Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Zarq
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:29 pm UTC
Location: Third Rock from Earth's Yellow Sun

Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Zarq » Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:12 pm UTC

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10321/1103874-53.stm

A 27-year-old pregnant woman's journey through the criminal justice system ended in her death from pneumonia following ineffective treatment in the Allegheny County Jail, according to a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court Tuesday.

Amy Lynn Gillespie, of Cuddy and, later, Knoxville, was jailed in December for violating the terms of her work release by becoming pregnant. Initially found to be in good health, according to the complaint filed by Downtown attorney Robert N. Peirce, she was complaining by the end of that month of difficulty breathing and discharge from her lungs.

Treated for viral influenza and denied diagnostic tests, according to the complaint, she worsened and then was transferred on Jan. 1 to UPMC Mercy. There she was found to have bacterial pneumonia, too far advanced to be successfully treated with antibiotics. She and the fetus, then 18 weeks along, died Jan. 13.

Mr. Peirce filed the civil rights lawsuit for the deceased's mother, Luann Gillespie Shultz.

Ms. Gillespie's legal troubles started with a pair of shoplifting convictions in 2004. In 2007, she was caught taking shampoo and steak from the Bridgeville Giant Eagle, and told the arresting officer that she did it because she was hungry. That year she was also caught stealing two $55 silver rings from Macy's, Downtown.

In 2008, she was picked up for soliciting men on Brownsville Road. Put on probation, she was referred to the Program for Reintegration Development and Empowerment of Exploited Individuals, which offers counseling and services to women arrested for prostitution.

She didn't comply with her probation terms and was sentenced to six to 12 months of jail or alternative housing in February 2009. Mr. Peirce said she would have been released around the beginning of this year had she not become pregnant, been jailed, and gotten sick. He said UPMC Mercy did not appear to be liable.

Named in the lawsuit are the county; jail Warden Ramon C. Rustin; the nonprofit Allegheny Correctional Health Services Inc., which provides medical care in the jail; its president, Dana Phillips; and several unnamed jail personnel.

Mr. Rustin and a county spokeswoman said they could not comment on litigation.

ACHS was created by the Allegheny County Health Department in 2000 to eliminate the contracting of jail health care to private firms. It has been sued six times in federal court since the beginning of 2009. Attorney Stanley A. Winikoff, who represents ACHS, said that's a modest number of lawsuits given that some 25,000 people spend time in the jail annually.

The jail's adequacy for women, notably those who are pregnant, has been criticized by the human rights organization New Voices Pittsburgh: Women of Color for Reproductive Justice.

Ms. Gillespie's story is "clearly a reproductive injustice, and it's a human rights violation," said LaTasha Mayes, executive director of New Voices Pittsburgh. She questioned whether a transfer to jail was an appropriate response to pregnancy.

"Ms. Gillespie should still be alive," she said.


I have absolutely no words to describe this.
You rang?

"It is better to shit yourself, than to die of constipation." - Some picture on reddit

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6539
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby sardia » Thu Nov 25, 2010 7:30 pm UTC

I saw the word contractors, so I'll assume it's about shoddy contractors doing shoddy work for absurd amounts of money. Now I'll precede to my rant on how contractors are ruining our governmental services. Yea, contractors suck, don't forget how much shit they stir up in Iraq and Afghanistan.

User avatar
Triangle_Man
WINNING
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 8:41 pm UTC
Location: CANADA

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Triangle_Man » Thu Nov 25, 2010 10:03 pm UTC

Well, this is the most horrifying example of human cruelty and stupidity that I've read today...
I really should be working right now, but somehow I don't have the energy.

The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:My moral system allows me to bitch slap you for typing that.

User avatar
PhoenixEnigma
Posts: 2303
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:11 am UTC
Location: Sasquatchawan, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby PhoenixEnigma » Thu Nov 25, 2010 11:59 pm UTC

Getting pregnant was in violation of her parole? WTF is that shit? I'm not particularly comfortable with governments removing reproductive rights as a punishment (or at all, for that matter).
"Optimism, pessimism, fuck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work." -Elon Musk
Shivahn wrote:I am a motherfucking sorceror.

