From: no_offline_contact@example.com   
      
   On 2026-02-15 4:08 p.m., Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   > BTR1701  wrote:   
   >> Feb 15, 2026 at 6:59:36 AM PST, NoBody  wrote:   
   >>> Sat, 14 Feb 2026 21:30:16 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman    
   wrote:   
   >   
   >>>> A lawyer commenting repeated my line that a woman who spontaneously   
   >>>> aborts in the first month or two of pregnancy can be charged with   
   >>>> murder. This has massive implications for the clinical treatment of   
   >>>> women in ordinary and extraordinary circumstances.   
   >   
   >>>> The wall of separation between church and state has been breached.   
   >   
   >>>> https://apnews.com/article/puerto-rico-923-governor-signed-   
   aw-pregnancies-9d2f1fb895a17511a920cc42d480668e   
   >   
   >>> Tell us how that would work if it's something she did not do to make   
   >>> it happen.   
   >   
   >> Miscarriages happen naturally all the time.   
   >   
   > There's now a criminal investigation. She must report spontaneous   
   > abortion to the coroner. The death of a human being was unattended so   
   > that requires finding at autopsy of natural, accidental, or homicide.   
   >   
   > Did the woman eat properly and seek prenatal care? Did she follow all   
   > recomendations? What if she didn't stop smoking or alchohol or drugs or   
   > what if her prior use may have interferred with bringing a child to   
   > term? Is her failure of prenatal care child endangerment?   
   >   
   > Many of these are intentional acts for a mens rea analysis.   
   >   
   > Please don't handwaive this away. Of course the law has been written for   
   > police investigations and prosecutions of the most wanton and morally   
   > despicable women.   
      
   I know you are speaking to BTR but I think you've raised some very   
   concerning issues. Are we really heading toward a point where the nanny   
   state has full supervision of every pregnancy and can punish the woman   
   (and anyone supporting her like a husband, other family, and close   
   friends) if she doesn't do everything possible to have an optimum   
   pregnancy? I'd find that very intrusive. On the other hand,  it wouldn't   
   be at all surprising for government to take it upon itself to ensure   
   that level of oversight, just like California is doing with cars that   
   will shut themselves off if the driver seems distracted.   
      
   I admit that I dread a future where the government has that much   
   oversight over our individual autonomy. I suppose that makes it sound   
   like I want mothers to be free to smoke, drink alcohol, take drugs, etc.   
   which I most certainly DON'T condone! The older I get, the more sympathy   
   I have for a point of view that Robert Heinlein expressed in some of his   
   books: at some point, the number of rules becomes excessive and then   
   it's time to move somewhere less intrusive. He was especially fond of   
   the idea of settling frontiers on other planets.   
      
   --   
   Rhino   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)