Motherly Law

Mississippi Underestimated: Answering the Question of Personhood

Free Choice

I recently saw a quote from a conservative governor stating that he had vetoed a particular bill because he didn't want to micromanage the actions of adults. This quote struck me as odd for a number of reasons. To name one, it's conservatives who typically are trying to take away the choice of abortions for all women. Isn't this also micromanaging adult women's actions?

Let me be clear. I am not a proponent of abortions. I don't know a single soul who is. I am a proponent of free choice. Abortion is not something that I would choose, as far as I know. But then again, I've never been in a position to have to make this decision; so I can't say for certain. I am certain that I cannot make that decision for anyone else though; it's not for me to say what others do with their bodies.

I think that a woman or a man should have the choice of making decisions regarding her or his body without the state interfering with this choice because someone else living in that state may disagree with the choice that person makes. The decision to have an abortion for any reason is one of the most personal choices I can think of.

An Argument for Conservatives

I liken my argument to that of gun rights. I, personally, don't think that people should own guns for personal safety or hunting. I, personally, think that people with guns make our society less safe. However, not everyone agrees with me. There are those who think it's vitally important to have firearms in the home in order to protect the family. There are others who enjoy the sport of hunting.

I will leave them to their sport and their sense of security. I will not tell them they can't own guns, even if they are safe with them and follow all the laws regarding firearm ownership and don't threaten others or commit crimes with their firearms. That is their right.

MS 26

Well, it's also a woman's right to decide what happens to her body. Yesterday, the people of Mississippi went to the polls to vote on a number of items, one of which was Initiative 26. "MS 26" as it was termed may have been on the MS ballot, but it was an issue that could have affected all women across this country. I spent my evening watching my Twitter stream with the hashtag #MS26 {I met some lovely ladies from MS too.} and monitoring MS election results.

If MS 26 had succeeded it could have opened the flood gates rushing toward the eventual overturn of Roe v. Wade. Well, it didn't. The people of Mississippi came through in the name of women's rights.

The exact wording of MS 26 is this:

Should the term 'person' be defined to include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the equivalent thereof?

57% of the voters in MS answered this question with a resounding, "NO" despite the time and money spent by Personhood USA in hopes of a "yes" vote.

Personhood USA

Personhood USA is a Colorado based "Christian" nonprofit organization that "serves the pro-life community by assisting local groups to initiate citizen, legislative, and political action focusing on the ultimate goal of the pro-life movement: personhood rights for all innocent humans."

What this means is that a grassroots team showed up in MS and planted the idea of putting this question to the vote of the people in hopes of stirring the pot into a frenzy that could lead other ultra conservative states to do the same. The Personhood Mississippi website says if the vote was yes, a legal challenge would be set up to challenge Roe v. Wade. Of course, the website also says that the most important reason to vote yes is that it will honor God and show love to their neighbors in the law system. Clearly, Personhood USA was appealing to the conservative Christian voters of that state.

Strong Southern Women

Mississippians responded with their own grassroots fight, explaining to would-be voters that MS 26 could have more far reaching effects, such as infertility treatments, access to contraception and women's health, in general. Personhood USA thought it could appeal to the deeply conservative, Christian, low-income and uneducated citizens of MS. They were wrong. Mississippians are smarting than that.

The idea of the personhood question evolved from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's observation during Roe v. Wade oral arguments when he said, "If it were established that an unborn fetus is a person, you would have an impossible case here." Now Personhood USA is trying to do just that. 

The Scoop

There are a number of laws in place that regulate the how, when and where abortions are performed, by whom and upon whom. It's not a spur of the moment, lightly taken, frivolous decision....ever. And the laws in place protect those who for whatever reason have come to a clinic for an abortion. Without these laws, providing this right, abortions would still take place, but behind the scenes, without safeguards, without regulating the who or what or when or where.

In the past I wrote about laws with unintended results. If the voters' answer to MS 26 had been yes, this would have been one of those laws. This issue is not about choosing abortion; this issue is about choosing for one's self. The people of Mississippi have chosen for themselves. Over and out...

Anna

 

The Million Dollar Question: Pop Culture Clues

What makes an idea or an article novel or appealing? What makes a reader choose to click a link? What makes a message amazing, eye-opening or viral? What makes an online writer stand out from the hundreds and thousands of others just alike floating around, bumping into each other out in cyberspace? That is the million dollar question, isn't it?

I'm working on figuring this out. And when I do have the answer, I'll let you know. I know this much; the answer has just as much to do with what will not put you in reach of the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow as it does with what you should be doing to earn the gold star.