User avatar
Triangle_Man
WINNING
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 8:41 pm UTC
Location: CANADA

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Triangle_Man » Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:30 am UTC

PhoenixEnigma wrote:Getting pregnant was in violation of her parole? WTF is that shit? I'm not particularly comfortable with governments removing reproductive rights as a punishment (or at all, for that matter).


From the looks of it, she was convicted of shoplifting, then of 'socilitation of men', and finally convicted of violating her parole. However, I don't see how any of those crimes translates into "cannot have babies" as a condition for release.
I really should be working right now, but somehow I don't have the energy.

The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:My moral system allows me to bitch slap you for typing that.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby The Reaper » Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:34 am UTC

Triangle_Man wrote:
PhoenixEnigma wrote:Getting pregnant was in violation of her parole? WTF is that shit? I'm not particularly comfortable with governments removing reproductive rights as a punishment (or at all, for that matter).


From the looks of it, she was convicted of shoplifting, then of 'socilitation of men', and finally convicted of violating her parole. However, I don't see how any of those crimes translates into "cannot have babies" as a condition for release.

From what I understand, the terms of her parole included not having sex because of the hooking? And thus, by becoming pregnant, she obviously violated her parole, which had she not gotten preggo, regardless of how much she had sex, would have been ignored, but since it couldnt be ignored, they had to put her in jail?

User avatar
Triangle_Man
WINNING
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 8:41 pm UTC
Location: CANADA

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Triangle_Man » Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:38 am UTC

The Reaper wrote:
Triangle_Man wrote:
PhoenixEnigma wrote:Getting pregnant was in violation of her parole? WTF is that shit? I'm not particularly comfortable with governments removing reproductive rights as a punishment (or at all, for that matter).


From the looks of it, she was convicted of shoplifting, then of 'socilitation of men', and finally convicted of violating her parole. However, I don't see how any of those crimes translates into "cannot have babies" as a condition for release.

From what I understand, the terms of her parole included not having sex because of the hooking? And thus, by becoming pregnant, she obviously violated her parole, which had she not gotten preggo, regardless of how much she had sex, would have been ignored, but since it couldnt be ignored, they had to put her in jail?


That sounds like 'clearly, she is pregant because she had sex, and because she had sex she violated her parole conditions, throw her in prison'. Which also sounds like a stupid argument on the part of the people making it.
I really should be working right now, but somehow I don't have the energy.

The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:My moral system allows me to bitch slap you for typing that.

User avatar
mmmcannibalism
Posts: 2150
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:16 am UTC

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby mmmcannibalism » Fri Nov 26, 2010 2:40 am UTC

sardia wrote:I saw the word contractors, so I'll assume it's about shoddy contractors doing shoddy work for absurd amounts of money. Now I'll precede to my rant on how contractors are ruining our governmental services. Yea, contractors suck, don't forget how much shit they stir up in Iraq and Afghanistan.


"ACHS was created by the Allegheny County Health Department in 2000 to eliminate the contracting of jail health care to private firms. It has been sued six times in federal court since the beginning of 2009. Attorney Stanley A. Winikoff, who represents ACHS, said that's a modest number of lawsuits given that some 25,000 people spend time in the jail annually."

It seems like this is the exact opposite of the case.

That sounds like 'clearly, she is pregant because she had sex, and because she had sex she violated her parole conditions, throw her in prison'. Which also sounds like a stupid argument on the part of the people making it.


Was the condition of parole not commiting another crime(prostitution here) or having sex(which seems extremely odd at best). If its the first then I agree; otherwise it is a logical argument.
Izawwlgood wrote:I for one would happily live on an island as a fuzzy seal-human.

Oregonaut wrote:Damn fetuses and their terroist plots.

