Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Indiana imprisons a woman for 41 years for a crime they didn't prove.

72 replies

PuffinsAreFictitious · 30/03/2015 23:17

www.politicalresearch.org/2015/03/29/how-indiana-is-making-it-possible-to-jail-women-for-having-abortions/#

rhrealitycheck.org/article/2015/03/30/purvi-patel-sentenced-41-years-feticide-neglect-dependent/

This is just horrendous. The prosecution's own experts couldn't show that she had taken any of the medication, nor that the miscarriage had been expelled alive.

OP posts:
PilchardPrincess · 01/04/2015 18:46

Well even the prosecution says it only lived a few seconds after birth, they don't seem to have said that if it was born in a different environment it would have survived.

Obviously I'm not party to the full details, none of us are, but if women's organisations and people like BPAS are up in arms then I'm prepared to think that this prosecution is not what it purports to be.

StillLostAtTheStation · 01/04/2015 20:07

I thought that they did prescribe drugs for abortions these days?

Yes prescribed by a doctor in accordance with the provisions of the 1967 Act- not bought off the internet.

Abortion in the UK is for most practical purposes available on demand but it is notionally aways required to fall within the ambit of the 1967 Act.

StillLostAtTheStation · 01/04/2015 20:10

It's the dumping in a dumpster which damns her though isn't it? Whether it were stillborn or died within minutes I can't get my head round how she could do that.

YonicScrewdriver · 01/04/2015 20:46

I think it she didn't want to be pregnant and had hidden it from her family.

So if she had miscarried then she may well have tried to hide it.

If she did take drugs to induce abortion, then it seems wrong that she has been convicted both of feticide and of neglect.

StillLostAtTheStation · 01/04/2015 21:12

Logically if they were sure the baby was born alive it should be attempted feticide and also causing death by neglect.

Obviously my comment about abortion effectively being available on demand in the UK is qualified by as long as within 24 weeks and not in Northern Ireland.

YonicScrewdriver · 01/04/2015 21:21

Still, if it was agreed by the prosecution the baby breathed for just a few seconds, and if it was a 25 week old foetus born anywhere but a hospital, I don't see how any action from her relating to the very brief life could constitute neglect.

If you argue that her actions caused labour and hence the death of a foetus inside or outside her body, I can see feticide is the right charge (I assume those who commit foetal destruction in the uk are charged as such even if the foetus breathes briefly post a Caesarian to try and save it or whatever)

AgaPanthers · 01/04/2015 23:08

"FWIW a person in the UK doesn't get 6 years for procuring a legal abortion, was this woman able to procure a legal abortion? "

There are at least four abortion clinics in the area she lived (within five miles of her house or workplace). 10% of pregnancies in Indiana end in legal abortion.

"If she did take drugs to induce abortion, then it seems wrong that she has been convicted both of feticide and of neglect."

It doesn't make a difference. The feticide (illegal abortion) was a six-year penalty, it's the neglect that carries the 20 year term. Given that they are running concurrently, although the terminology might be confusing, it's perfectly logical to convict both of what effectively is (even if they use different language) 'attempted abortion' and then also for dumping the baby in the dumper, on the basis that it was born alive.

YonicScrewdriver · 01/04/2015 23:15

Putting a dead body in a bin is not neglect, though.

VivaLeBeaver · 01/04/2015 23:34

Fetacide means to kill a fetus. Neglect means to neglect an alive being.

You can't be guilty of both!

How fucking bonkers.

AgaPanthers · 01/04/2015 23:51

The charge was

"On or about the 13th day of July, 2013, in St. Joseph County, State of Indiana, PURVI PATEL, who is more than eighteen (18) years old, and having the care of a dependent, did knowingly place that dependent in a situation that endangered the dependent's life or health by failing to provide any medical care for that dependent immediately after the dependent's birth, resulting in the death of that dependent, who was less than fourteen (14) years old"

According to the examining doctors, she was 28 to 30 weeks pregnant.

media.graytvinc.com/documents/PatelPCAffidavit.pdf

When the body was found in the dumpster, the examining doctor said it was around 30 weeks.

The pathologist said it was 12.2" long, and weighed 1.46lbs. So it definitely was not 8 weeks, from those facts. The pathologist said 28 weeks. Therefore, on simple statistics it would be normal at this age for the baby to survive.

I am not an expert, but the drugs she took are intended for first trimester abortions, and I'm not sure if at the point in pregnancy she took whether the effect would merely be to induce labour (and therefore, as you would expect at this age, the baby was born alive), or if it would tend to kill the foetus as well.

Moreover, it seems the medical question of whether the baby was alive is being made a political one. We are told that 'the float test' is terrible, primitive medicine.

