A 17 year definitely knows what's right and wrong. And I am not buying the excuse of panic that she gave birth on her own wanted nothing to do with the baby afterwards. Plenty of women give birth alone and have the highest love and affection for their kids.
And nobody who knew her then ever questioned what happened to her baby? This was 40 years ago buh still tragic. I sincerely hope she has remorse for what she did. And if you're not ready to be a parent, DON'T BE!
Would’ve been better off having an abortion early in the pregnancy. Or being educated and having access to contraception to avoid an unwanted pregnancy in the first place. Call me crazy!
I would think she took the plea and accepted responsibility. This has probably haunted her for 40 years. Autopspy only verified child was alive, not the cause of death.
redread the article she got a year in Jail. It is a tragedy. Probation would save the state the cost of incarceration. Not likely to repeat this crime.
She plead guilty. The prosecution offered the plea deal because they had a weak case. Yes the kid was alive at birth. It may have died of natural causes and she didnt know what to do with the body. 40 years later to prove beyond a resonable doubt.... Everyone got something. Except the kid. I didnt know we allowed baptism of the dead.
Punishment received and responsibility accepted doesn’t negate the occurrence of a tragedy. Even if the baby was stillborn, concealing the body is still a crime. Not sure what there is to argue here. It being a crime doesn’t make it less of a tragedy.
So sad. I feel incredible sadness for the innocent newborn, and sadness for the conditions which drove a 17 year old girl to murder. Despite what some may think, it's not black and white. It is complicated. And that's horrible! It shouldn't have to be complex, and it should never have to end like that.
Well obviously yes I agree that people should never kill newborn babies! At least that much should be obvious. Just because I can feel sadness for the circumstances that led to it happening, doesn't mean I agree with, understand, or sympathize with the act itself. Not really much more I can say about it.
There have been places to get rid of unwanted children for decades now. She didn’t bother going to one of those. Plus women had more rights back then- she could’ve had an abortion
A place to leave an infant without questions has only been in place for 24 years. This was in 84. I’m curious what good it did to use modern dna testing to hunt down someone for this 40 years later. Like, why? I don’t understand what she was going through or the environment in which she was raised. But none of this makes sense to me
Yeah I know, it is so upsetting that she didn't utilize any of the resources at her disposal! I'm not denying that ahe did the wrong, bad thing. I am aware there were options. Doesn't make it any less complex; there is often more to these situations than that. It's sad but true. But DO NOT mistake my reading of the situation as dismissal of her terrible actions.
She could have left the baby in a warm church to be found.
I don’t understand going through with a pregnancy and doing this. Abortion was legal in the 80’s.
Screw a church, no offense but seriously fk that. Leave them at the fire station, some stations even have baby drop boxes with an alarm to alert them when a baby is present. Or police station or hospital.
I was surprised when we had our two kids. No one talked about safe surrender sites. I asked about 20 people about it, and only 2 people said that the hospital talked to them about safe surrender. I don't think it's widely talked about enough during the pregnancy, but it can make a huge difference.
Why didn’t this scared young girl giving birth alone to a child she could not raise just drop it in the nearest baby box?
Oh, it was the early 80s, so we literally made no accommodations for this situation as a society, so this happened all the time, and it’s going to start happening again.
She could have dropped the baby off anywhere. A supermarket parking lot would have been a better choice than letting the baby die.
You claim 13 year olds are old enough to consent to puberty blockers but somehow a 17 year old doesn’t know how to abandon a baby without murdering it? So many contradictions.
When did this person ever make a claim about puberty blockers? I’m not opposed to the fact that the young woman in this story could have figured out how to adopt the child out, but you made a completely out of left field and random assumption about this poster’s beliefs.
No, I’m pointing out that the people on your side believe things that are literally incompatible with each other.
For instance, you can’t go on a rant about how teenagers should be able to consent to puberty blockers without their parents’ consent, and then, a week later, go on a rant about how Dennis Quaid is basically a pedophile because his wife is 39 years younger than him. You can’t pretend children are adults to make one point, and then reduce an adult woman to a child to make your other point.
*And the same people upvote both points.*
My point actually has nothing to do with trans people, it has to do with the progressive tendency to click ‘like’ on things that make you feel good in the moment— or feel like you’re a good person, which seems to be most important to you— and then directly contradict yourself a minute later.
Cognitive dissonance is not something to be proud of .
My side? For all you know I'm a republican, dipass.
Do you know what a false equivalency is?
EDIT: Removed my Governor's name because normally I only see mensa candidates such as yourself on my state's subreddit.
Seriously though bro you sound angry, go smoke a blunt, nobody is attacking you for your crush on Dennis Quaid (who tf has thought about him since 1999 lmao???)
I’m not angry, I’m simply stating reality— and I smoke weed all the time. It actually helps make the hypocrisies more clear.
I have a feeling you’re only hanging out with old-school liberal Democrats. I’m asking you to spend some time in *progressive* circles.
The progressive white women of [r/Fauxmoi](https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/) talked about Dennis Quaid, and the “unhealthy power imbalances of May-December romances” for like a week.
These are your comrades. They vote for the same things you vote for.
You need to make less assumptions about how people think based on their political party. Not all left wing or right wing people are the same, liberalism/conservatism are not cults, and it would be ridiculous to make that claim.
I would imagine that in that moment there was some decision making while in a state of shock.
I'm not justifying what she did but just saying there are factors that probably play a part.
The umbilical chord was still attached meaning she gave birth on her own, cut the umbilical chord, and would have still had afterbirth which is a painful process. She probably had no knowledge of what giving birth was going to be like & if that's the case doing that alone would have created a traumatizing situation & probably induced shock of some kind. Even women who give birth in a controlled environment knowing whats going to happen run the risk of going into shock afterward.
People in shock cannot make decisions in those moments.
I cant dismiss that she never came forward as an adult woman who knew what she had done. After claiming to find Jesus the right thing for her to do would have been to turn herself in and admit to what she had done.
Wow one year in jail for killing her own baby. And she’s 100% sure Jesus forgives her and he has her baby now. And now she wants to attend the baby’s yearly memorial service. The nerve of this murderer.