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Jahoclave » Fri Nov 26, 2010 2:54 am UTC

Right, so I figure that's ever been a parole violation for a man now. Oh, right, let's punish women because they can have babies and shouldn't exert their sexuality. Yeah, justice is a woman my ass. I'm starting to see why she's mostly naked and blind, cause the patriarchs kicked the shit out of her before handing her the scales to hold for them.

User avatar
PhatPhungus
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:40 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby PhatPhungus » Fri Nov 26, 2010 3:33 am UTC

Also, her being pregnant doesn't prove that she willingly had sex. And not having sex should never constitute a parole violation.
__________
_____
__
_

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6539
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby sardia » Fri Nov 26, 2010 3:50 am UTC

mmmcannibalism wrote:
sardia wrote:I saw the word contractors, so I'll assume it's about shoddy contractors doing shoddy work for absurd amounts of money. Now I'll precede to my rant on how contractors are ruining our governmental services. Yea, contractors suck, don't forget how much shit they stir up in Iraq and Afghanistan.


"ACHS was created by the Allegheny County Health Department in 2000 to eliminate the contracting of jail health care to private firms. It has been sued six times in federal court since the beginning of 2009. Attorney Stanley A. Winikoff, who represents ACHS, said that's a modest number of lawsuits given that some 25,000 people spend time in the jail annually."

It seems like this is the exact opposite of the case.

That sounds like 'clearly, she is pregant because she had sex, and because she had sex she violated her parole conditions, throw her in prison'. Which also sounds like a stupid argument on the part of the people making it.


Was the condition of parole not commiting another crime(prostitution here) or having sex(which seems extremely odd at best). If its the first then I agree; otherwise it is a logical argument.
Hmmm, I misread the article then. I'll amend it to say, one always needs proper oversight.

User avatar
Brooklynxman
Because I'm Awesome
Posts: 609
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 4:27 pm UTC
Location: Here
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Brooklynxman » Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:43 am UTC

mmmcannibalism wrote:
sardia wrote:I saw the word contractors, so I'll assume it's about shoddy contractors doing shoddy work for absurd amounts of money. Now I'll precede to my rant on how contractors are ruining our governmental services. Yea, contractors suck, don't forget how much shit they stir up in Iraq and Afghanistan.


"ACHS was created by the Allegheny County Health Department in 2000 to eliminate the contracting of jail health care to private firms. It has been sued six times in federal court since the beginning of 2009. Attorney Stanley A. Winikoff, who represents ACHS, said that's a modest number of lawsuits given that some 25,000 people spend time in the jail annually."

It seems like this is the exact opposite of the case.


When you tell me how many of those 25,000 people in jail used the Health Service for more then mandatory check-ups, then I'll start being impressed. And then of those, how many had a serious affliction, not just the common cold. Apparently Allegheny County thinks none of us took a Statistics course.
We figure out what all this means, then do something large and violent

The thing about changing the world...once you do it the world's all different.

I'm Angel. I beat the bad guys.

Spoiler:
Image

meataxe
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:58 pm UTC

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby meataxe » Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:19 am UTC

Jahoclave wrote:Right, so I figure that's ever been a parole violation for a man now. Oh, right, let's punish women because they can have babies and shouldn't exert their sexuality. Yeah, justice is a woman my ass. I'm starting to see why she's mostly naked and blind, cause the patriarchs kicked the shit out of her before handing her the scales to hold for them.


Why turn this into a gender issue? If her parole agreement stated that she was not allowed to have sex (due to her previous conviction of prostituting herself)1, then I'm almost positive that had a man been in the same situation and there was proof that he had had sex, he would have been locked up as well. The issue here isn't the fact that she was a woman, it's the fact that she was locked up for becoming pregnant, and then not received the correct medical care that she should have, resulting in her death.