Here's what I know thus far:

1. There is no instant formula for fame and fortune in writing;
2. The more you write, the more you hear your own, true voice; and
3. The more you understand your readers, the more you know how to temper what readers want to read with what you want to write.

So, with these truisms in mind, I have a few fun questions for you, Dear Reader:

This survey is anonymous, and I would be so incredibly grateful to you if you would take just a few minutes of your time to answer the questions. The questions are completely random and whatever jumped into my head as I typed. While this is true, I do think these questions will give me great insight into how to choose topics and how my readers will perceive certain issues, etc. And I promise you know all the answers to this survey!

Thanks so much in advance for helping me get closer to the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, so to speak. Over and out...

Anna

A Case of Misidentification: Ultrasound Mistake Leads to Court

A Sneak Peek

Some of the best parts of my pregnancies with Darling 1 and Darling 2 were the ultrasounds. I vividly recall each of them; a sneak peek at my tiny baby. I had two ultrasounds with each son. We were anxious to get a look at them, but mostly we wanted to know if everything was developing correctly and working properly.

At Darling 1's first ultrasound we thought everything was perfect. He was active, had all his limbs and organs and his heart and kidneys were functioning well. Then, the obstetrician told me that the there was one "soft marker" for chromosomal defects, a Calcium buildup in his heart. We were referred to a perinatal specialist obstetrician for a more detailed, second ultrasound.

At the second ultrasound, the doctor assured us all was well. She had seen at least 5 others with the same issue just that day. She said our doctor was just erring on the safe side. She explained that this phenomenon was relatively new and it was thought that perhaps these Calcium blips have always been there are now showing up due to our advanced technology. It causes no problems and often is absorbed later.

A Shattering Thought

We were so incredibly relieved to know our unborn baby was healthy, and grateful to have another look at our mover and shaker. However, the first night after the first ultrasound with the possibility that something was wrong with my baby hanging over my head was excruciating. It was so painful that I tried to forget about it; I tried to ignore the constant nagging in my brain; I tried to talk the worry away with Dear Husband; I tried to fill my mind with positive research information concerning this tiny bit of Calcium.

To no avail; I cracked in the middle of the night that night. All of my fears and concerns came rushing out, flooding the room with sadness, as if a dam had broken in the dark of night without any warning to the town below the dam. After letting all my terrors escape out of my brain, I was able to wait the two weeks until the second ultrasound that set us free. And 4.5 months later, my baby was born and was perfectly formed.

What Would You Do?

There are many opinions about what one should/would do if met with a severe disability, abnormality, medical condition or other conundrum during an ultrasound or subsequent amniocentesis. If you could or would have known something would you have decided to end the pregnancy? Would you ever choose to end a pregnancy?

I know some who felt certain about terminating a pregnancy should a disability be detected. I know others who would have never terminated a pregnancy, regardless of the prognosis or issue found. Thankfully, I never had to make this decision or even think about it. No matter which way you view it, there are no easy answers.

Large Award for Defects

I just read about a case out of Florida that awarded 4.5 million to Ana Mejia and Rodolfo Santana, the parents of a child born with severe defects, back in September. This child was born with no arms and only one leg. The couple had two ultrasounds performed during the pregnancy and were told everything was fine with the baby. They were told there was an extremely minor chance of a chromosomal disorder; the same remote chance that most people have.

When their son was born so severely disabled they were shocked and terribly upset that this information that escaped the ultrasound technician and obstetrician. They were saddened for their son who faced a life of hardship. They sued the two obstetricians they felt were responsible for this oversight and negligent in failing to provide such important information.

The couple claims they would have terminated the pregnancy had they had this information in hand after the ultrasounds. The couple sued in order to provide the care and medical procedure and prosthetics for their young son, now 3 years old.

They asked for 9 million, but the jury came back with a 4.5 million dollar award that will provide for his needs for the rest of his estimated 70 years of life, even if something happens to his parents.

A Case of Negligence

Now, perhaps you fall in the same camp as Mejia and Santana; or maybe you'd accept the fate of your child and the cost of caring for this severely disabled child and not blame the doctors for dropping the ball and neglecting to detect these very obvious defects. Whether you would have sued or not, it's clear {to me and the jury, at least} that these doctors were negligent.

