Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nebraska law is no abortion after 20 weeks.
Her water broke at 22 weeks.
She could have gone to another state.
Poor you say ?
She had one child already and this was her second.
If she had the money for an abortion then she could have borrowed money to get a bus ticket to another state.
If she was that determined she could have done that. The article says she delivered 8 days later.
That pregnancy was doomed once her water broke but she did nothing for 8 days after her water broke ?
No, there was absolutely nothing wrong with the law. She should have just gone to another state. Let's not change the actual law causing the problem, people can just go to other states. How silly of me.
Try reading the article and perhaps the comments.
Sheesh, talk about making uninformed comments without an inkling of the issue.
Nothing new from this poster.
She didn't want an abortion, the fetus was dying inside her ... being crushed.
Article says she delivered 8 days later and baby died from lungs not being fully formed.
And this is exactly why it is wrong for a room of men to legislate what a woman does with her body. Because of Nebraska state law, this baby was born deformed and suffered for 15 minutes before dying mercifully.
Sucks, but hey, its happens every day even in so called progressive pro abortion states.
No, there was absolutely nothing wrong with the law. She should have just gone to another state. Let's not change the actual law causing the problem, people can just go to other states. How silly of me.
It's a state law, not a federal law.
With a federal law you are cornered with no alternatives.
But you have alternatives with a state law.
Sucks, but hey, its happens every day even in pro abortion states.
I'm not saying it doesn't, but this is why we shouldn't have laws restricting access to abortion. Why does a room of mostly white men know what is best for a woman? I think women know what is best for themselves, and if they are wrong, this is a free country and they should at least have the option to make their own decisions. Why do we need nanny government telling a woman when she can have an abortion?
Nebraska law is no abortion after 20 weeks.
Her water broke at 22 weeks.
She could have gone to another state.
Poor you say ?
She had one child already and this was her second.
If she had the money for an abortion then she could have borrowed money to get a bus ticket to another state.
If she was that determined she could have done that. The article says she delivered 8 days later.
That pregnancy was doomed once her water broke but she did nothing for 8 days after her water broke ?
judgmental much? who are you to know whats in her bank account? does it matter? her uterus was crushing her baby. better to let the baby suffer eh?
as chie pointed out she didn't want an abortion this was a case for a medical late term abortion.
It's a state law, not a federal law.
With a federal law you are cornered with no alternatives.
But you have alternatives with a state law.
This reminds me of when people used to defend state sodomy laws... let's not get rid of the law that is flawed, because if people don't like it they'll just move.
My state has an 8% sales tax. This irks me, so naturally I am leaving my job, friends, and family tomorrow to move to a sales tax-free state. Don't know why I never thought of that before.
I've never heard of a uterus "crushing" an infant and an internet search gave me no information on this "condition". She had already had a normal pregnancy and a healthy child so I am mystified about exactly what was causing her presumably healthy uterus to "crush" this second baby. Something doesn't sound right here. Also note this is a blog posting by someone other than the woman who lost this baby. Other than her water breaking early, there really isn't enough information in the article to tell us everything we need to know before coming to any conclusions.
I've never heard of a uterus "crushing" an infant and an internet search gave me no information on this "condition". She had already had a normal pregnancy and a healthy child so I am mystified about exactly what was causing her presumably healthy uterus to "crush" this second baby. Something doesn't sound right here. Also note this is a blog posting by someone other than the woman who lost this baby. Other than her water breaking early, there really isn't enough information in the article to tell us everything we need to know before coming to any conclusions.
Agreed, you know those news articles about that nuclear crisis in Japan? Not gonna buy into it until the nuclear reactor itself is given a chance to speak on its own behalf. I want to hear about this in the nuclear reactor's OWN WORDS before rushing to any judgment.
I've never heard of a uterus "crushing" an infant and an internet search gave me no information on this "condition". She had already had a normal pregnancy and a healthy child so I am mystified about exactly what was causing her presumably healthy uterus to "crush" this second baby. Something doesn't sound right here. Also note this is a blog posting by someone other than the woman who lost this baby. Other than her water breaking early, there really isn't enough information in the article to tell us everything we need to know before coming to any conclusions.
the only conclusion false reporting or not is a woman has a right to privacy and abortion should she need one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.