• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Man sentenced to 13 years for tricking girlfriend into taking abortion pill

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
She is sure one vindictive bitch though. My wife had a blighted ovum. It was terminated about 6 weeks in. I can't say that either of us was emotionally attached enough to it to want to see somebody rotting in prison for 13 years for terminating it.
 
Mr. Pedantic said:
Misoprostol inducing labour is not poisoning the mother. If that were the case, every single mother in the history of the world has been poisoned, since misoprostol is an analogue of prostaglandins naturally produced by the body.

Also, if you give only misoprostol in a termination, the baby will be born alive. Unless, as I said before, it already died. Standard procedure is to also give methotrexate so the fetus dies.
Click to expand...
We all take poison at some time or another going by the text book definition, not your interpretation.
 
nehalem256 said:
All this man wanted was to have a say about his reproductive future.

Due to hypocritical liberals opposing this he was forced into this "cowardly deceitful act".

Seems like the real monsters are anti-equality liberals.😎
Click to expand...

And there are ways to do that without resorting to deceit in order to get around that whole consent thing.

You never cease to surprise me with how much hate and resentment you have towards women, and to a lesser extent liberals. Your "anti-equality" rants are just fucking pathetic, grow up kid, I'm tired of pitying someone who obviously isn't worth it.
 
Conservative authoritarian males have immature egos and are sexually insecure. This leads them to seek a patriarchal society in which they control the sexual lives of women, control being the operative word. This causes them to be unable to logically deal with the obvious facts of life, that men are men and women are women, two genders with two different natural functions, but morally equivalent in their individual human rights, but not identical due to their gender difference.

Because only a woman can carry a fetus to personhood but has an inalienable right over her body to determine her course of life, she and she alone has the right to decide if a fertilization of her egg(s) will be carried to term. This is so because she has the sacred right to determine her own body's fate and in this one instance her sacred right to do so trumps the right of the fetus to develop into personhood all other things being equal.

Because a man has no such sacred right to put his will above the will of the mother or the fetus, he has no say in the matter. He risks losing that right when he has sex that results in a fertilization. The sacred right of a potential being to develop personhood in accordance with the mother's will up to the time it actually receives that right as a person itself can only be abrogated or supported by the mother and any outsider that prevents its natural development is guilty of murder. Nobody but the mother has any countervailing sacred right.

This case proceed exactly as it should have, the court showing mercy in not imposing the death penalty for premeditated murder.
 
Last edited:
Moonbeam said:
Conservative authoritarian males have immature egos and are sexually insecure. This leads them to seek a patriarchal society in which they control the sexual lives of women, control being the operative word. This causes them to be unable to logically deal with the obvious facts of life, that men are men and women are women, two genders with two different natural functions, but morally equivalent in their individual human rights, but not identical due to their gender difference.

Because only a woman can carry a fetus to personhood but has an inalienable right over her body to determine her course of life, she and she alone has the right to decide if a fertilization of her egg(s) will be carried to term. This is so because she has the sacred right to determine her own body's fate and in this one instance her sacred right to do so trumps the right of the fetus to develop into personhood all other things being equal.

Because a man has no such sacred right to put his will above the will of the mother or the fetus, he has no say in the matter. He risks losing that right when he has sex that results in a fertilization. The sacred right of a potential being to develop personhood in accordance with the mother's will up to the time it actually receives that right as a person itself can only be abrogated or supported by the mother and any outsider that prevents its natural development is guilty of murder. Nobody but the mother has any countervailing sacred right.

This case proceed exactly as it should have, the court showing mercy in not imposing the death penalty for premeditated murder.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should spend more time reading and understanding what the crime the man was charged and convicted of doing instead of spewing your psychobabble about conservatives. If you had you would know the man was not charged with murder but charged/convicted of with tampering with a consumer product resulting in bodily injury and conspiracy to commit mail fraud.
 
