Considering the article states that she didn’t have enough money to have a funeral for the fetus, I don’t think she had the means to raise a child. It’s impossible to “get around to” doing something that isn’t offered easily and affordably. I don’t think giving her child abortion pills when she was over 20 weeks pregnant was her first choice, I think it was a move of desperation.
From the article: “her family could not have afforded a funeral for fetal remains, according to Courthouse News. (In a financial affidavit obtained by Vice, Jessica Burgess said she had $400 to her name.)”
That would be horrific but a lot of people here are assuming.
And that’s not much of an excuse. Should we allow her to do a 9 month abortion because she couldn’t get around to it earlier? No.
Considering the article states that she didn’t have enough money to have a funeral for the fetus, I don’t think she had the means to raise a child. It’s impossible to “get around to” doing something that isn’t offered easily and affordably. I don’t think giving her child abortion pills when she was over 20 weeks pregnant was her first choice, I think it was a move of desperation.
Who the hell has a funeral for an abortion?
From the article: “her family could not have afforded a funeral for fetal remains, according to Courthouse News. (In a financial affidavit obtained by Vice, Jessica Burgess said she had $400 to her name.)”
I understand she can’t afford it, but who even considers having a funeral for an abortion? That’s fucking weird
I think some states have laws that if you have an abortion you have to have a funeral as a way to shame the mother for having the abortion. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/state-mandated-mourning-for-aborted-fetuses/482688/
People can’t afford to care for newborns either, doesn’t give you the right to kill them.
It shouldn’t have come to that, of course, but the court heard her defense and rejected it.
With all due respect (which is none), that’s dingbattery.