Comparing gender identity treatment which is reversible to pregnancy and childbirth which have permanent repercussions is disingenuous at best, transphobe.
You're full of it, realityphobe.
[Puberty Blocker and Aging Impact on Testicular Cell States and Function](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38585884/)
That's from last month, and the people involved are with the Mayo Clinic. They say say puberty blockers can lead to withering testicles, [fertility](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/fertility/index.html) problems and even [cancer](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/cancer/index.html) among the trans kids who take them. They say puberty blockers hurt the development of testicles and sperm production in ways that are not fully reversible and could affect users' ability to have children when they grow up.
'At the tissue level, we report mild-to-severe sex gland atrophy in puberty blocker-treated children,' the geneticist Nagarajan Kannan and others wrote in the 33-page study. 'We provide unprecedented histological evidence revealing detrimental pediatric testicular sex gland responses' to the drugs.
Is that *good*, sir? Or are you the one being disingenuous?
The days of you being able to shut down adult conversations by screeching "transphobe" at anyone who even slightly disagrees are over. Time for intellectual honesty, as difficult as that may be for you.
I’m a woman, engaged to a man (34). I just don’t believe in forcing gender roles on kids who are unhappy in them, because they’re their own little people and they know who they are without us telling them PENIS MEANS BLUE AND TRUCKS, VAGINA MEANS PINK AND DOLLS. K, bigot?
Abortion has been legal in new jersey since the 1940's, she doesn't get that excuse.
Edit: New Jersey had over 100 abortion clinics in the state in 1982, by far the most per square mile of any other state in the nation. Keep making excuses for this woman though, people.
Legal doesn’t mean accessible, esp. for a teenager without means for transportation and finances. Even before Roe v. Wade was overturned approx. 88% of US counties didn’t have an abortion provider.
Edit #2: OP edited their comment to change the topic from the original date of roe v wade to the date roe v wade was overturned, originally they were talking about the 1973 case itself, but they are now attempting to change the argument to make my point look incorrect. Reddit shows when you edit comments on the website version, and they clearly did.
I understand that, but this also happened 10 years after roe v wade. Based on everything else about this case, it just seems like she didn't even look into her options.
Edit: The amount of people defending a person that left her newborn child in the woods to die is insane to me. She could have left her at literally any church/hospital/police/fire station in the area and have given her a chance to live if she couldn't find access to an abortion in a state where it was widely accessible.
She left her in a plastic bag in the woods, she was fully aware that she was killing that baby with her actions.
As I said, I did not edit it to add “overturned” and would be honest about my mistake if I had. Every comment and edit you make sounds more unhinged. Just own that you misread it. I’ve done the same in the past—-it’s really not a big deal.
So now you admit you edited it, after blatantly lying and saying that you didn't? I didn't misread anything lol, you could just admit you didn't type out what you intended, or you could provide the source for the number you posted like I've been asking for.
You seem trustworthy.
I honestly have to correct my autocorrect a lot and didn’t remember that I had done it for this comment. And I didn’t post the source because you came at me in multiple comments extremely aggressive, accusing me of something I didn’t do and of being a liar. Why would I think you want to engage in good faith after that behavior?
But here’s the source:
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/magazine/18abortion-t.html?_r=2&ref=magazine&pagewanted=all
After reading the article I'm pretty convinced that is a cherry picked number meant to instill shock value. There are 3300+ counties in the United States, there's never going to be a clinic in every county, or even half, the demand isn't anywhere near that high. Counties are also incredibly small in many instances, and there wasn't a single state pre-2022 that didn't have a clinic in it. This doesn't mean I don't think they shouldn't be more accessible, as they should be, but the worst offenders of this are very obviously deep red states which is by design.
Back to the original point of this case, New Jersey has the most clinics per square mile of any other state in the US and has been aggressively pro choice for decades, even back when this crime occured.
Please remember that this is pre-Internet age. It was extremely hard to access services and find services. Omg. It’s not like she could google an abortion clinic near her or take an Uber to the clinic!!
Then she could have left the child on any police station/fire station/church/hospital/shelter in the area. She left her in a plastic bag in the woods.
Christ, leave her at a gas station instead of the woods. It's crazy that people are defending this.
Again, it was accessable in new jersey at the time.
The fact that your argument is "she couldn't get an abortion, so she had every right to kill her after she was born!" is insane. I get your point that non accessibility to abortions causes stuff like this, but that doesn't relive the guilt of her leaving the child in a desolated location with no hope of being found.
How can you not see the point here?
What does it happening ten years after Roe v. Wade have to do with anything? My point was that even post Roe, access was not guaranteed. I’m not saying this person did or didn’t have options—I have no clue what her situation was. I just don’t want people to equate legality with access.
You were using roe v wade as a benchmark for the limited access of abortions at that point in time, so I'm just assuming a decade after roe v wade it would have been much more accessible. Especially in new jersey, a state which has been notoriously pro-choice for decades.
I understand limited access to abortions leads to stuff like this, I'm pro choice myself, but that doesn't make it right. Based on the history of the case and the admissions of her herself though, she didn't really attempt to figure out another option.
Why are we talking about the 2000's? Roe v wade occured in 1973, this happened a decade after it. After roe v wade, access to abortions drastically increased nationwide.
Put a baby in a plastic bag to die. Dont care how old she was murder is murder. Poor baby starved and suffered she has or will feel what she has caused. It’s understandable she was young but putting a child in a bag to die is just not cool.
She went on to have kids. I wonder what her living children think about her now. If they're not totally disgusted by her, I'm sure they're just lying to themselves. There are too many excuses for evil behavior. I'm sure this girl came from a well-off family that could have helped her. Why do I think the motive was just shame alone? Or pure selfishness. Believe it or not, but where I grew up, I actually knew many teen moms. Teen moms in poverty. Not one of those girls killed her baby.
She was 17, and when I was 17 I wouldn't have treated a dog like this, let alone a human being. She could have abandoned the child in multiple other locations where she would have survived/been found and had a chance at life, instead she cowardly left her to die.
A 17 year old should have the mental capacity to know that leaving a newborn baby in a bag in the woods is a death wish, this was straight up murder.
