Woman sentenced to 15 yrs prison - drug use contributed to death of fetus

[The Straight Story]

Marshall County prosecutes first case linking an infant’s death to drug use


An Arab (Arab, Alabama) woman will spend the next 15 years in a state penitentiary after prosecutors say her methamphetamine use killed her newborn.

....

Floyd said Hall, who was approximately 35 weeks into her pregnancy, arrived at Marshall Medical Center North in labor on Aug. 25, 2008. She admitted to having used methamphetamines earlier in the day at her home.

Her child was in obvious distress, according to information collected from doctors on scene Floyd said. The child’s heart rate dropped from a high of 140 beats per minute down to 60 beats per minute.

At that time, Hall was taken to surgery where an emergency cesarean section was performed and the child was delivered without any respiration or cardiac activity.


http://www.sandmountainreporter.com/news/local/article_a6a963d4-5590-11e0-a04b-001cc4c03286.html

[speltwon]

1. Note also that

she was already on probation for a meth MANUFACTURING charge from just 2 yrs prior to this incident.

[uncle ray]

47. point being?

[David__77]

2. I completely disagree with such a charge.

A fetus is not a person and should not be afforded the legal protections of personhood. A woman should not be legally treated as an incubator.

[The Straight Story]

4. Is it fetus at 35 weeks (or, is it one until born)? (nt)

[David__77]

5. I guess I have a simple position on it.

I don't consider it a person until it is independent of the woman physiologically. I do not consider "potential independence" to be a valid category here. One of the first pro-choice demonstrations I went to had a chant, "A baby's not a baby until it comes out... that's what birthdays are all about!" Now, humor aside, I do think there is a point there. Most people would reject that position, but I believe it's the correct one.

[hifiguy]

17. Agreed 100%, David. nt.

[cali]

20. disagree n/t

[David__77]

23. What do you think?

What sounds be the criterion for afforded legal protections of personhood? And if some fetuses are protected, should the penalties be the same as for crimes against born persons? I am curious to hear people's thoughts on this.

[peacebird]

29. agree 100% David. Once it is born, it becomes a person

[NYC Liberal]

44. Yep. I agree with this. nt

[Cid_B]

34. Then you'll love this one...

"Pregnant woman eats poison, is charged with murder after baby dies, Ind. cops say

A pregnant Indiana woman who allegedly tried to commit suicide by eating rat poison last December is being charged with murder and feticide after the baby died a few days later, according to police."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20044603-504083.html

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/01/04/police-baby-died-after-pregnant-mother-bei-bei-shuai-ate-rat-po/

[ZombieHorde]

3. Interesting. How do my fellow DUers feel about this one? nt

[Lasher]

8. Dangerous territory.

The article refers to 'the child' but it's not a child until it's born. And this fetus was stillborn, so it was never really a child. But this is setting a precedent for treating as manslaughter those acts which do not nurture the fetus. It's not a big stretch from this point to the morning after pill.

[cali]

19. this does not set precedent

[Lasher]

21. Look, ZombieHorde asked us to weigh in.

I offered my opinion. I'm not interested in preparing a writ of habeas corpus on this. If you have something constructive to say, why don't you say it instead of going down the thread sniping?

[ZombieHorde]

28. I don't think Lasher was trying to use legal speech. nt

[Lasher]

50. You are right and that is very kind of you Zombie, but cali is cool.

I respect her as a good Democrat and one of the best contributors here at DU. A little spat every now and then does not change that.

You might be interested in an OP she opened up here.

Love the zombie thing you've got goin' on there.

Lasher

[ZombieHorde]

51. I agree, Cali is cool. nt

[ZombieHorde]

27. I agree, this could be a sign of a bad trend. nt

[kickysnana]

22. Was the coroner biased? Babies die without meth use.

Mom obviously wanted the baby because she called an ambulance and she told them what she had used to help save the baby knowing there would be consequences.

I doubt there is drug treatment readily available in Alabama, or almost anywhere else right now. No ready access to birth control or access to affordable abortions right?

So no I do not believe she "murdered" her baby but I believe charges should be brought significant enough to require inpatient treatment and followups during probation.

If she is a good person, losing the baby is punishment enough. Women in their 80's and 90's still weep over lost babies. If she is a bad person she will blow off the help and end up in jail where she belongs.

