I have no doubt the woman will suffer for the rest of her life as a result of her actions but, in comparison, a woman in the UK has been jailed for 5 years when her child fell into a pond in the garden.
That mother had been reported to the NSPCC for letting her toddlers roam the streets inadequately clothed, barefoot, and hungry. She'd also had social services involvement for a near-miss car accident when she allowed her 18 month old toddler - the one who died at two - to play on the road, and he was nearly run over by an Astra. She knew the large pond was easily accessible, and agreed people had warned her that it was incredibly dangerous and she needed to cover it or fence it in, but she'd done nothing. She then allowed her two year old to play outside, alone in that environment, while she was inside on Facebook. This time, he had no second chance and he died.
She pleaded guilty to four counts of child neglect and her sentence reflected the fact she took a course of action which repeatedly placed her toddler at risk, without learning from those mistakes or changing her behaviour. Her child eventually, and arguably inevitably, paid the ultimate price.
In my mind, the woman in the car is more culpable from her actions.
This mother was upset by the baby's distress and took a monumentally stupid decision to stop that distress. Her baby's welfare was, however, her aim, and she now has to live with the fact that by that chronic lapse in judgement, driven by hating her baby to be upset, she's killed her own child.
I don't agree that a mother making one idiotic choice should go to prison when she's been so badly punished already. The other mother was consistently neglectful and her child's death almost probable, given her attitude to protecting him from risk.
Different situations completely.