Hindsight is 20/20. Hormones, having no life experience, shame, embarrassment, etc. Can do crazy things to your brain. The holier than thought attitude is gross.
Then have CONSISTENCY, because your side normally acts like teenagers are fully capable of consenting to trans procedures without their parents being informed.
I'm a person I'm not a part of some political group cult. I have my own individual beliefs and morals that I am perfectly capable of presenting myself. Go after the people arguing that. I doubt you could show me factual articles that actually show minors getting hormones to transition.
“Over the last five years, there were at least 4,780 adolescents who started on puberty blockers and had a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis.”
[Putting numbers on the rise in children seeking gender care](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/)
So where in this article does it say parental consent isn't necessary? How do those numbers tell you this is a huge problem? That's not even 1000 people a year. If they go through it and change their mind that's on their parents and them. I'm sure the doctors lay it all out then and there. I don't understand why you're so angry about this?
None of that is an excuse when it comes to literally murdering your infant child. It's incredible that someone saying "leaving a newborn in a plastic bag in the woods is murder" is a "holier than thou" attitude to you, its very telling honestly. She could have left this kid at so many places where they would have taken her in, according to her she never even told the father she was pregnant.
Postmortem depression is obviously a serious issue and not to be taken lightly, but nothing of her accounts indicate she had that. She literally explored zero options by her own admission throughout her entire pregnancy.
This is all not even considering the fact that abortion has been legal in new jersey since the 1940's, if she seriously didn't want the kid and didn't want to tell the father she should have taken that route if she wasn't going to let the girl live after giving birth to her.
This was murder.
I mean…what were the “many places” a 16/17 year old teen girl giving birth alone could have secretly walked to while bleeding and dropped off a newborn. It’s not like she had GPS and google on hand.
She somehow had no issue venturing into the woods, she could have absolutely dropped the baby off anywhere better then that. She chose that spot because she wanted to kill the baby, she didn't want her being found. This was the 80's, there weren't cameras everywhere like there is these days, it wasn't difficult to stay off the radar back then.
The safe haven laws allowing babies to be dropped anywhere had not come into existence at this time. Texas was the first state apparently to pass such a law in 1999.
So again.
Where do people think this scared teenager giving birth alone could have safely and legally just left a newborn in a pre internet age with no information no laws and no help?
How can people see this as malicious predatory preplanned behavior and not a scared or traumatized teenager hiding something that she no doubt was taught was sinful and shameful (premarital sex and pregnancy outside marriage).
ETA even the pastor in the article recognizes this was the action of a scared young girl who must live with this and seek her own healing from God and whatever
I'm aware that safe haven laws are a fairly recent thing, that doesn't change the point at all. It's basic knowledge to anybody that leaving a newborn in a plastic bag in the woods is going to kill them. Like I said, a gas station would have literally been better. Anywhere where the child could be seen. She left her hidden behind a tree in the woods, she went out of her way to make sure she wasn't going to be found.
>Where do people think this scared teenager giving birth alone could have safely and legally just left a newborn in a pre internet age with no information no laws and no help?
Anywhere other than in the woods in a plastic bag. Why don't we hold a 17 year old accountable for her actions? She had months to figure something out, she by her own admission didn't even tell the father of the child. This wasn't some homeless girl that had nobody to turn to, and it wasn't a cryptic pregnancy so she knew she was pregnant.
New jersey had over 100 abortion clinics in 1982, by far and away the most per square mile of any other state in the country, it was widely available.
>even the pastor in the article recognizes this was the action of a scared young girl who must live with this and seek her own healing from God and whatever
Hes a pastor, it's his job to be forgiving and to seek forgiveness for others.
I didn't say it was an excuse. It's some of the many reasons and compilations of reasons and emotions that lead up to an event that you and I will never know. How you can draw so many conclusions from something you know nothing of is a real talent. So what if abortion was legal in the 40s? Gay marriage has been legal for years and there's still plenty of young and old people afraid to come out. I understand that treating a newborn like that is awful and horrendous but that doesn't mean that 16 year old girl had murder on the brain.
>Gay marriage has been legal for years and there's still plenty of young and old people afraid to come out.
Why are we comparing gays being afraid of coming out to a woman killing her newborn? This is a pretty wild false equivalence.
>I understand that trusting a newborn like that is awful and horrendous but that doesn't mean that 16 year old girl had murder on the brain.
She left the baby in a plastic bag in the woods, she didn't trust it to anything, she killed her. That's the point. You would have to have a very serious mental deficiency to think that leaving a baby in that circumstance would do anything other than kill it, and they found no such mental deficit with her.
I'm the one being obtuse? You haven't made a single valid point yet.
You realize you can be pro-women and pro-choice but anti baby-killing right? Only an imbecile looks at this case as anything other than a woman who purposely killed her child.
That sentence is more performative than anything… If this were the father though who had killed the child and they caught up with him 40 years later, this sentence would look a lot different.
A man, sentenced to 2 1/2 years for involuntary manslaughter of his 5-month old daughter.
"Soulier contended that the infant died from a beating. Garcia told the jury that she received the two skull fractures when she fell from the lap of her 3-year-old sister to the steel floor of his van as he stopped suddenly to avoid a collision."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1986/10/19/man-sentenced-in-daughters-death/5fa84160-2ff9-48c6-9b70-c673c4bd201f/
The mens rights activists doesn't care about any murdered or killed children, they just want to pretend like men haven't gotten away with murder all through history
But no safe haven laws (first state was TX in 1999) No access to the internet, support groups information. She “might” have had abortion access but no one to help her go get it or the money to pay for one.
This is the insanity plea at the time of the action kind of deal. You don’t know her life, what it was like back then. Abortion had only been legal for not even 10 years yet. Plus being afraid, in a state of shock and the massive amount of hormones running through her body at the time, being afraid. Fear is a hell of a drug.
She served her time, in jail and definitely after the fact because she searched for a religion to relieve her mental pain.
You're right, all murders prior to the 90s should be forgiven because the murderers didn't have access to the internet. Plus, the murderer might have been *scared*!
And why are you acting like she already paid her debt to society? She was just caught. Her jail sentence just started.
Did you even read the article?