As illustrated from my experience with Darling 1 and the tiny Calcium buildup in his heart, ultrasound technology is quite advanced these days, and my ultrasounds were 5.5 years and 3.5 years ago. It should be quite clear to a trained ultrasound technician whether a child is missing limbs. And even if a technician missed it, then an obstetrician reading the films should for sure catch such a grave defect.

However, this case is not for you or for me to decide. It was for the jury. And the jury found the obstetricians at fault and decided this award of damages was in order, based on the testimony heard, evidence presented and instructions provided by the court.

A Call for Humanity

I happen to find the lawsuit, the jury finding and the award in order. What surprised me were the 159 comments {OK, I didn't read all 159, but I read a number of them}. The majority of the comments were hateful, rude and disrespectful. The comments were overwhelmingly against these parents. Some comments remarked that the parents should have been aborted. Other comments made the parents out to be gold diggers, trying to win big money for themselves. And on and on, the comments attack these parents.

I was surprised and shocked by these comments. I know, I shouldn't have been, but I'm a bit Pollyanna-ish when it comes to humanity. I always expect people to treat others with more respect and kindness than they do. But it seems that the anonymity of leaving a comment online seems to bring out the worst in people.

If we could put ourselves in other's shoes and understand that we don't know what's it's like to live someone's life until we walk a mile in someone else's shoes. If you have not seen your idea of having a perfectly formed child dashed against the rocks, watched your horribly disfigured child, knowing he will never experience life like other children and realized that for the rest of your life you will be caring for this child, then you have not walked a mile in their shoes. I know I have not.

The Scoop

There are many overly-litigious lawsuits out there. I'll be the first to admit it. But a lawsuit such as this is not one of them. A lawsuit such as this will help ensure these doctors and hopefully others don't make this kind of mistake again. Over and out....

Anna

The Unintended Result: When "Good" Laws Go Awry

The Mundane Decisions

As a parent of two young children, I have to make decisions all day every day that will affect not only me but also my little Darlings. Most of the decisions I make will not change the world or make much difference to anyone other than our family, i.e., whether to have PB&J or turkey sandwiches for lunch; whether to go to the zoo or the arboretum in the afternoon; whether to watch Cars or Diego; whether to interrupt Darling 2 while quietly playing trains to change that wet pull-up or wait until he notices and runs to the bathroom, etc. Oh, the important and critical issues a parent must decide.

But in truth, I do make decisions that can affect others, such as whether to vaccinate my children and whether I choose to use my cell phone to make calls or text while driving. However, most decisions I make throughout any given day are rarely given a second thought. It's just part of my everyday life.

A Bigger Impact

Everyone makes good and bad decisions. But what if you had to make a decision that could impact an entire state or the whole country? Our state and federal legislators make these kinds of decisions on a regular basis. Arguably, legislators are influenced by a variety of factors. Some base decisions on how to support, draft and/or vote on legislation on his or her principles, experience, needs and/or views of constituents, etc. Others make choices regarding legislation based on personal gain, whether for campaign purposes, financial incentives from lobbyists, or status, etc. And we accept this as politics.

Unforeseen Results

As one philosopher states, the single universal element of all such statutes, ordinances, codes, taxation provisions, appellate court decisions, prescribed punishments and rules for civil and criminal procedure is the presumed and stated intention of the law to correct some evil, injustice, inequity or promote some important and desirable good for the majority of civil society. Yet regardless of the intended purpose behind certain legislation, some laws, codes, regulations, etc. create unintended consequences. Many times, these inadvertent results have negative, unforeseen effects. I started thinking about this issue after reading an article about a high school football coach in FL. I soon found other good laws that have had unexpected results. Here is a potpourri of such laws, regulations and codes:

The Football Coach

When a FL high school football coach found out that one of his football players was homeless he took him in, allowing him to live in his home. Sounds benevolent, right? Yes, except for that fact that this violates the Florida High School Athletic Association (FHSAA) code.

The particular rule violated states: No school employee or representative of the school's athletic department can provide or promise free or reduced-cost housing for a potential athlete in their program. The code is meant to prevent coaches from recruiting players from other cities.

While no one questions the intention of the coach as being anything but kind-hearted, and the high school self-reported this violation to the FHSAA, the player has been sidelined pending the outcome of the investigation by the FHSAA.   Even though the school district reinstated the coach to both his coaching and teaching duties, after having to sit out one game, he may still have to forfeit some or all of his $3,850 annual coaching stipend, depending on the decision of the FHSAA.

