A pregnant woman who allegedly ignored medical warnings to have a Caesarean section to save her twins was charged Thursday with murder after one of the babies was stillborn.
Prosecutors said Melissa Ann Rowland, 28, didn't want the scars that accompany the surgery.
An autopsy found that the baby died two days before its Jan. 13 delivery and that it would have survived if Rowland had had a C-section when her doctors urged her to, between Christmas and Jan. 9. The other baby is alive, but authorities had no further information.
The doctors had warned that without a C-section, the twins would probably die, authorities said. A nurse told police that Rowland said a Caesarean would "ruin her life" and she would rather "lose one of the babies than be cut like that."
"We are unable to find any reason other than the cosmetic motivations by the mother" for her decision, said Kent Morgan, spokesman for the district attorney.
Court documents give no address for Rowland, and she isn't listed in area telephone books.
The charges carry five years to life in prison. She was jailed on $250,000 bail.
It was not immediately clear whether she had an attorney.
According to the documents, Rowland went to LDS Hospital in Salt Lake City in December to seek advice after she hadn't felt her babies move. A nurse, Regina Davis, told police she instructed Rowland to go immediately to one of two other hospitals, but that Rowland said she would rather have both babies die before going to either place.
On Jan. 2, a doctor at LDS Hospital examined Rowland and recommended an immediate C-section based on an ultrasound and the babies' slowing heart rates. Rowland left, the doctor told police.
The same day, Rowland allegedly saw a nurse at another hospital, saying she had left LDS Hospital because the doctor wanted to cut her "from breast bone to pubic bone," a procedure that would "ruin her life." The nurse also told investigators that Rowland said she would rather "lose one of her babies than be cut like that."
A week later, Rowland allegedly went to a third hospital to verify whether her babies were alive. A nurse there told police she could not detect a heartbeat from one twin and advised Rowland to remain in the hospital, but Rowland ignored the advice.
I too am appalled at some of the comments...I also think that there is more to the story. I have seen some of the mentally ill moms and it is truly sad. Many people with certain kinds of delusions will refuse surgery for a multitude of reasons. Only they know what is going on in their heads. I would love to know if they got a psych consult...they could have put a 3 day hold on her if they felt she was endangering herself.
Newgrad2004....unfortunatley, that is what many mentally ill people do...and then the kids are brought to us and they would have been much better off if they died. And if a mom tests positive for drugs they don't go to jail, that is for sure. They test positive, go to rehab and 90% of the time they get the kids upon discharge.
So we have a mentally ill, drug abusing woman who has already had children taken away from her because of neglect and inability to care for them. To refuse forcible sterilization for this woman is a serious neglect of her, IMO. Motherhood is already being denied her by the Family Services and rightly so.Why put her, and more future children, through all this misery? Sounds like her personal freedoms are a moot point anyway. I'm sorry, but I think she lost all reasonable rights to parenthood long ago. Of course it won't stop diseases..but will stop future children born to an unfit, mentally ill mother and further trauma from her continually losing them to death or forced removal. Enough is enough. A less permanent form of birth control probably wouldn't work for her, since she's not competent to keep track of pills or shots, I'm sure.
Society cannot continue to handle the broken lives and bodies of those who are unfit or unable to care for themselves, yet bring children into the world to be taken care of at state expense. Working people simply don't have the luxury of spending a major portion of their tax dollars on social programs designed to keep feeding into this problem with no good solution on how to prevent it from happening over and over again.
Just catching the thread, there is no doubt that this woman has serious issues, but is there any way to know whether the fetus would have survived with a C/S? i dont know may be maybe not.
The real issue there is, MD pressing charges against a woman obviously not able to understand choices anyway...
The second issue is: when this woman is going on trial, if the judge finds her guilty,
this is ensuring a new jurisprudence. MD will be able to inforce their decisions on pregnant patients such as VBACS, etc.... scary if you ask me...
Specializes in Case Mgmt; Mat/Child, Critical Care.
"Forcible sterilization".....I don't think so! As much as I agree that these children are sufferring the consequences of these kinds of mothers, I adamantly refuse the idea of "forcibly" sterilizing anyone! Can you imagine the implications of that....so all mentally challenged women, drug abusing women get sterilized. Then what...deaf women? Blind women? Women whom we just don't want reproducing? Where would it stop? And do we really want to give the government this kind of control over women??? I don't think so.
I agree, this is a huge issue and we've all seen and cared for these patients that we say "they shouldn't be allowed to reproduce", but to forcibly sterilize someone....
No, what society needs is to pay more attention to it's own citizens and provide education and programs to deal with these issues.