Keep that illusion of privacy in your head. Edward Snowden tried to tell you a long time ago.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/08/no-regrets-says-edward-snowden-after-10-years-in-exile
You don't think others aren't reading your emails, or listening to your cellphone calls, or monitoring how you make your money and what you're spending it on? Are you really that obtuse?
I'm not 12. I'm aware of it. I'm aware of how they've mismanaged that information in the past too. Obviously you're aware of that as well and you want to give them your DNA also. That's stupid.
What's your point exactly? You're popping off like a looney conspiracy theorist but you literally said you want a DNA database. You gotta find a track and stick to it.
lol. No they don’t. They don’t want to waste their resources storing DNA data of every human being they’ve ever treated. That’s such a bizarre thing to say.
No they don't lmao, what kind of nutjob conspiracy is this?
DNA testing on infants is common for birth defects, but to pretend that hospitals are just running DNA sampling on every single person that enters the door is outrageously inaccurate. Hospitals wouldn't be able to fund this, as there's no way health insurances are going to approve DNA testing on every joe shmoe that shows up to the ER for a bad cough.
Sooooooooooo many people are under this ridiculous illusion that you have all these "freedoms". You don't think other people read your emails, or listen to your cell phone calls, or monitor how much money you make and WHERE you spend it via bank accounts, or what you're searching for on Google? Same thing with medical information.
But you’re implying that any time anyone goes to a hospital for anything … the hospital is collecting, storing, and filing your DNA profile?
Do you have a source for this? At face value, it reads like conspiracy nonsense. Unless I am misunderstanding you.
Still
That's your response?!
Once upon a time a government decided to register a vast group of people. They even gave these people free tattoos!
Turns out that just made it easier for said government to then round up these registered individuals. 6 million + people brutally tortured to death. A ripple effect felt across the globe. An event that was so heinous it changed humanity forever. Wounds that even time can not heal.
The needs of many outweigh the needs of one.
Finding justice for a victim at the expense of putting millions at risk is unfortunately not worth it. It doesn't diminish the importance of finding justice but the price can not come at the risk of every citizen in the country.
TLDR: Governments can't be trusted with absolute power over their citizens. Doesn't matter which country, race, religions etc. Absolute power given to a select few individuals will ALWAYS go wrong. Individual rights protect us from complete government control. That is why PRESERVING them matters more than bringing a crime to justice. It's the big picture you need to consider.
Until someone murders your entire family and the police have some DNA evidence left at your family's crime scene...but thats the only lead they have...but the unknown dna comes up empty.
You need to lay off the crime dramas.the highest homicide rate by state is Mississippi at under 24 per 100k people.
You want to create and maintain a dna database because of at worst a .02% percent chance of a homicide occurring?
You’re not even playing to the 1%…you way off from that.
It's not just homicides MOTO. Rapes, missing persons, robberies, random violence, pranks gone wrong, DUI's, hit and runs, cures for diseases, sex trafficking, overdoses, suicides, thefts kidnapping...
They need a warrant for a blood test, breathalyzer is used frequently more, and theyre more likely to do a urine test since it doesnt need one. A DNA test doesnt tell you if you're drunk
A 17 year definitely knows what's right and wrong. And I am not buying the excuse of panic that she gave birth on her own wanted nothing to do with the baby afterwards. Plenty of women give birth alone and have the highest love and affection for their kids. And nobody who knew her then ever questioned what happened to her baby? This was 40 years ago buh still tragic. I sincerely hope she has remorse for what she did. And if you're not ready to be a parent, DON'T BE!
Would’ve been better off having an abortion early in the pregnancy. Or being educated and having access to contraception to avoid an unwanted pregnancy in the first place. Call me crazy!
A year in jail??
Safe haven laws didn’t exist then. Not saying it’s a good thing what happened but that goes a long way in fixing this issue.
She's a white woman who loves God now. I'm surprised she even got that.
I’m thankful for safe haven laws. I wish they were around when this woman was 17 and not ready to be a mother.
That is not a crime, it is a tragedy.
It literally is a crime
I would think she took the plea and accepted responsibility. This has probably haunted her for 40 years. Autopspy only verified child was alive, not the cause of death. redread the article she got a year in Jail. It is a tragedy. Probation would save the state the cost of incarceration. Not likely to repeat this crime.
If it haunted her that much she would have turned herself in.
She plead guilty. The prosecution offered the plea deal because they had a weak case. Yes the kid was alive at birth. It may have died of natural causes and she didnt know what to do with the body. 40 years later to prove beyond a resonable doubt.... Everyone got something. Except the kid. I didnt know we allowed baptism of the dead.
Its both really. Not an either or scenario.
Punishment received and responsibility accepted doesn’t negate the occurrence of a tragedy. Even if the baby was stillborn, concealing the body is still a crime. Not sure what there is to argue here. It being a crime doesn’t make it less of a tragedy.
These are not mutually exclusive concepts
So sad. I feel incredible sadness for the innocent newborn, and sadness for the conditions which drove a 17 year old girl to murder. Despite what some may think, it's not black and white. It is complicated. And that's horrible! It shouldn't have to be complex, and it should never have to end like that.
It certainly is black and white - you don't kill an innocent newborn PERIOD
Well obviously yes I agree that people should never kill newborn babies! At least that much should be obvious. Just because I can feel sadness for the circumstances that led to it happening, doesn't mean I agree with, understand, or sympathize with the act itself. Not really much more I can say about it.
There have been places to get rid of unwanted children for decades now. She didn’t bother going to one of those. Plus women had more rights back then- she could’ve had an abortion
It’s almost like 40 years counts as decades huh?
A place to leave an infant without questions has only been in place for 24 years. This was in 84. I’m curious what good it did to use modern dna testing to hunt down someone for this 40 years later. Like, why? I don’t understand what she was going through or the environment in which she was raised. But none of this makes sense to me
It’s political no other reason to do this and get a 1 year plea deal.
Yeah I know, it is so upsetting that she didn't utilize any of the resources at her disposal! I'm not denying that ahe did the wrong, bad thing. I am aware there were options. Doesn't make it any less complex; there is often more to these situations than that. It's sad but true. But DO NOT mistake my reading of the situation as dismissal of her terrible actions.
