http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,113967,00.html
Thursday, March 11, 2004
SALT LAKE CITY — A pregnant woman who allegedly ignored medical warnings to have a Caesarean section (search) to save her twins was charged Thursday with murder after one of the babies was stillborn.
Prosecutors said Melissa Ann Rowland, 28, didn't want the scars that accompany the surgery.
An autopsy found that the baby died two days before its Jan. 13 delivery and that it would have survived if Rowland had had a C-section when her doctors urged her to, between Christmas and Jan. 9. The other baby is alive, but authorities had no further information.
The doctors had warned that without a C-section, the twins would probably die, authorities said. A nurse told police that Rowland said a Caesarean would "ruin her life" and she would rather "lose one of the babies than be cut like that."
"We are unable to find any reason other than the cosmetic motivations by the mother" for her decision, said Kent Morgan, spokesman for the district attorney.
Court documents give no address for Rowland, and she isn't listed in area telephone books.
The charges carry five years to life in prison. She was jailed on $250,000 bail.
It was not immediately clear whether she had an attorney.
According to the documents, Rowland went to LDS Hospital (search) in Salt Lake City in December to seek advice after she hadn't felt her babies move. A nurse, Regina Davis, told police she instructed Rowland to go immediately to one of two other hospitals, but that Rowland said she would rather have both babies die before going to either place.
On Jan. 2, a doctor at LDS Hospital examined Rowland and recommended an immediate C-section based on an ultrasound and the babies' slowing heart rates. Rowland left, the doctor told police.
The same day, Rowland allegedly saw a nurse at another hospital, saying she had left LDS Hospital because the doctor wanted to cut her "from breast bone to pubic bone," a procedure that would "ruin her life." The nurse also told investigators that Rowland said she would rather "lose one of her babies than be cut like that."
A week later, Rowland allegedly went to a third hospital to verify whether her babies were alive. A nurse there told police she could not detect a heartbeat from one twin and advised Rowland to remain in the hospital, but Rowland ignored the advice.
________________________________________________________
Opinions?
Mine is that C-sections can have more issues than cosmetics, such as abdominal wall weakness, future complications of other pregnancies, etc, so not wanting to do so may be a valid reason. Additionally, it is one thing for a mother to actively kill her unborn child (which is legal, BTW), but another to tell her what she must have done to her body to save her unborn child and charge her for failing to do so.
Let's not make this an abortion debate please, but focus on whether or not a person should be forced by the state to undergo medical operations against their will, even to save the life of another. I think that forced organ donations could be at the end of this slippery slope.
Thursday, March 11, 2004
SALT LAKE CITY — A pregnant woman who allegedly ignored medical warnings to have a Caesarean section (search) to save her twins was charged Thursday with murder after one of the babies was stillborn.
Prosecutors said Melissa Ann Rowland, 28, didn't want the scars that accompany the surgery.
An autopsy found that the baby died two days before its Jan. 13 delivery and that it would have survived if Rowland had had a C-section when her doctors urged her to, between Christmas and Jan. 9. The other baby is alive, but authorities had no further information.
The doctors had warned that without a C-section, the twins would probably die, authorities said. A nurse told police that Rowland said a Caesarean would "ruin her life" and she would rather "lose one of the babies than be cut like that."
"We are unable to find any reason other than the cosmetic motivations by the mother" for her decision, said Kent Morgan, spokesman for the district attorney.
Court documents give no address for Rowland, and she isn't listed in area telephone books.
The charges carry five years to life in prison. She was jailed on $250,000 bail.
It was not immediately clear whether she had an attorney.
According to the documents, Rowland went to LDS Hospital (search) in Salt Lake City in December to seek advice after she hadn't felt her babies move. A nurse, Regina Davis, told police she instructed Rowland to go immediately to one of two other hospitals, but that Rowland said she would rather have both babies die before going to either place.
On Jan. 2, a doctor at LDS Hospital examined Rowland and recommended an immediate C-section based on an ultrasound and the babies' slowing heart rates. Rowland left, the doctor told police.
The same day, Rowland allegedly saw a nurse at another hospital, saying she had left LDS Hospital because the doctor wanted to cut her "from breast bone to pubic bone," a procedure that would "ruin her life." The nurse also told investigators that Rowland said she would rather "lose one of her babies than be cut like that."
A week later, Rowland allegedly went to a third hospital to verify whether her babies were alive. A nurse there told police she could not detect a heartbeat from one twin and advised Rowland to remain in the hospital, but Rowland ignored the advice.
________________________________________________________
Opinions?
Mine is that C-sections can have more issues than cosmetics, such as abdominal wall weakness, future complications of other pregnancies, etc, so not wanting to do so may be a valid reason. Additionally, it is one thing for a mother to actively kill her unborn child (which is legal, BTW), but another to tell her what she must have done to her body to save her unborn child and charge her for failing to do so.
Let's not make this an abortion debate please, but focus on whether or not a person should be forced by the state to undergo medical operations against their will, even to save the life of another. I think that forced organ donations could be at the end of this slippery slope.
