More news on MA teen

[asterroc]

Thanks to hrfan, more info at this link

Published: June 03, 2008 12:40 am

Lawrence teen accused of inducing abortion given pretrial probation
By Yadira Betances
Staff Writer

SALEM, Mass. — A Lawrence teenager who allegedly tried to cause her own abortion by taking anti-ulcer pills will have charges dropped against her if she complies with a court-ordered mental health program over the next year.

The case against Ambar Abreu began Jan. 6, 2007 when she went to Lawrence General Hospital complaining of abdominal pain. She later gave birth to a 11/4 pound baby girl at Tufts New England Medical Center. The baby, whom she named Ashley, died four days later.

Abreu, who was believed to have been 25 weeks pregnant, was accused of taking misoprostol pills, an anti-ulcer drug that is also a component of the abortion pill RU-486.

After leaving the hospital, Abreu was arrested at her home and spent three days at Framingham House of Correction, where she was placed under a suicide watch.

She was indicted by an Essex County grand jury on a charge of procuring a miscarriage.

She has been free on $10,000 cash bail, which her family had raised.

Yesterday, Salem District Court Judge David Lowry ordered Abreu to be on pretrial probation until next April and comply with mental health treatment through Health and Education Services of Lawrence, an agency that provides counseling, and that she report to a probation officer every eight weeks.

"Technically, the case is still pending," said Steve O'Connell, spokesperson for the district attorney's office. "The pre-trial probation is intended as a disposition."

The agreement does not require Abreu to admit any wrongdoing and will spare her a record of conviction as long as she complies with the conditions and stays out of further trouble.

If she violates any terms, however, the case will be put back onto the court's docket for trial.

Prosecutor Kate MacDougall and defense lawyer Denise Regan met briefly in the lobby of Salem Superior Court with Lowy yesterday. The judge then accepted the agreement.

Earlier this year public defenders Regan and Carol Cahill asked a Superior Court judge to dismiss the case, arguing that a woman's right to an abortion without government interference has been well established since the famous Roe v. Wade decision in 1973.

Abreu was charged under an 1845 law against procuring a miscarriage, which Regan and Cahill argued could not be enforced because of the Roe v. Wade decision.

In addition to questioning whether the law was still valid, Abreu's lawyers said there were factual errors in the evidence presented to the grand jury provided either by the prosecutor in her questions or by the Lawrence police lieutenant who testified.

They said the first grand jury had been incorrectly told that the use of misoprostol to induce an abortion is illegal, that Abreu did not tell anyone at the hospital that she was pregnant and had taken the pills, that the fetus tested positive for misoprostol (there is no known test for the drug), and that she fled the hospital against the advice of doctors.

Assistant District Attorney Kate MacDougall presented the case again to a new grand jury and received a new indictment on the same charge.

Abreu moved to Lawrence more than two years ago with her mother, Maritza Rosario, and brothers Wilkins and Sain.

In an interview last year, Abreu said she would do things differently if given the chance.

"This is going to haunt me for the rest of my life," Abreu said then. "I pray that one day she (Ashley) can forgive me for making this decision. When I have a family, how am I going to explain to them what happened?"

Reporter Julie Manganis contributed to this report.

So she *is* being tried for "procuring a miscarriage" - which is the same as an abortion, and therefore should be legal under Roe vs. Wade. Why the fsck is this happening in MA of all places? kadath, where are you and your outrage when we need it?

Edit: As mentioned elsewhere, this sounds like an activist DA with an agenda to overturn Roe v. Wade and willing to lie to a grand jury to do so. I agree w/ you meig, it's a witch hunt.

Comments

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

In the other article I read on the subject, reposted here, they say that the woman was 18 at the time of the miscarriage/abortion - hence my always referring to her as a woman and not as a teen - in January 2007 (so she's 19 now).

They took it to a new grand jury after the first one was lied to (or given incorrect info). But yeah, who knows about all the other questions you have.

Out of curiosity, when you say "pro-life" do you mean you're also against the right to choose? I am pro-choice, but if I accidentally got pregnant at this point in my life I think I would choose to keep the child. My point is that I feel the woman has the right to *choose*, and even if she's going to make a choice she'll regret, I still feel she has the right to do so - people have the right to smoke cigarettes, take drugs, binge drink, and have unsafe sex after all, and many of those are later regretted.

[seekingferret.livejournal.com]

Oh, so you favor legalizing hard drugs and abolishing DUI laws?

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

Ah, I shouldn't've mentioned drugs in that comment of mine, as I meant to be referring to things that ARE legal.

I do not favor abolishing DUI laws b/c DUI can hurt other individuals than the one doing it. I was talking here about binge drinking NOT behind the wheel of a car.

[seekingferret.livejournal.com]

Oh, darnit. I thought you'd gone libertarian on me. I was about to celebrate.

[weirdlilfaechld.livejournal.com]

I guess I missed where it said her age.

I think every woman already has the right to choose. If they don't want to get pregnant there are more then enough options available that they can choose to use. Yes, I know they can and do fail.

A few years ago my answer would have been a resounding "yes" but now I don't feel as strongly about it only due to the overpopulation problems and the amount of children who aren't wanted. But obviously the people who should get an abortion because they can't or are not willing to care for children don't.

Abortion is so readily available right now that in many places it is considered just another method of birth control and that in my opinion is horrible. People have gotten used to it and many no longer even respond. Most young women don't bother with birth control because they could just have an abortion and they have no clue about the possible physical problems it could cause and the probable psychological problems it causes. It should be a last resort.