TheSiege said:
If you dont want to pay child support, dont fuck. Both men and women know the outcomes of sex and what rights they do and dont have. Fair or not, they both know. Men know that they could pay for childsupport for 18 years. Women know that they might get pregnant. LIFE ISN'T FAIR, if you dont want to deal with that shit, stop having sex outside of marriage.
Click to expand...
But it's not that black and white. Recently a court ordered a guy that donated sperm to pay child support. In this case it was the state that went after him not the woman. Also, we have had cases of men being ordered to pay child support for children that they didn't father. The case I'm thinking of is one in which the man came into the life of the mother and daughter well after the child had been born. He and the child's mother split up and he was ordered to pay child support.

The point of these stories is that the laws currently on the books don't suit the times we live in (as someone already said in this thread). You can get fucked in this world without getting fucked.
 
Last edited:
s0me0nesmind1 said:
For your liberal nazi ways I'm surprise you're not on the side of the woman's right to choose. You should be saying the kid should get life in prison :whiste:
Click to expand...

My Nazi liberal ways?? LOL ... ummm ok dude.

I think that this guy should be arrested, charged and sentenced, but I think 13 years is excessive. There have been much more serious crimes than this that have received much less time.

The guy illegally forged a prescription (so yea, he gets jail time for that) then he lied, and then he poisoned this woman with medication that could have had very serious consequences for her should she have reacted badly to the drug. The guy needs to go to jail, but I still feel 13 years is excessive.
 
Genx87 said:
I dont understand the argument for men to not pay child support if a women goes through with a pregnancy. If you dont want to pay child support. Dont have sex.
Click to expand...

Look if a woman ends up having a baby, she ultimately has to fork out ton of money to have it, and then to feed and clothe that child, and has the burden on her to take care of it, so it is only fair that the father (willing or not) have responsibility in the care of the child also. Child support works both ways. Women are not absolved from child support should they decide not to raise the child. The argument that men shouldn't be forced to pay child support or somehow get a say in whether a woman can keep or terminate her own pregnancy (or must get the man's permission) is just looney. Thank goodness our laws are not written this way!

If a man doesn't want a baby, it's real simple, wear condom, or get a vasectomy.
 
Texashiker said:
Shows how tilted parental rights are.

Mother can abort the child with no considerations given to what the father wants.

Father aborts the child that everyone is upset.




How can you justify prison for someone excising their right to decide if they want to be a parent?

Maybe because women are the only ones that get to decide if they want to be a parent?

What about this whole equal rights thing?
Click to expand...

As usual your position reminds me of a long walk off a short pier. Women have the right to choose the children they bare, when men can get pregnant they can do the same.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Maybe you should spend more time reading and understanding what the crime the man was charged and convicted of doing instead of spewing your psychobabble about conservatives. If you had you would know the man was not charged with murder but charged/convicted of with tampering with a consumer product resulting in bodily injury and conspiracy to commit mail fraud.
Click to expand...

I said what he was not charged with, premeditated murder. My reply was directed at the argument going on in this thread regarding the rights of men vs. women, abortion, child care payments, the commentaries being presented and why conservatives have a problem thinking straight on such issues. In short I was addressing the responses that developed in the thread, not the case itself. It's not my fault that a description of the immaturity of conservative authoritarian males jacks defensively. It's how the conservative brain reacts.

Now when are you going to grow up and stop calling information that inevitably insults you by its factual nature 'psychobabble'. You realize, I hope what an immature response that is. Try to have the dignity of being honest with yourself. In that regard, thank you for pointing out what I didn't know, the legal facts the case was decided on. As I intimated, those were of little interest to me. My response wasn't to the case but to the reaction of many to the issue of women's rights and why conservatives can't think straight on the issue. Feel free to offer an alternative point of view.
 
Genx87 said:
I dont understand the argument for men to not pay child support if a women goes through with a pregnancy. If you dont want to pay child support. Dont have sex.
Click to expand...

If you dont want to be pregnant. Dont have sex. :colbert:

Vic said:
No one forced you to stick your dick in it.
Click to expand...

So by your logic there is not problem banning abortion. No one forced the woman to have a dick stuck in her

kage69 said:
And there are ways to do that without resorting to deceit in order to get around that whole consent thing.
Click to expand...

Actually there isnt.
 
WHAMPOM said:
As usual your position reminds me of a long walk off a short pier. Women have the right to choose the children they bare, when men can get pregnant they can do the same.
Click to expand...

