• Kantiberl@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It was always a crime to secretly force a stillbirth at 28 weeks and then bury the body without telling anyone. 28 weeks is almost 7 months (edit: math is hard). She had plenty of time to do it legally.

      • admiralteal@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I wish people wouldn’t talk about pregnancy in terms of months.

        40 weeks is at typical pregnancy. A nice, round, simple-to-remember number.

        28 weeks is a pregnancy in the 6th month, just as a matter of fact. 28 weeks is also basically the earliest you would ever call someone in the third trimester and is the earliest a pregnancy is typically thought to have the possibility of viability.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are quite a few medical complications that can be found after the 20 week ban. It is possible she did not discover it until after that. The article does not give information on the circumstances.

      As for what she is being charged with, improper disposal of a body, that seems proper assuming there was some sort of biohazard issue.

    • chicken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      agree. fetuses can live outside the womb starting at ~24 weeks, whether you are pro life or pro choice i think (and hope) most of us can agree abortion at 28 weeks is very wrong. i dont understand how people can think otherwise. plus the article says nothing about the fetus posing any dangers to her health.

      • admiralteal@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Absent more information, we cannot assert it was definitely wrong. You’ve intentionally framed this as “the article says nothing about the fetus posing any dangers to her health” which I have to assume is an intentional lie of omission. What the article actually says is nothing at all about the health of the fetus. It does not imply there was no danger to her health. It says nothing. Likely because it is an unknown.

        What we do know about a 28-week abortion is that such an abortion was not part of a normal, healthy plan. Late-term abortions like this are almost certainly from someone intending to carry to term who has some kind of crisis. We do not know the nature of severity of the crisis.

        In such a crisis generally, the community and the state should’ve been there to help them navigate it and reach an outcome that kept her as whole as possible while doing what is possible to keep the child alive. This was possibly a viable pregnancy. But I totally understand, especially to a teenager and in the current political environment of a place like Nebraska, being rightly too frightened to reach out for help.

      • SeaJ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        We can not agree on that because we have no fucking clue on the circumstances. It’s possible she learned of a medical complication for the fetus after 20 weeks. It is possible that it is really difficult to get an abortion in Nebraska and it took a couple months to be able to obtain the resources to do it.

        We do not know because the information is not provided. It is possible that somehow after carrying a fetus for 28 weeks and likely knew for 22 of those weeks, she decided she no longer wanted it. We do not know but that seems unlikely to me.

      • hotdaniel@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        To pretend that abortion after some arbitrary limit, should be illegal, is to make a mockery of pro-choice and bodily autonomy arguments. It even makes a mockery of pro-life. The whole thing is a complete joke. If you think abortion is murder, then agreeing to a term - based compromise is agreeing to let people murder children as long as they’re not too old. A compete mockery of pro-life. In reality, the arguments for bodily autonomy are so strong that everyone should have the right to abort at any term, because no one has the right to use someone else’s body without their consent (Republicans are changing this).

        When you support these arbitrary term-based bannings, you’re giving in to the social manipulation of pro-lifers who have successfully manipulated you into a compromise that supports their position.

        • admiralteal@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Being pro-choice requires you accept abortion at any point is morally acceptable.

          It does not mean it is desirable. You can have a preference that an abortion late term not happen. It’s just a preference for individuals to behave more charitably, after all. And you’re free to institute policies that make it less likely to happen so long as those policies do not trample on an individual’s ownership of their own body. For example, you can create financial incentives to complete the pregnancy – cover the person’s living and healthcare expenses or flat pay them to do it.

          It’s telling that the “pro-life” types aren’t out here advocating for these kinds of policies that prevent individuals from WANTING to have abortions. If they truly were concerned about murder, they’d be out there making education and contraception available and pregnancy care available and cheap. They’d be expanding things like TANF. All sorts of policies that are normally part of the agenda of the same people that tend to be pro-choice.