I would rather have my twin babies die then get a Caesarean Section!!!
 

Is what this piece of shit said.
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/US/West/...rowland.ap.jpg

And sure enough,,1 of the babies died.

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah (AP) -- A pregnant woman who allegedly ignored medical warnings to have a Caesarean section 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 the baby died two days before its January 13 delivery and that it would have survived if Rowland had had a C-section when her doctors urged her to, between Christmas and January 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 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" for the mother's 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. An attorney was to be appointed for her Friday, Morgan said.

The charges carry five years to life in prison. Rowland was jailed on $250,000 bail.

According to the documents, Rowland went to LDS Hospital 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 January 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 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 allegedly ignored the advice.

In January, the state Supreme Court ruled that unborn children at all stages of development are covered under the state's criminal homicide statute. The law exempts the death of a fetus during an abortion.

The law has been used to prosecute women who kill or seriously harm their babies through drug use; it has never been used because a woman failed to follow her doctor's advice, said Marguerite Driessen, a law professor at Brigham Young University.

"It's very troubling to have somebody come in and say we're going to charge this mother for murder because we don't like the choices she made," Driessen said.

Too bad she didnt die, but if the govt can force her to be cut open, i'm going on an all out campaign to have homosexuals castrated.

I saw this last night on the news, I can kinda of understand her point about going under the knife but shit if it was me I would of gone under it *shrugs*

Tom

why do they care. they're killing babies everyday in abortion clinics.

Ugly whore :321GFY

What was that woman thinking? She doesn?t deserve to be a mother. Hope she rots in jail. :(

Fuck the government.

Politicians are not going to decide when I must undergo an invasive medical procedure. That is ultimately my decision which will be made after considering the pros and cons of the medical advice.

What a fucking C U N T !


:feels-hot

Very stupid

She should have had the C-Section
It would not have ruined her life
She is already ugly.

That fucking hahahaha deserves to go to jail.
If you can't assume the risk then don't become pregnant.
She said no to a C-section so that she would not be scared !!!!
Didn't she know she looked like a phat ugly hahahaha anyways???
Some people do not even deserve to live. :mad: :feels-hot

GO ahead and say shes fucked up. But murder? I dont think so.
Charging her is wrong on SO many levers.

That's exactly what I was thinking!

kisses,

Milena

no shit.

you dont get cut that fucking much any damn way, plus doesnt she know that it will keep her shit tight....lol

Then why did you fuck her in the first place? :BangBang:

Stupid fucking bitch.. They should charge her. As someone who's had THREE caesarean sections, and some really bad ones, I can honestly say that they are NOTHING compared to the joy of having babies.

Oh and Wicked Ninjas, you DO get cut that much... my incisions are hip to hip with 38 staples. 6-8 weeks of recovery minimum. It's not easy, but it's still worth it.

Send her to the electric chair :thumbsup

It's murder not to be able to carry a child to term these days?

Cool -- I'm married to a double murderer.

i've had two c-sections...
was off for two weeks for the 1st one and off 2 weeks for the 2nd one. the 2nd one felt way better than the lst one recovery wise... sooo much better than going through actual labor which i did with my first kid! i'd have 100 more c-sections over regular labor anyday.

i think it's ironic that...

if a woman is preganant and you hit her with your car or something and she has a miscarriage you can be charged with murder of the unborn child.. because the prosecutor argues that the unborn child is a real human blah blah blah.. and then you can turn around and go have an abortion and its ok because they don't consider a baby a real human until it's born...............

Stupid bitch. She doesnt deserve a kid.

My mother doesn't have such a big incision.

Thats really just fucked up, we need to screen these bitches before they jump and have babies.

That is BAD!!

I'm not saying the government should be able to force anyone to go under the knife, but if a bitch goes this route the government should be able to prosecute the fuck out of her. She could have fucking saved her child for christ sake.



Re: c-sections ---- the severity of the procedure and the size of the incision must be a case by case thing then, because when two of my nephews were born my ex-sister-in-law had c-sections both times. She called what they gave her a "bikini cut".... and the scar was barely visible.

yeah, I don't really see a difference

You don't see a difference between a 3 week old fetus and a full term baby ready to be born?

k, I 100% disagree with the choice this woman made.... I would have had the c-section in a minute...

But let's look at it this way:

If this woman if found guilty of murder because of a choice she made to not have a c-section, won't that set a precedent in our legal system for other women who may face the same choice? And do we want the reasons to have/not have a c-section defined legally for us?

This woman was pregnant with twins... not something usually planned.... and she was given a choice by medical professionals and the consequences explained to her... I believe that almost all women would have had the c-section... so I hope they don't create some crazy law based on this woman's stupidity that prevents choice (and effects the civil rights) of other women.