1 As the article doesn't actually mention what the terms of her parole were, this is an assumption. However, as cynical as I am about how horrible human beings can be, I doubt that it was specifically stated she couldn't become pregnant. While I think that it is still somewhat ridiculous for sexual intercourse to be a parole violation, it makes a lot more sense given her prior conviction.

User avatar
SummerGlauFan
Posts: 1746
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:27 pm UTC
Location: KS

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby SummerGlauFan » Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:22 am UTC

It's still creepy to think that the government can tell you not to have sex.
glasnt wrote:"As she raised her rifle against the creature, her hair fluttered beneath the red florescent lighting of the locked down building.

I knew from that moment that she was something special"


Outbreak, a tale of love and zombies.

In stores now.

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Jahoclave » Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:38 am UTC

meataxe wrote:
Jahoclave wrote:Right, so I figure that's ever been a parole violation for a man now. Oh, right, let's punish women because they can have babies and shouldn't exert their sexuality. Yeah, justice is a woman my ass. I'm starting to see why she's mostly naked and blind, cause the patriarchs kicked the shit out of her before handing her the scales to hold for them.


Why turn this into a gender issue? If her parole agreement stated that she was not allowed to have sex (due to her previous conviction of prostituting herself)1, then I'm almost positive that had a man been in the same situation and there was proof that he had had sex, he would have been locked up as well. The issue here isn't the fact that she was a woman, it's the fact that she was locked up for becoming pregnant, and then not received the correct medical care that she should have, resulting in her death.

1 As the article doesn't actually mention what the terms of her parole were, this is an assumption. However, as cynical as I am about how horrible human beings can be, I doubt that it was specifically stated she couldn't become pregnant. While I think that it is still somewhat ridiculous for sexual intercourse to be a parole violation, it makes a lot more sense given her prior conviction.

Because it is a gender issue. That's why.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7507
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Zamfir » Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:57 am UTC

SummerGlauFan wrote:It's still creepy to think that the government can tell you not to have sex.

But that is implicit in jailing people too. She was released from a jail sentence on condition of living in a halfway house, basically still a prison but very light. Not having sex would be pgsrt of a sentence that is still lighter than the original jail sentence. Of course, using pregnancy as a main determinant whether people had sex makes the parole conditions discriminatory.

But isn't the part where prisoners apparently die.from lack of medical care the serious part here? That presumably happens to men too, and at proportionally larger rates because there are more of them in jail.

I mean, imagine a guy who is caught shoplifting, breaks his parole conditions on a triviality, then dies from pneumonia for lack or care. That's about as bad, right?

meataxe
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:58 pm UTC

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby meataxe » Fri Nov 26, 2010 7:22 am UTC

Jahoclave wrote:Because it is a gender issue. That's why.

It's good to know you didn't read past my first sentence. The way I interpret it from reading the article is that it could be a gender issue, but there isn't enough information in there to specifically say that she was jailed because she was a pregnant woman, thus making me uncomfortable to jump to that conclusion. I still think that whoever made the decision to put her back in jail was in the wrong. I think that, in all likelihood, her pregnancy should not have been a violation of her parole. I also think that they should have given her proper medical care while in jail to prevent her death. It's an unfortunate event, but I still don't feel comfortable jumping to the gender conclusion without more facts.

User avatar
Rinsaikeru
Pawn, soon to be a Queen
Posts: 2166
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:26 am UTC
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Rinsaikeru » Fri Nov 26, 2010 7:26 am UTC

Yes, because we should always make sure to consider how much worse it is for men in any situation--particularly one that involves being jailed for pregnancy.
Rice Puddin.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby The Reaper » Fri Nov 26, 2010 7:30 am UTC

Rinsaikeru wrote:Yes, because we should always make sure to consider how much worse it is for men in any situation--particularly one that involves being jailed for pregnancy.

But pregnancy wasn't the reason for being jailed... Breaking parole was. Having sex was a factor of the parole, and pregnancy being the proof of having sex.

