Before legal abortion, any doctor treating a woman who claimed to be having a miscarriage had to find some fetal tissue or report the case to the police as a “suspected induced abortion.”
How would finding fetal tissue prove it was not an abortion?
WAG: NOT finding fetal tissue would prove it WAS an abortion.
What’s creepier, having baby parts in a freezer or not?
In many places, mechanics legally have to return the parts replaced if asked. The dentist will probably give you your extracted teeth if asked, and I think you can keep kidney stones or something. A time traveling abortionist could become really popular.
Wouldn’t that depend on how many slabs and people performing the autopsies? I seem to remember that Quincy had 3 slabs and there was a rota of at least 3 more MEs lurking, along with several assistants doing the usual denier stuff. I seem to also remember Strong Memorial Hospital had more than 2 slabs, and several sets of staff, they ran their morgue in hospital 7/24. Not sure if they also did all of Monroe Counties legal autopsies also or not, but I know there are at least 3 other hospitals there I have been exposed to at one time or another [starting at the age of 5 going to the Highland Children Hospital, and my Dad was in a different hospital when he died.]
And how exactly? I can remember my 5 month loss quite clearly, and I lost the kid and the placenta, a lot of amniotic fluid, blood and some random tissue and they didn’t have to go in and clear anything out, I did it all by myself … I could have lost the damned thing at home for all the actual ‘work’ in my cootchie that the hospital actually did. They did a bang up job on the support bit, lots of IV fluids, hot and cold running nurses, doctors and interns, assorted other drugs as they were needed. Billing reflected it all too. Actual involvement once I lost the sprog, mainly cleaning up the mess once it got pushed out. Ultrasound and whatnot showed nothing left inside, clean as a whistle. Maybe I am different or something, but a proper delivery or miscarriage should be complete - otherwise we would have died off from some sort of infection caused by the rotting leftover tissue inside several hundreds of thousands of years ago.
Hell, they’ll give you your placenta back if you ask. In case you may want to eat it.
I can also confirm the dentist one - gave me her surgical glove with two nice wisdom teeth of mine tucked inside for safekeeping. One has all 4 roots fused into a single J-shaped mass, it’s odd as hell.
But I regret to say they will not give you the freaky external surgical pins & fixations that made you look like Frankenstein for 3 months - those are going into another dude next.
Would have thought the things disposable. They cost enough to be worth re-using?!
The murder charge has been dismissed. Apparently the prosecution intends to re-indict on manslaughter.
Smells like a run at governor or something.
Whose? The judge or the ADA?
Depends. In the US apparently there was a push from the insurance industry for disposable ones in every case (natch) even though from a strictly medical pov re-using them after sterilizing is fine, and I expect arm or leg fractures are common enough that every hospital has a stock of external braces for those.
But I had a pelvic fracture difficult enough that they had to order the thing and get it flown in from Italy. So those two days of waiting for the shipment to arrive were fun, in bed with two pelvic halves free-floating about :). 'Specially when you’re used to sleep on your side :(.
This is about autopsies that he, personally, has claimed to perform. From another article:
Even if we take “a few trusted assistants” to mean that he had 3 more MEs working with him, and they split his claimed count evenly, that’s still over 1500 autopsies across 4 people, more than 375 each. That’s a wildly over-generous interpretation, in my opinion, when the man himself has testified that he performs (not “oversees”) 1800 autopsies per year.
Quincy, this guy ain’t.
The ADA. Or the DA who is directing this prosecution, more likely.
Bearing in mind my own exposure to dead people is on the average of one per decade…
I was reading a mediaeval thriller, part of a series, ‘Crowner John’, set in 1196, about a coroner then [ Crowner ] who investigated and registered death — as opposed to a coroner now, who prods at bodies — by Prof. Bernard Knight; on the bio it states he became a Home Office pathologist in 1965, and during his 40-year career performed over 25,000 autopsies.
Some people are just really good at what they do.
( The Home Office is/was the equivalent of a Ministry of the Interior. )
Eh, that’s two a day, maybe three to account for week-ends. Not altogether extravagant. At 1.800 a year, Hayne runs a 5 stiffs per diem shop. 6 if you account for week-ends. Assuming he works 8 hours a day, goes on a few smoke/lunch/coffee breaks, does some paperwork, reviews labwork from past autopsies, explains what’s what to case investigators… that’s one hour or so per corpse, tops.
Calculation not accounting for his trial time OR his hospital work. But maybe he doesn’t sleep and does those at night - he could be vampyr, Sookie.
http://curiosity.discovery.com/question/how-autopsy-take-to-complete
The site says average autopsy is 4 hours, including paperwork. This does not include time for toxicology or other tests performed outside the Examiner’s Office.
One site says autopsies are only performed in 60-70 percent of deaths. Maybe he is giving the number of total death certificate including ones that did not require an autopsy?
This is a fascinating piece from Quora that seems applicable to this particular case and in a broader sense; why government/religion/just about anyone needs to stay the hell out of women’s uteri.
The mother-fetus bond or “What is the evolutionary or biological purpose of having periods?”
In a related story, a woman in South Carolina has been sentenced to twenty years for delivering an overdose of morphine to her 6 week old daughter via breastfeeding.
I find this quote from the end of the article particularly troubling:
Barnette doesn’t want his prosecution to stop women from breastfeeding. He took this case personally because his wife had a miscarriage in 1989. She is a nurse and personally reviewed the case.
“We make sacrifices every day for our children,” Barnette said. “She decided she was going to have her drugs and sacrifice the health, and ultimately the life, of her child.”*
I question this prosecutor’s judgment in handling this case given his personal issues with it. Seems like recusal would have been a better option.
+1
I don’t know about recusing himself… He’s supposed to believe in the cases he’s trying. What business did his wife have “reviewing the entire case” though?