Brittany Watts, 33, was charged after police searched her toilet following her miscarriage in September.
A Black woman in Ohio has been charged with a felony for abuse of a corpse after she miscarried into her toilet, according to a criminal complaint, and reproductive rights experts are warning that it could set a dangerous precedent if she is convicted.
The attorney for Brittany Watts and a campaign organized on her behalf called the charges against her unjust, saying they feared the case could open the door to similar prosecutions and lawsuits over miscarriages nationwide.
Just hours after Watts, 33, was admitted to a hospital for a life-threatening hemorrhage after she miscarried in her bathroom Sep. 22, police removed her toilet from her home and searched it for fetal remains, according to a GoFundMe set up to fund her legal expenses and home repairs.
“Ms. Watts suffered a tragic and dangerous miscarriage that jeopardized her own life. Rather than focusing on healing physically and emotionally, she was arrested and charged with a felony and is fighting for her freedom and reputation,” her attorney, Traci Timko, said in a statement.
Miscarriages happen. A foetus can die. Not all pregnancies are successful.
It is abhorrent that this woman has gone through a life-threatening experience and is now being arrested for creating a being that was never alive.
“Abuse of a corpse” is it a corpse if it was never alive?
“A fetus can die… is it a corpse if it was never alive?”
I’m a dummy-dumb-dumb so would you mind explaining to me how something can die if it was never alive?
Sorry, that does contradict itself. What I meant was that a fetus can be unviable and therefore “die”. But if it was unviable, then it was never alive.
I’m not sure if that clears it up.
If it was never alive then how did it develop into a fetus?
Tissue can be unviable while still being alive (teratomas being an example).
I don’t think I understand. It feels like we’re discussing semantics rather than the topic.
The fetus is alive in that it has living cells. It is not alive as in it could not survive on its own.
Why does the fetus get the attention of life rather than the woman? A person who has been alive for years should also be protected. A being that cannot survive without the woman should not be prioritized.
Why are you so insistent on using a double meaning (of “alive”)? The second definition you use isn’t even widely accepted.
“get the attention of life …should also be protected”
To continue living, which is what you are talking about right? I agree, the vast majority of people agree.
However I do think this is another example of you misusing semantic meaning to argue for a conclusion without saying it directly.
I don’t think you’re arguing that the woman’s life should be prioritised, but that something else should be prioritised…like personal preference.
The woman’s life should he priority.
Semantics or not, the fetus doesn’t get rights to live over the woman.
A fetus does not have rights.
“Semantics or not”
God I love these kinds of people…just saying word salad thinking it means something, making vague to outright self-contradictory statements, acting smug regardless…
So if a fetus has no rights, then why on earth did you initially start with claiming that it did?
Why did you try to fake a pseudo-nuanced position, when it was obvious from the very beginning that you didn’t believe it?
Poor woman
Those cops should be aborted
Extremely depressing it was even necessary, but here’s her gofundme
The charges should be dropped (even though she is technically guilty), but arguing that this sets a precedent is absurd fear-mongering. This has happened before, the article even mentions actual statistics on how many times it has happened, it’s uncommon and there is no evidence that it is suddenly becoming standard.
