this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2025
268 points (98.9% liked)

News

33972 readers
2535 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/16453

While Brooke Shoemaker and a rights group representing her in court are celebrating this week after an Alabama judge threw out her conviction and ordered a new trial, her case is also drawing attention to the dangers of "fetal personhood" policies.

"Laws and judicial decisions that grant fetuses—and in some cases embryos and fertilized eggs—the same legal rights and status given to born people, such as the right to life, is 'fetal personhood,'" explains the website of the group, Pregnancy Justice. "When fetuses have rights, this fundamentally changes the legal rights and status of all pregnant people, opening the door to criminalization, surveillance, and obstetric violence."

Since the US Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling ended the federal right to abortion in 2022, far-right activists and politicians have ramped up their fight for fetal personhood policies. Pregnancy Justice found that in the two years after the decision, the number of people who faced criminal charges related to their pregnancies hit its highest level in US history.

Shoemaker's case began even earlier, in 2017, when she experienced a stillbirth at home about 24-26 weeks into her pregnancy. Paramedics brought her to a hospital, where she disclosed using methamphetamine while pregnant. Although a medical examiner could not determine whether the drug use caused the stillbirth—and, according to Pregnancy Justice, "her placenta showed clear signs of infection"—a jury found her guilty of chemical endangerment of a minor. She's served five years of her 18-year sentence.

"After becoming Ms. Shoemaker's counsel in 2024, Pregnancy Justice filed a petition alongside Andrew Stanley of the Samford Law Office requesting a hearing based on new evidence about the infection that led to the demise of Ms. Shoemaker's pregnancy, leading the judge to agree with Pregnancy Justice's medical witness and to vacate the conviction," the rights group said in a Monday statement.

Lee County Circuit Judge Jeffrey Tickal wrote in his December 22 order that "should the facts had been known, and brought before the jury, the results probably would have been different."

Shoemaker said Monday that "after years of fighting, I'm thankful that I'm finally being heard, and I pray that my next Christmas will be spent at home with my children and parents... I'm hopeful that my new trial will end with me being freed, because I simply lost my pregnancy at home because of an infection. I loved and wanted my baby, and I never deserved this."

— (@)

Although Tickal's decision came three days before Christmas, the 45-year-old mother of four remained behind bars for the holiday last week, as the state appeals.

"While we are thrilled with the judge's decision, we are outraged that Ms. Shoemaker is still behind bars when she should have been home for Christmas," said former Pregnancy Justice senior staff attorney Emma Roth. "She was convicted based on feelings, not facts. Pregnancy Justice will continue to fight on appeal and prove that pregnancies end tragically for reasons far beyond a mother's control. Women like Ms. Shoemaker should be allowed to grieve their loss without fearing arrest."

AL.com reported Tuesday that "Alabama is unique in that it is one of only three states, along with Oklahoma and South Carolina, where the state Supreme Court allows the application of criminal laws meant to punish child abuse or child endangerment to be applied in the context of pregnancy."

However, similar cases aren't restricted to those states. Pregnancy Justice found that in the two years following Dobbs, "prosecutors initiated cases in 16 states: Alabama, California, Florida, Idaho, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. While prosecutions were brought in all of these states, to date, the majority of the reported cases occurred in Alabama (192) and Oklahoma (112)."

This is fantastic news!!I wrote in my book how the medical examiner ruled the cause of the stillbirth "undetermined," but the coroner (who lacks medical training) instead listed cause of stillbirth as mom's meth usage on the fetal death certificate.

[image or embed]
— Jill Wieber Lens (@jillwieberlens.bsky.social) December 30, 2025 at 12:25 PM

"Prosecutors used a variety of criminal statutes to charge the defendants in these cases, often bringing more than one charge against an individual defendant," the group's report continues. "In total, the 412 defendants faced 441 charges for conduct related to pregnancy, pregnancy loss, or birth. The majority of charges (398/441) asserted some form of child abuse, neglect, or endangerment."