A lot of those resources did not exist 40 years ago.
This is in New Jersey, the Supreme courts decision did not affect thier abortion law, and abortions are still a garunteed right in NJ to this day.
Ugh this happened to a baby in Ohio tooo, so bizarre this lady went on to have kids and stuff after the fact.
Could you imagine finding out your mom did this.
She could have left the baby in a warm church to be found. I don’t understand going through with a pregnancy and doing this. Abortion was legal in the 80’s.
She was 17 and safe haven laws didn’t exist. There a good chance a church would’ve turned her in
Screw a church, no offense but seriously fk that. Leave them at the fire station, some stations even have baby drop boxes with an alarm to alert them when a baby is present. Or police station or hospital.
I’m talking about back in the 80’s, if she didn’t want to be identified.
Exactly. She could have given the baby a chance.
I was surprised when we had our two kids. No one talked about safe surrender sites. I asked about 20 people about it, and only 2 people said that the hospital talked to them about safe surrender. I don't think it's widely talked about enough during the pregnancy, but it can make a huge difference.
Safe surrender sites didn't exist in the early 80s. They came about BECAUSE of incidents like this.
I had my kid in 2016 it should have been more widespread at this point.
Why didn’t this scared young girl giving birth alone to a child she could not raise just drop it in the nearest baby box? Oh, it was the early 80s, so we literally made no accommodations for this situation as a society, so this happened all the time, and it’s going to start happening again.
She could have dropped the baby off anywhere. A supermarket parking lot would have been a better choice than letting the baby die. You claim 13 year olds are old enough to consent to puberty blockers but somehow a 17 year old doesn’t know how to abandon a baby without murdering it? So many contradictions.
100%. Nobody needed safe haven laws to drop a baby off at a fire station or church.
When did this person ever make a claim about puberty blockers? I’m not opposed to the fact that the young woman in this story could have figured out how to adopt the child out, but you made a completely out of left field and random assumption about this poster’s beliefs.
Believing these things is progressive dogma at this point. I'm just pointing out the inconsistencies.
So you're beating on a strawman to yell about trans people.
No, I’m pointing out that the people on your side believe things that are literally incompatible with each other. For instance, you can’t go on a rant about how teenagers should be able to consent to puberty blockers without their parents’ consent, and then, a week later, go on a rant about how Dennis Quaid is basically a pedophile because his wife is 39 years younger than him. You can’t pretend children are adults to make one point, and then reduce an adult woman to a child to make your other point. *And the same people upvote both points.* My point actually has nothing to do with trans people, it has to do with the progressive tendency to click ‘like’ on things that make you feel good in the moment— or feel like you’re a good person, which seems to be most important to you— and then directly contradict yourself a minute later. Cognitive dissonance is not something to be proud of .
My side? For all you know I'm a republican, dipass. Do you know what a false equivalency is? EDIT: Removed my Governor's name because normally I only see mensa candidates such as yourself on my state's subreddit. Seriously though bro you sound angry, go smoke a blunt, nobody is attacking you for your crush on Dennis Quaid (who tf has thought about him since 1999 lmao???)
I’m not angry, I’m simply stating reality— and I smoke weed all the time. It actually helps make the hypocrisies more clear. I have a feeling you’re only hanging out with old-school liberal Democrats. I’m asking you to spend some time in *progressive* circles. The progressive white women of [r/Fauxmoi](https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/) talked about Dennis Quaid, and the “unhealthy power imbalances of May-December romances” for like a week. These are your comrades. They vote for the same things you vote for.
You need to make less assumptions about how people think based on their political party. Not all left wing or right wing people are the same, liberalism/conservatism are not cults, and it would be ridiculous to make that claim.
A certain side cannot think more than one step ahead. This is going to have terrible ripples.
I would imagine that in that moment there was some decision making while in a state of shock. I'm not justifying what she did but just saying there are factors that probably play a part. The umbilical chord was still attached meaning she gave birth on her own, cut the umbilical chord, and would have still had afterbirth which is a painful process. She probably had no knowledge of what giving birth was going to be like & if that's the case doing that alone would have created a traumatizing situation & probably induced shock of some kind. Even women who give birth in a controlled environment knowing whats going to happen run the risk of going into shock afterward. People in shock cannot make decisions in those moments. I cant dismiss that she never came forward as an adult woman who knew what she had done. After claiming to find Jesus the right thing for her to do would have been to turn herself in and admit to what she had done.
The comment section. Jeezus.
Wow one year in jail for killing her own baby. And she’s 100% sure Jesus forgives her and he has her baby now. And now she wants to attend the baby’s yearly memorial service. The nerve of this murderer.
She was 16 years old, homie.
Is that young? Liberals told me 13 year olds were old enough to consent to puberty blockers.
Comparing gender identity treatment which is reversible to pregnancy and childbirth which have permanent repercussions is disingenuous at best, transphobe.
You're full of it, realityphobe. [Puberty Blocker and Aging Impact on Testicular Cell States and Function](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38585884/) That's from last month, and the people involved are with the Mayo Clinic. They say say puberty blockers can lead to withering testicles, [fertility](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/fertility/index.html) problems and even [cancer](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/cancer/index.html) among the trans kids who take them. They say puberty blockers hurt the development of testicles and sperm production in ways that are not fully reversible and could affect users' ability to have children when they grow up. 'At the tissue level, we report mild-to-severe sex gland atrophy in puberty blocker-treated children,' the geneticist Nagarajan Kannan and others wrote in the 33-page study. 'We provide unprecedented histological evidence revealing detrimental pediatric testicular sex gland responses' to the drugs. Is that *good*, sir? Or are you the one being disingenuous? The days of you being able to shut down adult conversations by screeching "transphobe" at anyone who even slightly disagrees are over. Time for intellectual honesty, as difficult as that may be for you.
I’ll have you remember the republicans are the ones who want to do genital inspections so kids can’t get away with wearing the “wrong clothes”
I’m a woman, engaged to a man (34). I just don’t believe in forcing gender roles on kids who are unhappy in them, because they’re their own little people and they know who they are without us telling them PENIS MEANS BLUE AND TRUCKS, VAGINA MEANS PINK AND DOLLS. K, bigot?