[Beaverhausen]

39. well said- I agree with you

[Paradoxical]

6. Until the fetus is out of her body, it has no rights.

[The Straight Story]

7. So if it is born, then dies from drug issues related to the mother -would you see it as a crime?(nt)

[Paradoxical]

10. Any consequences manifested after birth that are a result of the mothers actions...

Should be considered child abuse.

[Llewlladdwr]

74. How is that logically consistant?

If the action wasn't child abuse at the time it happened it seems irrational to go back and redefine it as such after birth. Under your definition a woman could be considered guilty of child abuse for action engaged in before they even became pregnant.

[Tansy_Gold]

15. I think this is an example of what happens when we try to define

things -- any things -- so precisely and with so little wiggle room that it's virtually impossible to reach a consensus.

What if the woman uses meth during her pregnancy, has the baby, takes it home alive, uses meth again and the baby dies because it choked on its own vomit while the mother was stoned (or whatever it's called these days)? what if the same thing happens and the mother isn't stoned at the time?

What if the woman uses meth during her pregnancy, has the baby, takes it home alive, and then it dies of complications from poor fetal development that were caused by the mother's meth use?

What if the woman uses meth during her pregnancy, including on the day the baby is born, takes it home alive and then it dies of complications unrelated to the mother's meth use but which the mother might have been aware of and sought treatment for if she hadn't been stoned?

Before *I* passed judgment, I want to know a whole lot more about the specifics of the case. Maybe 15 years is too harsh; maybe the definition of the crime is poor. Could be a lotta different things at play in this.


TG

[cali]

13. are you speaking legally?

or just expressing your opinion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act

[Paradoxical]

16. Expressing my opinion.

[abelenkpe]

9. She's a drug addict

She needs help recovering from her drug problem.

Sad news about the baby, tho.

Meth sucks. It ruins people. It's a huge problem...

[coalition_unwilling]

11. This is a very poorly-written article, imho. Take these two clauses:

"An Arab woman will spend the next 15 years in a state penitentiary after prosecutors say her methamphetamine use killed her newborn."

contrasted with

"Floyd said Hall, who was approximately 35 weeks into her pregnancy, arrived at Marshall Medical Center North in labor on Aug. 25, 2008."

Now either the subject was already born (a 'newborn' from the language of the first clause) or it was not yet born (still a fetus, implied in the language of the second clause about the 35th week of pregnancy).

Of course, it is Alabama we're talking about here where a child can both be a 'newborn' but still be inside a mother's womb.

I hope this case goes all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court on appeal, as well it should. A fetus does not have rights, imho.

[cali]

14. but a fetus does have rights

under federal law. Agree or not, this is the law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act

[uppityperson]

42. Only in some cases. And only per law since 2004. Per your link...

"The law applies only to certain offenses over which the United States government has jurisdiction, including certain crimes committed on Federal properties, against certain Federal officials and employees, and by members of the military. In addition, it covers certain crimes that are defined by statute as federal offenses wherever they occur, no matter who commits them, such as certain crimes of terrorism.
Because of principles of federalism embodied in the United States Constitution, Federal criminal law does not apply to crimes prosecuted by the individual states. However, 34 states also recognize the fetus or "unborn child" as a crime victim, at least for purposes of homicide or feticide.<3>"

[one_voice]

12. Well, first thing is she was already on...

probation.

I consider myself pro-choice, it's a woman's choice ALWAYS. However, I hold a "personal" belief that any mother that does drugs while pregnant and takes that pregnancy to term, should absolutely be charged with child endangerment, especially if said drug use causes any type of disability with the child. Your choice to do drugs should not be imposed on an innocent. Not sure agree with charging this woman with manslaughter, even though her drug use is what killed the child. I'm of the belief that it's a child at the point it can survive outside the uterus and a 35 week pregnancy can survive.

I think something like this is opening the door to all kinds of intrusive behavior for women. So, no matter my personal belief, it goes against what's best for women. Cuz someone would go overboard with this..in a bad way.

[Fumesucker]

38. What if the "drug" in question is alcohol?

Keep in mind that alcohol consumption by pregnant women is by far the most common cause of preventable birth defects, Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.