"As has been the case for decades, nearly all the cases alleged that the pregnant person used a substance during pregnancy," the report adds. "In 268 cases, substance use was the only allegation made against the pregnant person. In the midst of a wide-ranging crisis in maternal healthcare and despite maternal healthcare deserts across the country, prosecutors or police argued that pregnant people's failure to obtain prenatal care was evidence of a crime. This was the case in 29 of 412 cases."

When the publication was released last year, Pregnancy Justice president Lourdes A. Rivera said in a statement that "the Dobbs decision emboldened prosecutors to develop ever more aggressive strategies to prosecute pregnancy, leading to the most pregnancy-related criminal cases on record."

"This is directly tied to the radical legal doctrine of 'fetal personhood,' which grants full legal rights to an embryo or fetus, turning them into victims of crimes perpetrated by pregnant women," Rivera argued. "To turn the tide on criminalization, we need to separate healthcare from the criminal legal system and to change policy and practices to ensure that pregnant people can safely access the healthcare they need, without fear of criminalization. This report demonstrates that, in post-Dobbs America, being pregnant places people at increased risk, not only of dire health outcomes, but of arrest."


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

all 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 77 points 6 days ago (3 children)

18 years

I know of child predators and murderers who got less time.

[–] Cavemanfreak@programming.dev 52 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Some of them even go on to be the president!

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 18 points 6 days ago

Twice!

This is what shitholes do.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 36 points 6 days ago

Some of them get rewarded with two terms as President.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Or J6 terrorists.

[–] Rhoeri@piefed.world 2 points 3 days ago

Should never have gotten here to begin with, but this is great news!

[–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 36 points 6 days ago (2 children)

“As has been the case for decades, nearly all the cases alleged that the pregnant person used a substance during pregnancy,” the report adds. “In 268 cases, substance use was the only allegation made against the pregnant person.

We don't know what these substances were or how far along in pregnancy these people were. Combined with strict anti-abortion laws, this is such a trap. I got an abortion a few years ago. In part it was because I'm way too poor to afford a child, but it was also in part because I was taking prescribed medications that would've been counter-indicated for a pregnancy. The medication I was taking would've been particularly harmful in the first trimester, and had I been trying to get pregnant, I would've avoided it. However, things can happen even with contraception.

Thankfully I'm not in a backwards state, but if I had been, would I have been stuck in this trap? Unable to abort, but also taking "substances" that would've been harmful to a fetus, there's no way around it except to say that anyone of child-bearing ability isn't allowed to take such medications or use "substances" at all. For all we know someone could've been casually drinking in the first trimester, without even knowing they were pregnant yet, and now they're jailed because they dared to live a normal, adult life. The only reason I found out about mine was because I coincidentally got an illness within the first few weeks and the doctor offered a pregnancy test. It was so early, I hadn't even missed a period yet. With dysregulated cycles (sometimes due to conditions outside of a person's control), one could go quite a while without being aware of a pregnancy, carrying on life as normal.

It's so clear the law-makers think of us as merely vessels for child-bearing, with no other life or purpose. We must be pure and perfect, and ready to take on a pregnancy whenever it may happen, regardless of our lifestyles. I feel for this woman and all the others stuck in this situation, keenly aware that if I were to simply move a few hundred miles away, I could be in their shoes.

[–] lka1988@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 days ago

Just remember: the cruelty is the point.

[–] TheOakTree@lemmy.zip 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It doesn't help that most medicines are not designed to be quit cold-turkey. Someone in your scenario who wants to have a child (despite not planning for it) could still be risking their child in the process of getting off such a medication. That's not even considering the impact of being off said medication.

What a mess.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Like half the SSRIs, anything to treat ADHD and benzodiazepines. All of those would not be fun to go off of.

[–] TheOakTree@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I was on an SSRI and then my insurance said they actually don't need to cover my mental health and meds. I didn't have the energy to keep appealing the decision (hence the need for meds) so I gave up.

