[dl]

I cannot believe that anyone could be so vain that they would put their unborn, near term twins lives at risk.

Mother charged with murder in stillbirth

The woman allegedly refused C-section because she didn't want to be scarred.

By ALEXANDRIA SAGE
The Associated Press

SALT LAKE CITY – A pregnant woman who allegedly ignored medical warnings to have a Caesarean section to save her twins was charged Thursday with murder after one of the babies was stillborn.

Prosecutors said Melissa Ann Rowland, 28, didn't want the scars that accompany the surgery. An autopsy found that the baby died two days before its Jan. 13 delivery and that it would have survived if Rowland had had a C-section when her doctors urged her to, between Christmas and Jan. 9. The other baby is alive.

The doctors had warned that without a C-section, the twins likely would die, authorities said. A nurse told police that Rowland said a C-section would "ruin her life" and she would rather "lose one of the babies than be cut like that."

"We are unable to find any reason other than the cosmetic motivations" for the mother's decision, said Kent Morgan, spokesman for the district attorney. An attorney was to be appointed for her today, Morgan said. The charges carry five years to life in prison. Rowland was jailed on $250,000 bail.

According to the documents, Rowland went to LDS Hospital in Salt Lake City in December to seek advice after she hadn't felt her babies move. A nurse, Regina Davis, told police that she instructed Rowland to go immediately to one of two other hospitals but that Rowland said she would rather have both babies die before going to either place.

On Jan. 2, a doctor at LDS Hospital examined Rowland and recommended an immediate C-section based on an ultrasound and the babies' slowing heart rates. Rowland left, the doctor told police.

The same day, Rowland allegedly saw a nurse at another hospital, saying she had left LDS Hospital because the doctor wanted to cut her "from breast bone to pubic bone."

A week later, Rowland reportedly went to a third hospital. A nurse told police that she could not detect a heartbeat from one twin and advised Rowland to remain in the hospital but that Rowland allegedly ignored the advice.

BTW ~ this was in an actual daily newspaper, not a tabloid.

[sspete]

OH MY GOSH......THIS IS HARD TO BELIEVE!!!!!

I cannot even imagine!!! It is a good this this was from the newspaper or I would have found it hard to believe that is was True!!!! How Sad!!!!

Staci

[hope4kids]

I guess I don't find it hard to believe. In a society where abortion is legal and late term abortion is not unheard of, where is the line drawn? I mean, how was it any different really. The twins were not yet born. If she had gone to an abortion clinic instead of the delivery room, she wouldn't have been charged with any crime.

[sspete]

Unheard of in our society.....Not really!!!! HARD TO BELIEVE..... that a mother could do this to her children for vanity reasons, better believe it!!!! I will NEVER understand!!!!!

Staci

[Kelli]

dlouis, I read this article in the newspaper during my lunch today and it made me sick to my stomach! I'm curious to see what her defense will be and what a judge and jury will do with her. Sadly, I think hope4kids brings up some points that her defense could possibly try to use on her behalf, however far they have to stretch it. IMO, her actions (or rather non-action) are reprehensible, and like you, Staci, I can't even begin to understand them.

Another story that has been making news in the Atlanta area for the past couple of days is yet another story of a baby found in a dumpster, this time dead. They've located and arrested the young mother and she claims the full term baby was stillborn, but the severe physical trauma evidence is showing otherwise

Peace and blessings,

Kelli

[RiverGal]

It's for reasons like these two examples that I refuted a poster in a previous thread that stated "all birth mothers love their babies from conception through birth." How sick these two women are!!!

Both of them should be sterilized and tattooed across their foreheads. Wonder if the mother of the surviving twin will be on here in 18 years crying the blues because she wants to meet her birthchild?

With any justice at all, the court could use this case to set a precedence. The buck needs to stop somewhere.

Debra

[Kelli]

Well, however true it really is, here's the defense that I was curious about . . . hmmm. . .

And was this the story about a potential birthmother or just an expecting mother? I've heard nothing yet about her making an adoption plan.

Kelli

[Mom2J]

This might dispell some things, this is the latest story:

Utah Woman Charged in C-Section Case
Sat Mar 13, 4:18 AM ET Add U.S. National - AP to My Yahoo!


By ALEXANDRIA SAGE, Associated Press Writer

SALT LAKE CITY - A woman charged with murder for allegedly refusing a Caesarean section that could have saved her unborn twin said she never imagined having a stillborn child would result in prosecution or national news coverage.

"I feel like I'm getting a lot of attention that (should be) my private business." Melissa Ann Rowland told The Associated Press during a jail interview Friday.