[one_voice]

49. I still feel the same way...

though studies have shown that drinking an occasional glass of wine/beer is ok during pregnancy. I don't think I've ever seen it stated that doing crack, heroin, meth..ect are ok ever. If you drink during your pregnancy and harm your baby, the consequences should be the same. I don't

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/29/dining/29preg.html

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/nov/10/health/he-closer10

[Fumesucker]

60. As I pointed out, fetal alcohol syndrome is by far the most common preventable birth defect..

Ever heard of a woman being prosecuted for having a FAS baby?

Neither have I.

[one_voice]

62. As I pointed out..

that's my personal opinion. NOT something I want to see enacted--prosecuting women in this way. Guess you missed that part.

[one_voice]

52. Also, I just want to clarify...

I think a ruling like this could/will be detrimental to women and women's rights. What I said about doing drugs while pregnant is just a personal opinion I have. Even if you couldn't charge a mother until after a baby is born, with neglect, child endangerment/abuse, it would open up a door to start a stampede to overturn Roe v. Wade and just decimate what women have fought so hard for.

It's a shame that it always has to be the whole ball of wax or nothing.

[Wait Wut]

18. I can't check the link so...

35 weeks is close to full-term. I'm going to call this a justifiable sentence. My opinion, obviously. I will also be cold-hearted enough to say the child is better off.

I lived with a guy who's ex-wife was a tweeker. She had 4 kids and pregnant (none his, but 3 dads). We'd bribe her with whatever we had in order to get the kids away from her for a week or so. Her "boyfriends" were disgusting and there were obvious signs of abuse. Yes...she had been reported by many people many times, including us and her own family. She always flew just under the radar.

But...she's in prison now for 6 years. Her parents have the kids. Good people, but old and tired. The baby is living with the sister of the "father".

Hopefully, 15 years will be long enough to remove this Alabama woman from breeder stock.

[Old and In the Way]

24. So, a woman falls and the fetus dies....negligent manslaughter?

If we need to protect the constitutional rights of the unborn, when does this end? Will the State need to install webcams in our bedrooms to protect these blasto-citizens? Mandatory pregnancy testing for women of childbearing age? It's all a matter of degrees, here. And since mother nature is the #1 provider of spontaneous abortions, do we try God, in absentia?

We know these yahoo's don't give a shit about children...or war or life, in general. This is just an excuse to impose power over the rest of us. And don't worry, if you got $ and connections, you'll get your abortion services because that has always been the case...it's just the poor who will have to endure forced childbirth.

[MikeW]

25. that would be called and accident but then again you knew that

or at least I hope you do

[peacebird]

30. unless authoritues choose to say the woman threw herself down a flight of stairs to abort...

http://www.care2.com/causes/womens-rights/blog/in-37-states-its-illegal-for-a-pregnant-woman-to-fall-down-the-stairs/

happened earlier this year, was in the news at the begining of March

[uppityperson]

43. So was the damage from the meth use in the OP.

Oh, but meth use was something she CHOSE to do, right? Well, so was walking down those stairs.

[MikeW]

57. well I guess its you against the world

Shes been tried, convicted and sentenced

End of story.

[uppityperson]

59. My my my, aren't you something. eom

[MikeW]

58. well I guess its you against the world

Shes been tried, convicted and sentenced

End of story.

[uppityperson]

63. Fail. She pled guilty. No trial. Try reading the article.

Marshall County Assistant District Attorney Mitch Floyd said Hall’s case was to be the first case tried in the county’s history where an infant’s death was directly tied to the mother’s drug use. Jury selection was expected to begin Wednesday, but Hall pleaded out Tuesday afternoon.

“We worked hard to get this negotiated plea because, frankly, we were in uncharted waters here,” Floyd said. “There has never been a case like this tried in Marshall County, or anywhere. We don’t have any precedents to look back on."

They worked hard to get a plea bargain because they didn't know what would happen IF it went to trial.

[Old and In the Way]

45. You aren't paying attention Mike.

You and I can call it an accident...but a fundie DA with a fundie judge can call it murder, if they decide that they don't like the woman in question. The possibilities are limitless!

[uppityperson]

64. And if they talk her into plea bargaining to plead guilty, as they did this one, then they don't

even need a jury. The possibilities are limitless indeed.