It was certainly not the intention of the FHSAA to punish athletes who happen to be homeless. It was merely meant to stop high school coaches and other school district personnel from shopping around for athletes. And yet it's not right that a decent human being can't do something out of the goodness of his heart without violating a rule. Hopefully, this situation will be remedied soon.

Source: rivals.yahoo.com

Bike Helmet Laws Leaving Kids Behind

Several months ago I posted on bike helmet laws and the reasons for such laws. The intent is to protect children, and sometimes adults too, from head injuries if thrown from the bike or hit by a car while riding. While these laws have reduced the number of injuries and fatalities, apparently these laws in over 20 states have also reduced the number of children who bike.

According to the article Intended and Unintended Effects of Youth Bicycle Helmet Laws by Carpenter and Stehr, there are several possibilities as to why this is happening. One likelihood is that the cost of bike helmets is problematic for some. It's speculated that another cause of reduced biking is that it simply is not cool to wear bike helmets, and social acceptance is important to tweens and teens.

The problem is that reduced biking among youth means less exercise, which goes against the current trends of tackling childhood obesity. And as one article suggests, some kids are turning to other less regulated activities, such as skateboarding and in-line skating, which could be just as dangerous as biking without a helmet. Again, it's unfortunate that laws with good intentions are having such negatives effects when the laws were put into place to protect children from injury.

Source: Ideoblog

Sexting and Other Teen Exploits

These days photos, videos and written materials can be easily exchanged and shared with numerous people in a matter of minutes through texts, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc. Over the past several years I have read many articles about teens who consensually took nude photos of themselves and sent the photos to boyfriends or girlfriends over the Internet or others who willingly took videos of themselves engaged in sexual activities, who then found themselves charged with child pornography crimes and prosecuted.

The intent of these laws is to protect minors from abusive adults who seek to harm them both physically and psychologically. These teens who have been charged with such crimes and found guilty are labeled sex offenders for the rest of their lives. When, in fact, the teens were doing nothing more than exploring their sexuality, not committing a crime.

While I'm not condoning this activity, I believe there are other ways to handle such situations. There is no crime being committed in most of these circumstances. Being found guilty of such a crime means being stuck with a misleading and false label for the rest of one's life and can ruin college, career and family opportunities. This was certainly not the intent of the legislature when these laws were passed.

Source: Wired

Historical Unintended Consequences

Historically, there have been other laws that were intended to stop something or promote something and yet went terribly wrong. Two such instances: prohibition and prohibiting abortions. I know I'm treading on dangerous ground bringing up these two points, but this is my opinion.

                Prohibition

Prohibition was intended to eliminate drunkenness, promote industry and hard work, reinforce the sanctity of the family unit and generally encourage and assure sobriety and adult responsibility in America. The results were contrary to the motivation for the federal and state laws that outlawed the manufacture, sale and transportation of alcoholic beverages. Crime increased, and previously unknown petty criminals and street gangs were quickly transformed into wealthy, powerful and organized crime syndicates. The consumption of alcohol actually increased over pre-Prohibition levels. Agencies and departments intended to enforce the law and keep the peace were on the whole corrupted with bribes. Clearly, this law did not accomplish its intended purpose.

Abortion Laws

Prior to Roe v. Wade, abortions were illegal in almost all circumstances with a few exceptions, such as rape and incest. Instead of stopping abortions from taking place, the law merely forced women to seek out doctors and/or clinics or others who operated outside the law. The result was that many women died or became ill with infections because of the non-sterile equipment, inexperience or lack of expertise of the person performing the abortion. In many circumstances, women were so desperate that they risked their lives to have an abortion. Certainly, it was never the intention of the legislators who deemed it an immoral procedure and banned abortions that women would seek to have an abortion regardless of the repercussions, but that is exactly what happened.

Fortunately, both prohibition and the ban against abortion have been lifted thereby diminishing the unintended impact, although some remnants of those ill effects still linger. There are other such laws written and passed with an intended positive result that, in fact, is never achieved, such as Don't Ask, Don't Tell in the military, certain tax laws and enforced busing of students after desegregation of schools.

The Scoop

How does the Legislature prevent laws created with good intentions from going awry? As they say, hindsight is 20/20. Can you think of other circumstances where an unintended result occurred? On Wednesday, I will post tips on decision making. Over and out…

Anna

You might also like:

Protecting the Ol’ Noggin: Why Your Child Should Wear a Bike Helmet and How to Choose One

Driving to Distraction: The Hazards of Texting While Driving and the Laws Restricting This Habit

We're Not Gonna Take It: Anti-Bullying Laws Leaving Kids Unprotected