According to this study, however, link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00414-012-0727-1

that is not the case, and in fact out of 208 babies tested, there were zero false positives (lungs that floated when the baby was born dead), and 4 false negatives (lungs that sank, when the baby was born alive).

In this case the defence claims a false positive.

Other studies appear to contradict this but on the face of it, it seems at least likely that she gave birth to a live baby.

I would like to read the full pathologist's report however.

AgaPanthers · 01/04/2015 23:57

"Fetacide means to kill a fetus. "

The law cover 'attempts'. In the UK no different. If you 'attempt' to kill someone, you are guilty of a serious crime. If you 'attempt' to procure an abortion, that's also a crime.

'Neglect means to neglect an alive being.

You can't be guilty of both!"

Yes you can, you can attempt an illegal abortion, then when it fails 'neglect' the born child. Simple.

VivaLeBeaver · 02/04/2015 00:00

I'm no expert but if I killed someone Id be charged with murder. If I tried to kill someone it would be attempted murder. I can't be found guilty of murder if the person didn't die? Hmm

StillLostAtTheStation · 02/04/2015 00:42

But there are 2 separate crimes. There is the illegal abortion which the baby survived but the crime has still been committed.

The baby survived the abortion but was obviously born in a situation where there could not possibly be medical care available. In the UK the crime would be concealment of birth rather than neglect.

AgaPanthers · 02/04/2015 00:47

The law says

" A person who knowingly or intentionally terminates a human pregnancy with an intention other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus commits feticide, a Class B felony."

So it's intention that makes the crime complete.

As a Class B Felony, the sentencing range is 6-20 years. She got 6 years for that.

You can call it 'attempted feticide' if you want, it would still be a crime in this country as well as in the US.

StillLostAtTheStation · 02/04/2015 00:47

Putting a dead body in a bin is not neglect, though

The neglect relates to the circumstances of the birth and immediately afterwards. Putting a dead body in a bin is a separate crime.

StillLostAtTheStation · 02/04/2015 01:16

The whole thing is terribly sad. I do still feel very sorry for her but I'm puzzled why she didn't go for a legal abortion. Indiana allows first and second trimester abortions albeit it makes women go through counselling hoops.

YonicScrewdriver · 02/04/2015 06:40

I see the logic, I just don't see how there can be meaningful neglect of a foetus that breathed a few seconds. Yes, if it had breathed for hours and she hadn't fed or dressed it or sought medical help, I would see it.

YonicScrewdriver · 02/04/2015 06:46

Aga, there seems to be some inconsistency with the NBC coverage which talks about the prosecutors stating 25 weeks of pregnancy and that breathing only happened for a few seconds.

www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/indiana-has-now-charged-two-asian-american-women-feticide-n332761

VikingVolva · 02/04/2015 06:49

Might it have breathed for much longer had it been medically attended?

If so, failure to secure that is neglect. In UK as well as US.

VivaLeBeaver · 02/04/2015 06:54

She says the baby had air in its lungs after she tried CPR. Blowing sir into a baby's mouth would put air in the lungs so I don't see how they can prove it ever lived.

YonicScrewdriver · 02/04/2015 06:54

But Viking, the only way that could have happened is if she was actually in a suitably equipped hospital when the foetus left her body.

Friends of mine were driving back (a long way) from a visit to family at around 25-26 weeks gestation, she had a bit of pain so he suggested getting her checked at a hospital on the way. She gave birth and the baby lived, after a lot of treatment. If they'd chosen to keep driving and see how she was in the morning, the outcome would have been different.

YonicScrewdriver · 02/04/2015 06:56

A few seconds is only the time it takes to think "oh my god, it's breathing, what should I do?" or whatever. If she'd dialled 911 straight after that thought, it would still have been too late.

YonicScrewdriver · 02/04/2015 07:03

It would seem a logical premise that for neglect to be a suitable charge, there has to be evidence that someone's inaction caused a worse outcome. Here, dashing straight for the phone would have made no difference.

Are people in Indiana going to be criminalised if their father has a heart attack and dies before they dial 911, if tests show the lungs only drew a few breaths after the heart attack?

VikingVolva · 02/04/2015 07:42

"Are people in Indiana going to be criminalised if their father has a heart attack and dies before they dial 911, if tests show the lungs only drew a few breaths after the heart attack?"

No, as heart attacks are not preceded by several hours of indications in one person that an event is going to happen to another person.

YonicScrewdriver · 02/04/2015 07:46

Then that involves criminalising women who don't go to hospital when miscarrying, Viking.

(The foetus is not a person)

Swipe left for the next trending thread