Yes people have the right to do all of the other things you mentioned, but they only hurt themselves. Can't have a child with just one person and even though it is the woman's body it's the man's sperm. She didn't get pregnant on her own. With abortion at least three lives can be hurt.

May I ask why adoption isn't an option? The waiting list of parents unable to have children of their own is eight years long, and the amount of couples who want a baby to raise but can't have one of their own is so large that companies are paying young women quite a bit to be surrogate mothers. So why in the world are so many people who are unable to or do not want to care for a child they are carrying so violently against adoption? You can even choose the parents, have your pregnancy related medical bills paid for, and see the child as he or she grows up if you want. ("You" is used here in the general sense, not referring to you personally.)

Why doesn't the fetus have the right to live? Yes, I do believe that a fetus is a human life at conception.

Personally I just don't understand abortion at all. I would give anything to bear a child but it doesn't matter, I can't. Yet there are women who don't even realize it's a gift and just throw it away. So yes there emotions cloud my thoughts about abortion but I felt that way long before I found out I was infertile.

I also believe I'm still too sick to make much sense or spell correctly. Hope spell check caught most of it.

[hrafn.livejournal.com]

In brief, one of the issues with adoption is that pregnancy and childbirth are a significant physical, mental, emotional, and financial strain on the woman, which adoption does nothing to resolve.

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

Well, there are arrangements possible where the adopting parents pay the financial costs, but those are few and far between and may not be entirely legal (as it approaches child trafficking).

[hrafn.livejournal.com]

True. I really wish we could do the sensible thing: lay eggs!

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

Spoken like a fellow crazy birdmom. ^_^ We'd have to buy incubators you know, I certainly wouldn't sit on the nest for 8-9 months.

[hrafn.livejournal.com]

Yeah, at least you can walk away from the incubator :) Or hand it all off to someone else. Even marsupials have it easier.

[weirdlilfaechld.livejournal.com]

I agree that it doesn't resolve physical, mental, or emotional strains but I don't see how replacing them with something else that causes significant physical, mental, emotional, and financial strain is the answer. Adoption can solve financial strain because in most cases the counseling and medical costs become the responsibility of the adoptive parents, who have already had to prove their ability to financially support the child and the woman during pregnancy, labor, and post-partum trauma.

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

Do you happen to know of any studies of women after adoption and after abortion, and what percent end up regretting each one? All I know is anecdotes.

[weirdlilfaechld.livejournal.com]

No, it's the same here. All I know are anecdotes when it comes to regret.

[hrafn.livejournal.com]

Having an abortion is safer, physically, than pregnancy. Whether one or the other is more emotionally stressful is probably completely determined by the individual and whatever her life circumstances are (and whenever I hear about women who have regretted having an abortion, I always want to know why we hear so little from women who regret having children, and how the numbers of cases of post-partum depression compare to cases of equally severe post-abortion depression - but I doubt the information on merely "regretting" having a child has been collected). But the two biggest reasons I have (and this article explains quite nicely for believing that abortion must be not only legal, but readily available, are that 1) the alternative is far, far worse in terms of lives lost and ruined, because making it illegal will not make it do away, and 2) to do otherwise is to treat women as second-class citizens, not deserving of full autonomy and access to medical care. While I am somewhat sympathetic to some of the anti-abortion stance, I just cannot get behind any philosophy or system of ethics or what-have-you that says that due to an accident of conception, I or any other woman should be forced to put my body to use to support any other life. We do not require anyone, male or female, to donate blood or bone marrow or even to donate organs after death, all of which also save lives, and none of which are as invasive and potentially damaging as pregnancy.

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

There are physical risks to bring a pregnancy to full term and to bearing a child as well, and emotional risks in both of those and to adoption. And in the aftermath there's postpartum depression. I don't know whether pregnancy, birth, and adoption is "riskier" than abortion however.

There are many cases where an abortion is medically necessary, such as ectopic pregnancies. Such an embryo could not survive to birth, and it would take the "mother" with it. I believe there are also cases where an abortion would be necessary for a patient's mental health - for example if the woman expresses suicidal tendencies due to the pregnancy either due to personal beliefs or depression, or if the pregnancy were the result of a rape.

The latter case is part of what leads me to feel that abortion should be entirely legal: who is to judge when a rape has taken place? This especially fuzzy in the case of date rape, but even "straight forward" stranger rape is tough to call. Such cases take years, at which point the baby has already been born, and the woman has been made to suffer even more.

For me personally, I have the means and desire such that if I unexpectedly became pregnant right now I'd raise it. For the past ten years or so I've thought that I would put the child up for adoption. But my own personal choice for my own body does not mean that I feel others should be forced to do what I choose.

You may be interested to follow the_xtina, her feminist tag, and her other blog. She links to some of the most radical feminist posts about abortion and rape out there, so much of it I take with a grain of salt, but some of it is scary too.

[weirdlilfaechld.livejournal.com]

I never stated I was against abortion when it is medically necessary. I am most definitely not. I have never seen any reports of women showing suicidal tendencies as the result of a pregnancy from a situation that doesn't involve rape.

You're right, who is to judge when a rape has or has not happened, especially when it is common for the victim to keep it to themselves or even believe they were at fault. But considering how uncommon that is compared to people getting an abortion just because they can it doesn't justify why abortions need to be so readily available.