Prosecutors this week charged Rowland with exhibiting "depraved indifference to human life" in avoiding the C-section. One nurse told police Rowland said she would rather "lose one of the babies than be cut like that."

Rowland denied claims she avoided surgery because she feared scarring.

"It was all medical concern. None of it was vanity," Rowland said. Her other two young children, ages 7 and 9, both were delivered by C-section, she said.

Her attorney, meanwhile, said she had a long history of mental illness. Rowland said she had attempted suicide twice and spent time in a psychiatric hospital.

Rowland, 28, who has been jailed since mid-January on a child endangerment charge involving the surviving twin, said she was informed of the murder charge Thursday evening by reporters.

Critics of the charges say the case could affect abortion rights and open the door to the prosecution of mothers who smoke, fail to follow their obstetrician's diet advice or take some other action that endangers a fetus.

"I see this as part of an overall focus of a certain movement on fetal rights and an effort to elevate fetal rights above the rights of a woman," said Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women (news - web sites) and a former prosecutor.

A phone message left at the headquarters for the National Right to Life Committee (news - web sites) seeking comment was not immediately returned.

Rowland, from the Salt Lake City suburb of West Jordan, was warned numerous times between Christmas and Jan. 9 that her unborn twins were likely to die if she did not get immediate medical treatment, charging documents allege. When she delivered them Jan. 13, a baby girl survived but her twin, a boy, was stillborn.

Rowland was charged with criminal homicide. She said the child endangerment charge stems from allegations that the surviving baby girl had drugs and alcohol in her system, which Rowland denies.

The baby has been adopted by a family Rowland knows. Her other children live with her estranged husband's parents.

Rowland's attorney, Michael Sikora, called a C-section major surgery and told The Salt Lake Tribune "it would come as no surprise that a woman with major mental illness would fear it."

Prosecutors allege that Rowland told a nurse during a January visit to a hospital that doctors wanted to cut her "from breast bone to pubic bone" and she would rather "lose one of the babies than be cut like that."

Rowland denied making the statements, but remembers that hospital visit as "very stressful. Doctors there had me very upset." She was concerned about her recovery time and the nature of the surgery, she said.

She said she was never concerned about her babies' health because in all her hospital visits, she was told the babies had good heartbeats and were fine.

Caesarean sections usually involve delivery through a surgical incision in the abdomen and front wall of the uterus. They are generally not vertical and can be done in the bikini incision, according to Dr. Christian Morgan, a family practice doctor who regularly performs C-sections at the University of Utah Health Sciences Center.

[debsdone]

Sick! This surely opens a can of worms, doesn't it? Many issues already mentioned. Mental illness? Surely, but what defense is that? Who defends the children? If this is defendable on the grounds of mental illness, why is some sort of mandatory birth control or sterilization so heinous to people? I have always believed that women who drink and/or take drugs during pregnancy should indeed be prosecuted. Just as if those substances were given to a child just after birth. Once the baby is viable outside the uterus, I personally believe it should be treated as any other child. I mean reasonably viable. I know this is a fuzzy area.
As for painting birth mothers with a dirty brush...that sounds a bit self serving to me. This isn't an issue about birth mothers reputations. This is a reality. This happens. Mothers like this exist, some of the adoptees here on this site have them! Either selfish, mentally ill, whatever. If changing the perceptions about birth mothers means ignoring realities, that is hogwash. I think we understand that not all birthmothers are like this. Frankly, that comment sounded cold and self serving, without regard for the tragedy that this is. JMHO! Debi

[ddhuab]

I have to say that though mental illness *might* be a valid legal defense to avoid severe criminal penalties, I DON'T think it is some kind of excuse to avoid any charge at all -- on the other hand, if the medical personnel were so worried, psychiatric consults and law enforcement should have been invovled before the death (which occurred during gestation) and stillbirth.

JMO,
D.

[PinkRibbon]

I have a bit of a different take on this. I'm concerned with the law/government interfering with a woman's right to choose. I fear that this case could be the beginnings of the anti choice movement trying to overturn roe v. wade.
I think that the doctors should have taken her to court for an emergency injunction to order one if they were that adamant about her having a c-section, especially since she has a history of mental illness. I'm not sure how prison would really be a good sentence for her, but I sure hope her kids are taken away and that she's monitored so that if she does become pregnant again she isn't allowed to parent.

[RiverGal]

PinkRibbonAmy: By that point in a pregnancy, doesn't the child deserve some rights, too? She had her "freedom of choice" when she could have aborted earlier on...she didn't.

Debsdone: Ditto!!! We are on the same page...well said!