User avatar
mmmcannibalism
Posts: 2150
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:16 am UTC

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby mmmcannibalism » Fri Nov 26, 2010 7:32 am UTC

Awkward aside; I think its odd to see generally pro choice people willing to stress the fact that a woman was pregnant as a means to make her case appear more important.

Yes, because we should always make sure to consider how much worse it is for men in any situation--particularly one that involves being jailed for pregnancy.


Its valid here, if the condition of the parole was not having sex(something I think sound rather odd and possibly foolish); the fact that she was a woman only made it easier for her to be caught(via pregnancy). If the problem is that prisons have horrendous medical care, that isn't an issue about gender.
Izawwlgood wrote:I for one would happily live on an island as a fuzzy seal-human.

Oregonaut wrote:Damn fetuses and their terroist plots.

User avatar
PhoenixEnigma
Posts: 2303
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:11 am UTC
Location: Sasquatchawan, Canada
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby PhoenixEnigma » Fri Nov 26, 2010 7:34 am UTC

The Reaper wrote:
Rinsaikeru wrote:Yes, because we should always make sure to consider how much worse it is for men in any situation--particularly one that involves being jailed for pregnancy.
But pregnancy wasn't the reason for being jailed... Breaking parole was. Having sex was a factor of the parole, and pregnancy being the proof of having sex.
Do you have a citation for this? The article in the OP explicitly states it was for "becoming pregnant." Do you have a link to a source that indicates otherwise? I'm quite honestly curious, as the original article was not particularly informative on this particular matter.
"Optimism, pessimism, fuck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work." -Elon Musk
Shivahn wrote:I am a motherfucking sorceror.

User avatar
Hawknc
Oompa Loompa of SCIENCE!
Posts: 6986
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Hawknc » Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:09 am UTC

mmmcannibalism wrote:Awkward aside; I think its odd to see generally pro choice people willing to stress the fact that a woman was pregnant as a means to make her case appear more important.

You seem to misunderstand what the word "choice" means. Admittedly we're assuming she chose to become pregnant, but only because there's no evidence to the contrary. Pro-choice does not mean anti-pregnancy.
ImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7507
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Zamfir » Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:14 am UTC

PhoenixEnigma wrote:Do you have a citation for this? The article in the OP explicitly states it was for "becoming pregnant." Do you have a link to a source that indicates otherwise? I'm quite honestly curious, as the original article was not particularly informative on this particular matter.

This article from the same paper says
Women and Girls Foundation CEO Heather Arnet said that jail Warden Ramon Rustin has worked with similar coalitions to resolve issues like the shackling of women during childbirth, which was discontinued.

She said the Gillespie lawsuit "raises so many questions about what the quality of care was while she was in jail."

She also said that the circumstances of Ms. Gillespie's return to jail raise the question of whether no-sexual-contact conditions for work release may be inherently discriminatory.


Which suggest that no sexual contact was the condition, not pregnancy. That of course raises other issues, like whether men get similar conditions and whether there are other checks than pregnancy. If there are little to no other checks, it would still be an effective pregnancy condition. Still, for the moment it seems best to assume the condition was "no sexual contact", not "No pregnancies".

This is the program she was initially send to, which from to looks tries to teach a different lifestyle to drug-addicted women who were convicted for prostitution. I can imagine that a strict "no sexual contact" rule makes sense in that context, and that it was intended as a genuine contribution to improving her life over the long run, not as a punishment.

But the article in the OP is a bit vague, and suggests she might have been transferred from that program to another, more stricter program before she was send to jail.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Malice » Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:29 am UTC

meataxe wrote:
Jahoclave wrote:Because it is a gender issue. That's why.

It's good to know you didn't read past my first sentence. The way I interpret it from reading the article is that it could be a gender issue, but there isn't enough information in there to specifically say that she was jailed because she was a pregnant woman, thus making me uncomfortable to jump to that conclusion. I still think that whoever made the decision to put her back in jail was in the wrong. I think that, in all likelihood, her pregnancy should not have been a violation of her parole. I also think that they should have given her proper medical care while in jail to prevent her death. It's an unfortunate event, but I still don't feel comfortable jumping to the gender conclusion without more facts.