A legal decision like this could be the difference between 'Ma'am, I strongly advise you to have a c-section, what's your decision?' or 'Ma'am, have this c-section or you'll potentially spend life in jail if the outcome of your decision doesn't please us'....


:helpme

Fyrflygrl

:throwup

The thing is, if both babies had lived there would be no fuss. I don't think there should be a law created to make having the surgery mandatory in future cases..... but I think that if (for want of a better term) some stupid twat wants to risk her baby's life over her own selfish reasons you bet she should suffer criminal charges.... if not murder then something along the lines of criminal negligence or manslaughter.


What I'm saying is, for future cases they should say "Hey, if you want to be a selfish bitch and risk your child's life that is your choice.... but if your child dies as a result of that selfish choice you WILL be held accountable."

My kids were both born C-Section.. 20 yrs ago... and mom was up and around in just a few days..... so I would have encouraged this woman to have C-Section...


However, I shutter at the thought of any govt or entity having the power to FORCE any mother to have C-Section or any other treatment against her will...

sure the kids have rights.. but you cant ask them how they want to be born.. so you ask mom... and moms choice should be final...



Big B

:2 cents: :2 cents:

Now I got another question...

Who The fuck was the blind man that hit that ugly bitch
and knocked her up...???


Big B

I was going to say that too....I want to beat the man whos responsible for that shit.

A baby is a baby. Regardless of its devolopment stage.
:2 cents:

Abortion laws see it different. In most states and in Canada there is a time limit set, thus drawing a distinction.



But this case doesn't involve an abortion, it involves a stupid selfish woman whose selfish decision caused the death of her full term offspring. She needs to be held accountable for that decision.

Not for the law. It all depends on the developpement of the foetus (number of weeks).

I'd hit it!:thumbsup

That sucks...:ak47:

I was just giving my opinion. I relize the law does not see it that way.

Why did I know that was coming? :1orglaugh




Let me guess....... boneprone fucked it.

dumb bitch, but if you put her in jail it's a slippery slope. the religious right would grab ahold of that and run with it.

No problem. You are obviously an anti-abortionist, and that's fine. In principle I too am anti-abortion, but I can also see that legalized safe abortions are a must because people are going to have them whether they are legal or not. They may as well be able to get them done safely. But that is another discussion altogether.


This case may very well be used as a leverage case by the staunch anti-abortion crowd though, your point is definitely valid.

The irony of the situation is she gave life and took life all at the same time. I don't think people should be forced to have any medical procedures done unto them, but in this case I think there has to be some sort of punishment for blatantly endangering the life of her very developed baby.

To me, if she were to birth both babies successfully, then 2 days later left one in the car and it died cause of heatstroke... she'd go to jail. Well, in essence, the babies were live, kickin and ready and she deliberately put one of their lives at risk and now she should have to pay the price. Sure it's her body, but she's out numbered 2 to 1 here...

I'm probably wrong but oh well.

:1orglaugh

She looks retarded :helpme

So are you for late term abortions, or against them?

After all, babys born 3.5 months premature are surviving these days all the time.

She's your type, I can tell from the pic.
She looks drugged ;)

i was watching the discovery channel a few days ago about this couple who was going to have 7 babies due to fertility drugs. the doctors were encouraging them to abort some so the rest would have a better chance at survival.

the couple chose not to abort any.. and all were born ok.. but.. if they had chose NOT to abort any and a few died at birth or were stillborn would they be charged with murder for not heeding the doctors advice to save what children they could???

hmmmmmmmmmmmm.......

I am against late-term abortions, as it should be obvious by a few of my posts here. Most current laws in N. America draw the legal line at around 3 months from conception I believe, but they do vary.


But again I must point out, we aren't talking about an abortion in this case.

by the looks of her... a scar on her body could only HELP that slag

My first thought was...she should be charged for trying to
breed.....at all.

Second was....at least one of the babies got off lucky. It died.
Unfortunately the other one is stuck with that for a mother
whether she goes to jail or not.

Third, it concerns me that she was charged with murder....for
"not" opting for cesaerean. Perhaps if her "motivation" were not
known at the time, a murder charge would not have occured?
Chalked up to a tragic decision instead?

Last time I looked we had a right to say how we will give birth.
There are women this very second, starving themselves, smoking
crack, selling sex and drinking alcohol all while being pregnant,
who then lose the babies to whatever circumstance. They are
not charged with murder are they?

I'm in no way defending this abominable person, I just question
the legal standpoint and have to wonder what they'll tell us we
cannot do next.

Just my :2 cents: .