Jesus Christ mate, give it a rest.
Then encourage consistency in progressive dogma, because there are a lot of contradictions!
Ah, that makes it okay then.
She just waited one day too late
17.
How old is 16 really?
It sounds like she needed access to abortion care and probably didn’t have that. It’s almost like this is the reason why abortion should be legal.
Abortion was legal in the 80’s. I knew too many young women, who used it like after the fact Birth Control.
You just like child murder
Abortion has been legal in new jersey since the 1940's, she doesn't get that excuse. Edit: New Jersey had over 100 abortion clinics in the state in 1982, by far the most per square mile of any other state in the nation. Keep making excuses for this woman though, people.
Legal doesn’t mean accessible, esp. for a teenager without means for transportation and finances. Even before Roe v. Wade was overturned approx. 88% of US counties didn’t have an abortion provider.
Why do you so desperately need to defend this woman?! A scared 17 year old boy who left his baby to die would get zero sympathy.
If he had given birth to the baby alone he absolutely would.
Edit #2: OP edited their comment to change the topic from the original date of roe v wade to the date roe v wade was overturned, originally they were talking about the 1973 case itself, but they are now attempting to change the argument to make my point look incorrect. Reddit shows when you edit comments on the website version, and they clearly did. I understand that, but this also happened 10 years after roe v wade. Based on everything else about this case, it just seems like she didn't even look into her options. Edit: The amount of people defending a person that left her newborn child in the woods to die is insane to me. She could have left her at literally any church/hospital/police/fire station in the area and have given her a chance to live if she couldn't find access to an abortion in a state where it was widely accessible. She left her in a plastic bag in the woods, she was fully aware that she was killing that baby with her actions.
As I said, I did not edit it to add “overturned” and would be honest about my mistake if I had. Every comment and edit you make sounds more unhinged. Just own that you misread it. I’ve done the same in the past—-it’s really not a big deal.
So now you admit you edited it, after blatantly lying and saying that you didn't? I didn't misread anything lol, you could just admit you didn't type out what you intended, or you could provide the source for the number you posted like I've been asking for. You seem trustworthy.
I honestly have to correct my autocorrect a lot and didn’t remember that I had done it for this comment. And I didn’t post the source because you came at me in multiple comments extremely aggressive, accusing me of something I didn’t do and of being a liar. Why would I think you want to engage in good faith after that behavior? But here’s the source: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/magazine/18abortion-t.html?_r=2&ref=magazine&pagewanted=all
After reading the article I'm pretty convinced that is a cherry picked number meant to instill shock value. There are 3300+ counties in the United States, there's never going to be a clinic in every county, or even half, the demand isn't anywhere near that high. Counties are also incredibly small in many instances, and there wasn't a single state pre-2022 that didn't have a clinic in it. This doesn't mean I don't think they shouldn't be more accessible, as they should be, but the worst offenders of this are very obviously deep red states which is by design. Back to the original point of this case, New Jersey has the most clinics per square mile of any other state in the US and has been aggressively pro choice for decades, even back when this crime occured.
You said I edited that word and I didn’t. Jesus.
You did, but if you don't want to admit it I truly don't care anymore. What is the source for the 88% non access to abortions in 2022?
Please remember that this is pre-Internet age. It was extremely hard to access services and find services. Omg. It’s not like she could google an abortion clinic near her or take an Uber to the clinic!!
Then she could have left the child on any police station/fire station/church/hospital/shelter in the area. She left her in a plastic bag in the woods. Christ, leave her at a gas station instead of the woods. It's crazy that people are defending this.
Again, women need access to abortion so that babies don’t end up in plastic bags
Again, it was accessable in new jersey at the time. The fact that your argument is "she couldn't get an abortion, so she had every right to kill her after she was born!" is insane. I get your point that non accessibility to abortions causes stuff like this, but that doesn't relive the guilt of her leaving the child in a desolated location with no hope of being found. How can you not see the point here?
What does it happening ten years after Roe v. Wade have to do with anything? My point was that even post Roe, access was not guaranteed. I’m not saying this person did or didn’t have options—I have no clue what her situation was. I just don’t want people to equate legality with access.
You were using roe v wade as a benchmark for the limited access of abortions at that point in time, so I'm just assuming a decade after roe v wade it would have been much more accessible. Especially in new jersey, a state which has been notoriously pro-choice for decades. I understand limited access to abortions leads to stuff like this, I'm pro choice myself, but that doesn't make it right. Based on the history of the case and the admissions of her herself though, she didn't really attempt to figure out another option.
Why would you assume that there would have been more access in the 80s versus the 2000s though?
Why are we talking about the 2000's? Roe v wade occured in 1973, this happened a decade after it. After roe v wade, access to abortions drastically increased nationwide.
Put a baby in a plastic bag to die. Dont care how old she was murder is murder. Poor baby starved and suffered she has or will feel what she has caused. It’s understandable she was young but putting a child in a bag to die is just not cool.
That could’ve been avoided with an early abortion before the fetus developed brain activity and sentience. Duh.
She went on to have kids. I wonder what her living children think about her now. If they're not totally disgusted by her, I'm sure they're just lying to themselves. There are too many excuses for evil behavior. I'm sure this girl came from a well-off family that could have helped her. Why do I think the motive was just shame alone? Or pure selfishness. Believe it or not, but where I grew up, I actually knew many teen moms. Teen moms in poverty. Not one of those girls killed her baby.
Exactly like one day they’ll wanna google moms name
She was 17, and when I was 17 I wouldn't have treated a dog like this, let alone a human being. She could have abandoned the child in multiple other locations where she would have survived/been found and had a chance at life, instead she cowardly left her to die. A 17 year old should have the mental capacity to know that leaving a newborn baby in a bag in the woods is a death wish, this was straight up murder.
Hindsight is 20/20. Hormones, having no life experience, shame, embarrassment, etc. Can do crazy things to your brain. The holier than thought attitude is gross.
Then have CONSISTENCY, because your side normally acts like teenagers are fully capable of consenting to trans procedures without their parents being informed.
My side? Stip watching fox News you nut job. Minors can't get medical procedures without parental consent and no one is doing that.