It's a gender issue. Because if the crime is having sex, women are more likely to exhibit signs of committing that crime. Therefore women are unfairly targeted by that law (or more specifically the level of enforcement that it presumably sees, wherein people are only punished if their actions are noticeable).
Image

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Jahoclave » Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:45 am UTC

Malice wrote:
meataxe wrote:
Jahoclave wrote:Because it is a gender issue. That's why.

It's good to know you didn't read past my first sentence. The way I interpret it from reading the article is that it could be a gender issue, but there isn't enough information in there to specifically say that she was jailed because she was a pregnant woman, thus making me uncomfortable to jump to that conclusion. I still think that whoever made the decision to put her back in jail was in the wrong. I think that, in all likelihood, her pregnancy should not have been a violation of her parole. I also think that they should have given her proper medical care while in jail to prevent her death. It's an unfortunate event, but I still don't feel comfortable jumping to the gender conclusion without more facts.


It's a gender issue. Because if the crime is having sex, women are more likely to exhibit signs of committing that crime. Therefore women are unfairly targeted by that law (or more specifically the level of enforcement that it presumably sees, wherein people are only punished if their actions are noticeable).

Not to mention, the only way to prove that a guy did the act is to either catch him doing it, or a paternity test: which, you know, they have to actually have to wait a bit for. Unless, of course, masturbation counts, which I'm fairly certain it doesn't. So even then, it's unfairly applied across gender.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7507
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Zamfir » Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:55 am UTC

Malice wrote:It's a gender issue. Because if the crime is having sex, women are more likely to exhibit signs of committing that crime.

But it is important to note that breaking conditions of the parole is the crime, not the actions themselves. The parole is offered as a milder alternative to jail time, and it can have conditions attached that are no way to be seen as crimes in themselves.

In general, it's a good thing that people get conditions that are aimed at their personal situation. Such conditions can be used in an attempt at rehabilitation, with the threat of jail time as enforcement. Rehabilitation is out of necessity something that requires a different approach for different people.

In this particular case, drug-related prostitution is a problematic situation, most of all for the women themselves. It's also one people have great trouble getting out of by themselves, and often they have little support anymore from friends or family who would normally give the 'soft' enforcement of a different lifestyle.

In that situation, the best conditions from a point of rehabilitation are going to be gender-specific. I have no idea whether a no-sexual-contact rule is a good condition for that, to judge that requires much more experience with actual programs than I have. But it is important that the problematic situation itself has a very strong gender-specific component to it, and as a result even the best way to treat the problem might well have to have a gender-specific, enforced part.

There simply is a trade-off between rehabilitation and blind justice. Not just with respect to gender, but in general. The best rehabilitation program for different situations will be different, and there is a definite risk involved that some people end up with heavier sentences than others. A good judge and legal system balances those.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Malice » Fri Nov 26, 2010 9:52 am UTC

Zamfir wrote:
Malice wrote:It's a gender issue. Because if the crime is having sex, women are more likely to exhibit signs of committing that crime.

But it is important to note that breaking conditions of the parole is the crime, not the actions themselves. The parole is offered as a milder alternative to jail time, and it can have conditions attached that are no way to be seen as crimes in themselves.


It isn't important to note that, which is why I decided not to do so.

In general, it's a good thing that people get conditions that are aimed at their personal situation. Such conditions can be used in an attempt at rehabilitation, with the threat of jail time as enforcement. Rehabilitation is out of necessity something that requires a different approach for different people.

In this particular case, drug-related prostitution is a problematic situation, most of all for the women themselves. It's also one women have great trouble getting out of by themselves, and often they have little support anymore from friends or family who would normally give the 'soft' enforcement of a different lifestyle.


Gender assumption you're making: all prostitutes are women.