Debra

[PinkRibbon]

Originally posted by MissngLinkInFL
By that point in a pregnancy, doesn't the child deserve some rights, too? She had her "freedom of choice" when she could have aborted earlier on...she didn't.

She could have legally had a late term abortion and would not be facing charges, although she would have had to abort both children. I am pro choice and believe that until the child is born, the mother is the one who has the rights.

Do I like what this woman did? Hell NO, but I defend her right to make that choice.

I would not have been against the doctor's taking her to court to have the procedure court ordered if this woman was deemed mentally incompetent to do so.

I advocate for kids and hate is not a strong enough word for how I feel when I see pregnant women smoking, drinking, or taking drugs or other harming her fetus in some way. The infants shouldn't have to live with life long problems because of her neglegence when abortion is available legally.

I don't want to turn this into a pro/anti choice debate because no one is going to change her/his mind about this and it creates a lot of hard feelings.

These are my beliefs, please respect them and I will respect yours.

[dl]

hope4kids: "In a society where abortion is legal and late term abortion is not unheard of, where is the line drawn?. . . If she had gone to an abortion clinic instead of the delivery room, she wouldn't have been charged with any crime."

In this case I don't believe a late term abortion could have even been considered. These were near term twins who would have been viable outside the uterus at the time a C-section was recommended.

Kelli: "And was this the story about a potential birthmother or just an expecting mother? I've heard nothing yet about her making an adoption plan."

I did not see any reference to adoption or "birthmother" in the article I posted that ran on Friday, March 12th. In the article Mom2J posted that ran Saturday, March 13th, it does mention that the twin that survived has been adopted. There is no mention whether adoption had been planned prior to one baby being stillborn and the other born with drugs and alcohol in her system.

Like you, I'm not surprised that the defense is using "mental illness" After all, what other excuse could they possibly use?

MissngLinkInFl: "It's for reasons like these two examples that I refuted a poster in a previous thread that stated "all birth mothers love their babies from conception through birth."

I agree with you and continuously object to "ALL" being used about any group, whether it's bparents, aparents, adoptees, men, women, a race/nationality etc. In regards to the statement you refuted, I would add: There are many that insist that the "bond" is developed in the womb between ALL mothers and the child, and breaking that "bond" by adoption is what causes the WOUND, TRAUMA, ANXIETY AND DISORDERS in the child. If that is supposedly true with ALL, it makes one wonder how this situation could occur. Where was this mothers PRIMAL BOND?

I do find it interesting that the defense is insinuating that the various doctors and nurses at different hospitals misquoted her or even lied to authorities, as she now denies everything that was told to the authorities. Of course she also says that it's not true that drugs and alcohol were found in the system of the child that lived. Hmmm ~ isn't that determined by blood tests that are pretty clear cut? Substances are either there or they are not there. I'm sure that an autopsy was performed to determine if drugs and alcohol were in the dead baby's body. If so I would imagine there will be expert medical testimony as to whether the substances contributed to his not surviving.

originally posted by ddhaub:
"on the other hand, if the medical personnel were so worried, psychiatric consults and law enforcement should have been invovled before the death (which occurred during gestation) and stillbirth."

originally posted by PinkRibbonAmy:
"I think that the doctors should have taken her to court for an emergency injunction to order one if they were that adamant about her having a c-section, especially since she has a history of mental illness."

Obviously this woman was able to conceal her "mental illness" from the doctors and nurses that she consulted during this time period. If they had been aware or suspicious perhaps they could have legally intervened or at least contacted whomever she listed, as who to contact in case of an emergency, on the hospital paperwork. As the first article made no mention of her "history of mental illness" who knows if she even divulged it to the medical personnel at the various hospitals she went to. It does not sound like she consulted a long term physician, she simply showed up at different hospitals.

PinkRibbonAmy: "She could have legally had a late term abortion and would not be facing charges, although she would have had to abort both children."

I have understood a "late term abortion" to be an abortion in the second trimester. I do not believe "She could have legally had a late term abortion" in her EIGHTH MONTH!

[hope4kids]

My point is that all life is life. In a society that does not respect life in the earliest form, this seems a natural reaction. When it has been considered acceptable to abort a baby that is partially born, this woman's decision makes sense. It is the natural course of a nation that has not esteemed life.

I think the choice she made was tragic and wrong, but in all reality not all that different from the many woman who willfully kill their unborn children everyday. Perhaps she will experience the same pain and emotions that women who have abortions often feel. Perhaps what she will need is compassion and counseling instead of prosecution. Or are we as a nation realizing that we have not esteemed life and that it is time we change the laws and defend the most vulnerable little lives in our society?