[peacebird]

31. the woman can be charged in 37 states (link provided) for falling while pregnant

http://www.care2.com/causes/womens-rights/blog/in-37-states-its-illegal-for-a-pregnant-woman-to-fall-down-the-stairs/

[MikeW]

26. at 35 weeks with 1 to go sorry she's guilty

[peacebird]

32. 1 week to go? Sorry - pregnancy for humans is 40 weeks.

[MikeW]

36. 40 is approximate ... its actually 37-42

[uppityperson]

46. 35+1=37? Or do you mean 35+1=42?

[BlueJazz]

33. Even though I'm disgusted by this Woman's actions, I can't and couldn't..

...send her to jail.
I WOULD make it mandatory that she gets help for her addiction.
She needs help and not punishment.

[Lyric]

35. I agree. I'd even go so far as to court-mandate an appropriate birth control method

so that this doesn't happen again.

But I don't believe that a fetus is a person, and I don't believe that women should be jailed for doing something while pregnant that could harm the fetus.

I believe the emotional reaction here is because she was using an illegal drug--meth, to be precise. It seems obvious that meth can hurt a developing fetus, at least to US. But do we know if she knew that? And before anyone says that it doesn't MATTER whether or not she knew, because meth is illegal, please consider that it really DOES make a big difference. Ignorance of the law does not excuse you from obeying it, but it does mitigate the circumstances and can be a deciding factor in what to charge you with, if anything.

A lot of women don't know that taking ibuprofen (Advil, Motrin, etc.) during the 3rd trimester of pregnancy can seriously harm your fetus. Taking a bath that's too hot or using a hot tub during pregnancy can seriously harm your fetus. There are over-the-counter AND prescription medications that can cause a miscarriage or stillbirth.

Let's say that instead of meth, she'd decided to take a friend's ulcer prescription because she was having stomach pain. Technically, she just took an illegal drug because it was illegal for HER--it was not prescribed to her. Now, let's say that it causes a stillbirth. Do we send her to prison for it? Or do we recognize that intent really matters? Or conversely, what if she DID intend to kill the fetus with that medication because no doctor would give her an abortion? Do we send her to prison THEN? And unless she admits it, how would we ever know one situation from the other?

This is the problem with the idea of "fetal rights". When the rights of the fetus are recognized, the rights of the woman carrying it are diminished. If we recognize fetal rights, we are not far from a society where pregnant women are legally forbidden to do ANYTHING that might harm the fetus. Imagine being legally forbidden to take a hot bath...or a ibuprofen...or to ride a bike...or to lie on your belly at night. Imagine facing jail time for not taking your prenatal vitamins, or not being able to afford prenatal care at ALL and losing your baby to a preventable health complication.

The complications and "what ifs" and extremely unique circumstances of each individual case are what lead me to believe that the best approach is just to NOT consider fetuses as "people". Until the exit the womb, fetuses are fetuses. They are not "newborns", and they are not "children". The best thing we can do for drug-addicted pregnant women is to provide them with comprehensive and FREE addiction counseling and rehab, with no legal consequences for seeking help. In other words, if a woman shows up seeking help and admits to using drugs while pregnant, we CANNOT use that as an excuse to take her baby away from her later, no matter how tempting it might be. Otherwise, the very women we're trying to help will continue to avoid the system and there's not much point to trying any further.

[uppityperson]

48. Thank you for what you wrote. Good writing and I agree. eom

[Old and In the Way]

54. Excellent post! Fact is, spontaneous abortions happen.

Through no fault of the mother. When we start criminalizing any particular instance of miscarriage, the door opens for any and all miscarriages to be suspicious and treated as potential criminal acts. These events don't necessarily occur in public with witnesses. They can happen in the home with no else around. Maybe the DA understands and refuses to press charges. Maybe a religious zealot DA decides to make this his crusade for higher office. It's tough enough for a woman to lose a fetus she really wanted to give birth to...it'd be infinitely worse to have this become part of a public record with legal/criminal implications.

[MikeW]

37. she can get drug counseling free - IN JAIL

[Paradoxical]

41. She can also get drugs in jail. More easily than she could in normal life.

When you send someone to jail, you are immersing them in everything they shouldn't be exposed to.

