyes smiley.

[The_Second_Stone]

Constitutionally invalid because as described the bill is overbroad. Probably vague too. A woman using the morning after pill at home could be charged.

[otternell]

@villa

I am sorry the sarcasm wasn’t thick enough there. My point was that the motivation behind these laws restricting abortions for teenaged girls is often punishing them for having sex, rather than any protection of some blob of cells.

Actually, when in this thread itself there have been people expressing similar views in all seriousness, I probably should have used a roll-eyes smiley.

Sorry, I had wondered if I was (over) reacting to sarcasm.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Oddly, nobody in the thread seems to have noticed that the bill as currently written would outlaw medical abortion.

[John_Mace]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Oddly, nobody in the thread seems to have noticed that the bill as currently written would outlaw medical abortion.

From the OP’s second link:

The bill does not affect legally obtained abortions, but it does criminalize the actions taken by a woman to induce a miscarriage or an abortion outside a doctor’s care.