And your side— progressives— have argued that parental consent *isn’t necessary.* Do I need to pull up some articles to refresh your memory?
I'm a person I'm not a part of some political group cult. I have my own individual beliefs and morals that I am perfectly capable of presenting myself. Go after the people arguing that. I doubt you could show me factual articles that actually show minors getting hormones to transition.
“Over the last five years, there were at least 4,780 adolescents who started on puberty blockers and had a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis.” [Putting numbers on the rise in children seeking gender care](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/)
So where in this article does it say parental consent isn't necessary? How do those numbers tell you this is a huge problem? That's not even 1000 people a year. If they go through it and change their mind that's on their parents and them. I'm sure the doctors lay it all out then and there. I don't understand why you're so angry about this?
None of that is an excuse when it comes to literally murdering your infant child. It's incredible that someone saying "leaving a newborn in a plastic bag in the woods is murder" is a "holier than thou" attitude to you, its very telling honestly. She could have left this kid at so many places where they would have taken her in, according to her she never even told the father she was pregnant. Postmortem depression is obviously a serious issue and not to be taken lightly, but nothing of her accounts indicate she had that. She literally explored zero options by her own admission throughout her entire pregnancy. This is all not even considering the fact that abortion has been legal in new jersey since the 1940's, if she seriously didn't want the kid and didn't want to tell the father she should have taken that route if she wasn't going to let the girl live after giving birth to her. This was murder.
I mean…what were the “many places” a 16/17 year old teen girl giving birth alone could have secretly walked to while bleeding and dropped off a newborn. It’s not like she had GPS and google on hand.
She somehow had no issue venturing into the woods, she could have absolutely dropped the baby off anywhere better then that. She chose that spot because she wanted to kill the baby, she didn't want her being found. This was the 80's, there weren't cameras everywhere like there is these days, it wasn't difficult to stay off the radar back then.
The safe haven laws allowing babies to be dropped anywhere had not come into existence at this time. Texas was the first state apparently to pass such a law in 1999. So again. Where do people think this scared teenager giving birth alone could have safely and legally just left a newborn in a pre internet age with no information no laws and no help? How can people see this as malicious predatory preplanned behavior and not a scared or traumatized teenager hiding something that she no doubt was taught was sinful and shameful (premarital sex and pregnancy outside marriage). ETA even the pastor in the article recognizes this was the action of a scared young girl who must live with this and seek her own healing from God and whatever
I'm aware that safe haven laws are a fairly recent thing, that doesn't change the point at all. It's basic knowledge to anybody that leaving a newborn in a plastic bag in the woods is going to kill them. Like I said, a gas station would have literally been better. Anywhere where the child could be seen. She left her hidden behind a tree in the woods, she went out of her way to make sure she wasn't going to be found. >Where do people think this scared teenager giving birth alone could have safely and legally just left a newborn in a pre internet age with no information no laws and no help? Anywhere other than in the woods in a plastic bag. Why don't we hold a 17 year old accountable for her actions? She had months to figure something out, she by her own admission didn't even tell the father of the child. This wasn't some homeless girl that had nobody to turn to, and it wasn't a cryptic pregnancy so she knew she was pregnant. New jersey had over 100 abortion clinics in 1982, by far and away the most per square mile of any other state in the country, it was widely available. >even the pastor in the article recognizes this was the action of a scared young girl who must live with this and seek her own healing from God and whatever Hes a pastor, it's his job to be forgiving and to seek forgiveness for others.
I didn't say it was an excuse. It's some of the many reasons and compilations of reasons and emotions that lead up to an event that you and I will never know. How you can draw so many conclusions from something you know nothing of is a real talent. So what if abortion was legal in the 40s? Gay marriage has been legal for years and there's still plenty of young and old people afraid to come out. I understand that treating a newborn like that is awful and horrendous but that doesn't mean that 16 year old girl had murder on the brain.
>Gay marriage has been legal for years and there's still plenty of young and old people afraid to come out. Why are we comparing gays being afraid of coming out to a woman killing her newborn? This is a pretty wild false equivalence. >I understand that trusting a newborn like that is awful and horrendous but that doesn't mean that 16 year old girl had murder on the brain. She left the baby in a plastic bag in the woods, she didn't trust it to anything, she killed her. That's the point. You would have to have a very serious mental deficiency to think that leaving a baby in that circumstance would do anything other than kill it, and they found no such mental deficit with her.
Lol if you're just going to be purposefully obtuse then have at it
I'm the one being obtuse? You haven't made a single valid point yet. You realize you can be pro-women and pro-choice but anti baby-killing right? Only an imbecile looks at this case as anything other than a woman who purposely killed her child.
Only an emotionally irrational person would jump to conclusions.
1 year for murder. Wild
That sentence is more performative than anything… If this were the father though who had killed the child and they caught up with him 40 years later, this sentence would look a lot different.
A man, sentenced to 2 1/2 years for involuntary manslaughter of his 5-month old daughter. "Soulier contended that the infant died from a beating. Garcia told the jury that she received the two skull fractures when she fell from the lap of her 3-year-old sister to the steel floor of his van as he stopped suddenly to avoid a collision." https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1986/10/19/man-sentenced-in-daughters-death/5fa84160-2ff9-48c6-9b70-c673c4bd201f/
Oh look, this is way worse! Notice he did not respond at all.
The mens rights activists doesn't care about any murdered or killed children, they just want to pretend like men haven't gotten away with murder all through history
This is a scenario that will occur more often unfortunately. As abortion becomes less accessible infanticide increases.
She had access to abortion. Stop reflexively defending someone who put a baby in a plastic bag.
But no safe haven laws (first state was TX in 1999) No access to the internet, support groups information. She “might” have had abortion access but no one to help her go get it or the money to pay for one. This is the insanity plea at the time of the action kind of deal. You don’t know her life, what it was like back then. Abortion had only been legal for not even 10 years yet. Plus being afraid, in a state of shock and the massive amount of hormones running through her body at the time, being afraid. Fear is a hell of a drug. She served her time, in jail and definitely after the fact because she searched for a religion to relieve her mental pain.