Could just as easily say. When men can get pregnant they will be expected to support all the children they CHOOSE to have.
 
Oldgamer said:
The guy illegally forged a prescription (so yea, he gets jail time for that) then he lied, and then he poisoned this woman with medication that could have had very serious consequences for her should she have reacted badly to the drug. The guy needs to go to jail, but I still feel 13 years is excessive.
Click to expand...

Frankly, when you put it that way it doesn't really sound excessive at all.

To me this sort of feels like coercing someone into donating an organ like a kidney. Like, forging the donor documentation and signatures and somehow convincing the person that the surgery is something else. It's not a perfect analogy, since you can have another baby and you don't really have diminished function without it, but it's still basically taking what's (legally) considered a part of the woman's body away, against her will.

Or maybe some kind of personal sabotage charge makes sense, where you're deliberately destroying a person's major life ambition. I'm not aware of any laws exactly like that.

I don't think the sentence should be similar to what it'd be had he say, coerced her into taking pain killers because she was in a lot of pain, but somehow opposed to taking them. But that could have fallen under the same charges. It's good for judges to have leeway in sentencing for this reason.
 
Exophase said:
Or maybe some kind of personal sabotage charge makes sense, where you're deliberately destroying a person's major life ambition. I'm not aware of any laws exactly like that.
Click to expand...

Interesting idea. So if a woman gets an abortion against a man's will should he be able to have charged with that?😎
 
It was a 6 week-old cluster of cells, the worst he should have gotten was aggravated assault on his GF. C'mon, what BS, there's zero consistency in the law here. Unlike specific Austrian cats, it's either alive or it isn't. :colbert:

nehalem256 said:
Is tricking someone into taking a medication a crime generally?
Click to expand...

Aggravated assault, unless you have a court order.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Actually the defendant was convicted on charges of tampering with a consumer product resulting in bodily injury and conspiracy to commit mail fraud and not for tricking his girlfriend into taking the drug/inducing an abortion. The drug was not the day after pill, it was a drug that could cause abortion. More media sensationalism.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/28/us-usa-abortion-florida-idUSBREA0R1HS20140128
Click to expand...

Yeah, but that's an incredibly stiff sentence for just those crimes, wouldn't you agree?
 
Moonbeam said:
I said what he was not charged with, premeditated murder. My reply was directed at the argument going on in this thread regarding the rights of men vs. women, abortion, child care payments, the commentaries being presented and why conservatives have a problem thinking straight on such issues. In short I was addressing the responses that developed in the thread, not the case itself. It's not my fault that a description of the immaturity of conservative authoritarian males jacks defensively. It's how the conservative brain reacts.

Now when are you going to grow up and stop calling information that inevitably insults you by its factual nature 'psychobabble'. You realize, I hope what an immature response that is. Try to have the dignity of being honest with yourself. In that regard, thank you for pointing out what I didn't know, the legal facts the case was decided on. As I intimated, those were of little interest to me. My response wasn't to the case but to the reaction of many to the issue of women's rights and why conservatives can't think straight on the issue. Feel free to offer an alternative point of view.
Click to expand...

There you go again with talking down conservatives, many moderate conservatives have no issue with women's rights including their right to determine whether to continue or terminate a pregnancy. I will continue calling your wide brushed pyschobabble for what it is........psychobabble.
 
Mr. Pedantic said:
Sorry, giving someone misoprostol the way this guy did, is not poisoning them. Regardless of whether he actually induced the abortion, whether the pregnancy was or was not viable, he didn't poison her.

Nor did he poison the baby, if that's where you think I'm going.
Click to expand...

Mr. Pedantic, you don't seem to understand what the definition of poisoning is in either medical terms or legal terms. Both agree that this was clearly a case of intentional poisoning.

Edit: I see people have already beaten me to the point.
 
Bottom line, this guy broke the law, he was punished for what he did. Do men deserve more rights when it comes to pregnancy, probably so. Do they deserve equal rights? Not until they equally share the responsibility of pregnancy. Bottom line, if you don't want to pay child support, don't engage in activities that can end in that result. Until then, know that, by having sex, it can lead to pregnancy and thus child support
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top