Society has a lot of burdens, that is for sure, but if we can't even take care of our own... what's next???
So we have a mentally ill, drug abusing woman who has already had children taken away from her because of neglect and inability to care for them. To refuse forcible sterilization for this woman is a serious neglect of her, IMO. Motherhood is already being denied her by the Family Services and rightly so.Why put her, and more future children, through all this misery? Sounds like her personal freedoms are a moot point anyway. I'm sorry, but I think she lost all reasonable rights to parenthood long ago. Of course it won't stop diseases..but will stop future children born to an unfit, mentally ill mother and further trauma from her continually losing them to death or forced removal. Enough is enough. A less permanent form of birth control probably wouldn't work for her, since she's not competent to keep track of pills or shots, I'm sure.
Society cannot continue to handle the broken lives and bodies of those who are unfit or unable to care for themselves, yet bring children into the world to be taken care of at state expense. Working people simply don't have the luxury of spending a major portion of their tax dollars on social programs designed to keep feeding into this problem with no good solution on how to prevent it from happening over and over again.
Just catching the thread, there is no doubt that this woman has serious issues, but is there any way to know whether the fetus would have survived with a C/S? i dont know may be maybe not.
The real issue there is, MD pressing charges against a woman obviously not able to understand choices anyway...
The second issue is: when this woman is going on trial, if the judge finds her guilty,
this is ensuring a new jurisprudence. MD will be able to inforce their decisions on pregnant patients such as VBACS, etc.... scary if you ask me...
just my 2 cents
Ginny,
I agree that murder charges are not appropriate, but please understand that it is not the MD who is pressing them! It is the District Attorney.
In this country, you can choose to abort an unborn baby up until the last minute of gestation. Would you say a woman who chooses abortion is also an unfit parent? Is there is a difference between the mother who knowingly allows her unborn child to die, and one who chooses to terminate the pregnancy at the last minute? According to our law, an unborn child lives based on the choice of the mother. I'm not trying to make a judgement here, but we can't have it both ways. As it stands right now, an unborn baby only has as much status as the mother allows. If she wishes to have the baby then causing it harm is a crime. If she doesn't wish to have the baby, then she is free to end its life. Based on that, she didn't commit murder. And if she is found unstable and unfit, then any woman terminating would be ustable and unfit and vice versa.
Maybe I'm not up to speed on this, but I was under the impression that abortions were only legal (in NJ, at least) up to 24 weeks. That is not the last minute of gestation. Or would that be in case of danger to the mother's health/life? Just wondering...
This is EXACTLY what I thought...but not only about the prosecutor but also about the MEDIA in general.
How often do you turn on the news and hear a story then flip channels and hear the same story but w/ different, embellished, or flat out DIFFERENT details.
This story is a prime example of this type of thing happening. I had previously posted that I had heard on a cable news channel (that rhymes with "Socks" ) that this lady had called a relative and tried to make a deal to sell the baby to this relative for bond money.
I came back here to read a different story that said that the baby girl was adopted.
Who really knows for sure what's going on? We really can't make assumptions on anything in this case.
"Forcible sterilization".....I don't think so! so all mentally challenged women, drug abusing women get sterilized.
I know..... this is what we were doing in the 40's
Then what...deaf women? Blind women? Women whom we just don't want reproducing? Where would it stop?
Yep Hitler started with that.... see Armand Gatti play deals with Deaf hiding during the war...
Ginny
And do we really want to give the government this kind of control over women??? I don't think so.
I agree, this is a huge issue and we've all seen and cared for these patients that we say "they shouldn't be allowed to reproduce", but to forcibly sterilize someone....
Again, it is hard to sort out truth from fiction due to the media hype in this case, but it is my understanding that an RN or Social Worker from the hospital where she delivered contacted Child Protective Services after the babies were born to report a case of possible abuse/neglect. Frankly this is believable to me, as many states mandate reporting of report (+) newborn drug screens.
) that this lady had called a relative and tried to make a deal to sell the baby to this relative for bond money.
NicuGal, MSN, RN
2,743 Posts
I too am appalled at some of the comments...I also think that there is more to the story. I have seen some of the mentally ill moms and it is truly sad. Many people with certain kinds of delusions will refuse surgery for a multitude of reasons. Only they know what is going on in their heads. I would love to know if they got a psych consult...they could have put a 3 day hold on her if they felt she was endangering herself.
Newgrad2004....unfortunatley, that is what many mentally ill people do...and then the kids are brought to us and they would have been much better off if they died. And if a mom tests positive for drugs they don't go to jail, that is for sure. They test positive, go to rehab and 90% of the time they get the kids upon discharge.