[Selatius]

66. Your sense of life in prison is out-of-touch. Prisons nowadays are gladiator arenas.

There's quite a lot of smuggling of things like drugs, cigarettes, sharp objects, etc. The US prison system has sort of moved away from the notion that it should exist to rehabilitate as well as punish. Nowadays, it punishes them and often makes people worse and more cruel when they leave prison.

[Lucian]

40. I don't agree with this at all.

[Kat45]

53. I wouldn't be surprised if there are people who killed a living, breathing person

who got less than 15 years.

[DutchLiberal]

55. Your country is fucked up.

And no, I have nothing to add, and no, I don't care if you would bash my country. We don't do things like that. Your country is insane, and this is not the first case where that feeling is appropriate.

[jberryhill]

61. Two words - Geert Wilders

What this country is - is large.

Large enough that different places in it have entirely different laws.

Large enough that our equivalents of Mr. Wilders are a majority in some places.

Taking one county in Alabama as representative of the entire country is small minded.

[DutchLiberal]

67. Like I said, this is not the first time such an example has come from your country...

In fact, I must have seen a few hundred cases, mostly to do with laws and penalties, from the US, where I thought they were ridiculous.

Oh, and as far as I know, Geert Wilders is not part of government, nor part of the judicial branch, but just a member of parliament. So why you bring him into the discussion is not clear to me.

[jberryhill]

70. One county in Alabama

You say Geert Wilders is "just a member of parliament".

NONE of the persons involved in this story - involving a criminal prosecution in a county in Alabama have ANY connection whatsoever to the US national government at all. But, you use it to make a characterization of the US as a whole.

There are dumb stories that come out of rural Alabama every DAY. There are some 275 million people in the US. I guarantee you that a fair number of them are going to do something outrageously stupid today.

Obviously, there are enough people in the Netherlands to elect Geert Wilders and his ilk to national office. None of the officials or judges in this story are part of the national government or judiciary in the US, so your attempt at a distinction makes about zero sense.

Shall we talk about Royal Dutch Petroleum and Nigeria, or is it too early in this conversation?

[DutchLiberal]

71. Like I said, my judgment is based on MANY such cases from all over the US...

But you deliberately leave that out every time. My point is that a case like the one in Alabama couldn't happen in The Netherlands. Same goes for jail time for possession of marijuana, "three strikes, you're out", and other ridiculously high and severe penalties for very small crimes.

Please, start talking about the Dutch-British Shell and Nigeria. I can't wait. I've been outraged for years. Glad someone shares my frustration.

[jberryhill]

73. Yes, in a country this size, you get MANY idiots /nt

[DutchLiberal]

75. I thought we were going to talk about Shell & Nigeria?

[jberryhill]

76. And I thought you had "nothing to add"

So I guess that makes it an even deal

[sarcasmo]

56. Protceting the fetus and bombing the living, rght wint thinking is messed up.

[Berserker]

65. She knew

she was pregnant and she made the decision to do meth. I'm sure she also knew what could happen but drugs were more important. No one forced her to do that she made the decision and she should pay for it.

[Pithlet]

68. And now, by punishing her, women will have to pay

Making such laws endangers all women. Now, every time a woman loses a baby, it potentially makes her a suspect in the eyes of the law. It is wrong.

[Le Taz Hot]

69. This is a hard one.

35 weeks. Yikes! I'm long-time pro-choice but I also saw a baby so addicted to methamphetamine that the first few days of life was, literally, torture. If you've never seen this pray that you don't. It's the most heart-wrenching thing you'll ever watch and it's hard NOT to be extremely angry at the person who did this to this poor innocent little thing. If you intend on having a child, isn't it incumbent upon the future parent to take as good of herself as she is able? If there is a drug addiction I would think that, being pregnant, she would be a priority patient in a rehab clinic. Otoh, how accessible are abortion services in Alabama? I don't know. I can see the slippery slope but -- 35 weeks! Jesus.

[truebrit71]

72. You are right, this is a tough one...I'm sure the mother was using for the entire pregnancy...

..so the fetus, had it been delivered at term, would have had a myriad of problems too, no?

I also think that it is a very slippery slope and that whilst this particular case stands out, the real danger is in how the term "contributed to the death of" gets defined down the line...could what you eat cause it? Too much/too little exercise? Who gets to determine what was or was not the cause of a terminated pregnancy?

I ultimately think, as heart-breaking as it is, that this is a case where the law is wrong..