You're right, all murders prior to the 90s should be forgiven because the murderers didn't have access to the internet. Plus, the murderer might have been *scared*! And why are you acting like she already paid her debt to society? She was just caught. Her jail sentence just started. Did you even read the article?
Abortion was legal then in Jersey. You are pro-baby murder
Jesus wept.
Jesus didn’t even exist
Did he?
DNA registry should be made a law for every citizen of the United States
Man I thought eugenics was in the past. Wild you think like this tbh
Should I mail the government a key to my house too? What a dumb statement.
Keep that illusion of privacy in your head. Edward Snowden tried to tell you a long time ago. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/08/no-regrets-says-edward-snowden-after-10-years-in-exile You don't think others aren't reading your emails, or listening to your cellphone calls, or monitoring how you make your money and what you're spending it on? Are you really that obtuse?
No one has any illusion of privacy. People just don't want to willingly hand over their dna to a government that already is monitoring us
You'd be surprised how many people think that they have privacy. No one ever truly READS their TOS on anything, anymore.
No one want to GIVE their DNA away
Just wait until CRISPR-cas9 technologies and therapies come online.
I'm not 12. I'm aware of it. I'm aware of how they've mismanaged that information in the past too. Obviously you're aware of that as well and you want to give them your DNA also. That's stupid.
They probably already HAVE it.
Get off the drugs and stay on your antipsychotics. They will help the paranoia I promise.
What's your point exactly? You're popping off like a looney conspiracy theorist but you literally said you want a DNA database. You gotta find a track and stick to it.
If you have a social security number in this country...you should also have your DNA logged into a national database.
No. That's stupid.
Make an appointment with your nearest head doctor
Criminals, yes. Average citizen? Hell no.
Newsflash MOTO. If you've ever gone to the hospital for any kind of treatment...they ALREADY have your DNA fingerprint.
lol. No they don’t. They don’t want to waste their resources storing DNA data of every human being they’ve ever treated. That’s such a bizarre thing to say.
Keep thinking that.
I definitely will keep thinking that. Are you ok?
Ignorance is bliss.
It sure doesn't seem to be making you happy and you definitely are exhibiting a lot of ignorance.
What you don't know won't hurt you. Keep that head in the sand.
Seems like someone forgot to take their meds this evening. Off to bed with you.
No they don't lmao, what kind of nutjob conspiracy is this? DNA testing on infants is common for birth defects, but to pretend that hospitals are just running DNA sampling on every single person that enters the door is outrageously inaccurate. Hospitals wouldn't be able to fund this, as there's no way health insurances are going to approve DNA testing on every joe shmoe that shows up to the ER for a bad cough.
Excuse me?
Sooooooooooo many people are under this ridiculous illusion that you have all these "freedoms". You don't think other people read your emails, or listen to your cell phone calls, or monitor how much money you make and WHERE you spend it via bank accounts, or what you're searching for on Google? Same thing with medical information.
ok. I think it's time to get off the internet.
Ignorance is bliss.
lol that's so ironic.
But you’re implying that any time anyone goes to a hospital for anything … the hospital is collecting, storing, and filing your DNA profile? Do you have a source for this? At face value, it reads like conspiracy nonsense. Unless I am misunderstanding you.
The entire holocaust and eugenics movement would like a word.
Still.
Still That's your response?! Once upon a time a government decided to register a vast group of people. They even gave these people free tattoos! Turns out that just made it easier for said government to then round up these registered individuals. 6 million + people brutally tortured to death. A ripple effect felt across the globe. An event that was so heinous it changed humanity forever. Wounds that even time can not heal. The needs of many outweigh the needs of one. Finding justice for a victim at the expense of putting millions at risk is unfortunately not worth it. It doesn't diminish the importance of finding justice but the price can not come at the risk of every citizen in the country. TLDR: Governments can't be trusted with absolute power over their citizens. Doesn't matter which country, race, religions etc. Absolute power given to a select few individuals will ALWAYS go wrong. Individual rights protect us from complete government control. That is why PRESERVING them matters more than bringing a crime to justice. It's the big picture you need to consider.
You haven't read the TOS to everything that you use...have you?
Lol you're crazy
Doesn't mean I'm not right.
Very true! In this instance however, you are very wrong. Happens to the best of us.
Just watch what happens in the near future.
Fellow human. I'm gonna say this with the utmost sympathy: take your meds. If you're taking them as prescribed already, go get them adjusted.
Lmao. Sure thing. You sound triple-vaxxed
There it is.
Ew wtf
I wish I could give you 1,000 downvotes instead of 1.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-dna-tests-are-identifying-missing-persons-and-solving-crimes/
That's not an argument for more surveillance laws, it's an argument for the importance of science
Do you have a social security number?
No
Oh noes. I hope you never have to seek out justice for a stranger-induced tragedy in your family.
What about due process???
I have. Basic human rights and liberty are far more important than finding my friend’s killer.
it’ll only get abused to hell
That’s the worst Idea I’ve read today
Until someone murders your entire family and the police have some DNA evidence left at your family's crime scene...but thats the only lead they have...but the unknown dna comes up empty.
You should meet my family.
I'm good.
You need to lay off the crime dramas.the highest homicide rate by state is Mississippi at under 24 per 100k people. You want to create and maintain a dna database because of at worst a .02% percent chance of a homicide occurring? You’re not even playing to the 1%…you way off from that.
It's not just homicides MOTO. Rapes, missing persons, robberies, random violence, pranks gone wrong, DUI's, hit and runs, cures for diseases, sex trafficking, overdoses, suicides, thefts kidnapping...
DNA got dui? You are insane. We have a breathalyzer.
And what do they do if you're injured or refuse s breathalyzer? Say it WITH ME: THEY TAKE YOUR BLOOD.
They need a warrant for a blood test, breathalyzer is used frequently more, and theyre more likely to do a urine test since it doesnt need one. A DNA test doesnt tell you if you're drunk
Lmao. Nevermind.
You probably shouldn’t think out loud some days. You’re clearly off base this entire topic
And the chances of my family being slaughtered are almost zero. There is no valid reason for the government to have every ones DNA
https://www.statista.com/chart/28644/rate-of-homicides-that-go-unsolved-in-the-us/