I tried to wean myself off with the remaining supply I had, because that is what the doctors teach you to do when they take you off an SSRI. I only knew this because the previous did nothing good for me. It was guesswork, it was unpleasant, and I highly recommend avoiding this situation if possible. The withdrawal sucks and the effects lasted a few months.

Imagining doing that while pregnant makes my stomach turn.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Which SSRI? Some are vastly more painful to discontinue than others.

[–] TheOakTree@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Escitalopram (Lexapro), so somewhere in the middle of the pain-to-cold-turkey pack.

[TMI maybe] Awful experience, but worse than the pain was that my libido vanished for a little over half a year after quitting. On the medication, it still somewhat existed. My partner was not happy, understandably.

[–] MrSulu@lemmy.ml 21 points 6 days ago

I have professional (UK) experience, but not sighted on the evidence or debates in this case or on US law. Firstly: Medical examination appears clear as to the question, did the meth cause death. Cannot say it did is a scientific / medical point. This means possibly, but there is sufficient doubt that it did here. Secondly: placental infection was clearly present. Nothing at all is reported as to how the use of meth could lead to that infection.
Placental infection could be viral or bacterial. No indication which. Immune weaknesses can lead to higher risk of infections. Meth could create some immune weakness, but you only see that with longer term / higher dose use. Again, not a specific cause that we could say is the cause.

Unless there is evidence that we don't see, there is absolutely no way to acheive a balance of probabilities level of evidence, let alone the required level of "beyond all reasonable doubt".

It seems that beleifs and words led to this womans conviction rather than facts.

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Wait so how does a coroner not have medical training? It's just some guy cutting dead people open?

[–] tehn00bi@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

I recently moved to GA and the coroner was one of the hottest local elections since moving here. No idea if he has any medical training.

Edit: just looked the guy up, he ran a funeral home for some time. Mortuary science degree.

[–] SoloCritical@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

What’s the worst that can happen? You can’t kill them even more, right?

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Well, how can they determine cause of death if they have no medical training? Like in the case in this article they put something else as cause for the stillbirth instead of the placenta infection the medical examiner found.

[–] novibe@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago

They are experts in death, not life!

But on a serious note, isn’t forensics a specific college degree? I would assume people study anatomy a lot in college, for forensics. Idk 🤷‍♂️

[–] SoloCritical@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

True, I was half-joking but I see your point and agree with you.

[–] _skj@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

TV shows often portray coroners as forensic medical examiners, but those are different jobs in practice. A coroner is really just the person in charge of handling dead people for a region. Declaring them dead, arranging for transport to next of kin, and sometimes handing them over to a medical examiner if things are suspicious. Each area will typically have a single elected or appointed coroner who will hire or contract medical examiners and other staff as needed.

[–] BanaramaClamcrotch@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 days ago

Abortion bans are class warfare

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

I'm reading American Nations right now, and part of me does wonder about forming some additional country or a situation like Puerto Rico where they have no real representation. Carve off the very shittiest area of the country, with few or no resources we'd want, let them form their own thing, and call it Jesustan.

Let all the mouthbreathing conspiracy theorists and most especially all the snake-handling dipshits move there. Give time and assistance for any reasonable people in the new Jesusland territory to move to real America.

For those that remain that are still conservatives/Republicans: let them know we are not going to have any of their more extremist nonsense here, reiterate that this is a secular nation, and if they don't like real freedom, including the freedom FROM religion, they have the option to move to Jesustan.

I imagine that Jesustan would not end up much different than The Christian States of America as depicted in Rapture of the Nerds...

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 6 points 6 days ago

I look forward to seeing all the people who think that they should be able to speed excessively in vehicles on public roads with no issue coming to the defense of prosecuting this woman for doing an illegal act which was not confirmed to have any effect on the stillbirth.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Anti-abortionists need a Nuremberg-style trial...

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 days ago

Alabamastan