In that situation, the best conditions from a point of rehabilitation are going to be gender-specific. I have no idea whether a no-sexual-contact rule is a good condition for that, to judge that requires much more experience with actual programs than I have. But it is important that the problematic situation itself has a very strong gender-specific component to it, and as a result even the best way to treat the problem might well have to have a gender-specific, enforced part.


Why, though? Seriously, explain it to me. All you're doing is saying "the behavior has something to do with gender and so rehabilitation has to have something to do with gender." That's not an explanation, it's hand-waving.

What I am saying is, on a literal, physical level, when you tell a man and a woman not to have sex with anyone, and you don't have a way to check, you're only going to end up violating parole for the women. Your response seems to be, "Well, women have sex, so when we tell them not to have sex, it's okay if we only catch them having sex because they're women," a sentence which goes around and around in my mind until my brain leaks out my ears because it doesn't make any goddamn sense.
Image

User avatar
Gellert1984
Posts: 588
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:07 pm UTC
Location: South Wales UK

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Gellert1984 » Fri Nov 26, 2010 10:37 am UTC

[spoiler=Slightly off topic and a total fiction, just to satisfy my curiosity.]If the parole officer had sex with the woman, who became pregnant and was subsequently found in breach of her parole and returned to jail, where she catches and dies from pneumonia, would the parole officer be liable for prosecution for manslaughter?[/spoiler]

OT: Ignoring that we have no case details to work from. I feel that finding her in breach of parole for sexual activity by way of pregnancy is decidedly off. Not least of which being that there are more ways to become pregant than consensual sex. I think the main issue I have with this is that men can't become pregnant, so how do you catch a man violating the no-sex thing? Realistically, you can't without a great deal of work, following the guy around and catching him red handed.
The only time I question the right to Free Speech is when I watch Fox News, probably due to the fact that I don't think they really believe in it. -Elisa Scaldaferri

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7507
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Zamfir » Fri Nov 26, 2010 11:22 am UTC

Malice wrote:What I am saying is, on a literal, physical level, when you tell a man and a woman not to have sex with anyone, and you don't have a way to check, you're only going to end up violating parole for the women. Your response seems to be, "Well, women have sex, so when we tell them not to have sex, it's okay if we only catch them having sex because they're women," a sentence which goes around and around in my mind until my brain leaks out my ears because it doesn't make any goddamn sense.

Yes, of course, and if you look in this thread you'll see that I made this exact same point twice already. By the time I made the third post, i thought that point was by now so obvious that it didn't need a third repeat from me. If you have a program that uses pregnancy as sole or main check for having sex, it's just a stupid, discriminating program.

Thing is, we don't know whether the program uses pregnancy as sole means of checking for sex. From the outside, and from some articles on it I read, the program she was in looks like a genuine effort to improve the lives of the women involved. So for the moment, it seems to fair to assume that this programs restricts sex with at least good intentions, as part of a general program based on experience, and that it tries to hold up its rules by more means than pregnancy tests.

Perhaps that is wrong, and the program is a nasty, power-abusing institution that just forbids sex out of cruelty or moral righteousness, or doesn't really do anything at all except receive a check and perform pregnancy tests. Those are definitely real options, and if so, it's clearly wrong. It is however not the only option.

Why, though? Seriously, explain it to me. All you're doing is saying "the behavior has something to do with gender and so rehabilitation has to have something to do with gender." That's not an explanation, it's hand-waving.

It happens to be a program aimed at female prostitutes. Male prostitutes move in different circles, with different social dynamics, and it makes sense to have different programs and policies aimed at male addicted prostitutes. I have no idea whether such programs include limitations on sex.

These programs tend to have strong rules on more than sex. This one is described as a work program, which presumably means people are forced to accept certain work and to attend to this work. There is a supervised housing component to program. They actively ban drugs, and often alcohol too. Some programs (don't know about this one) forbid people to see certain of their friends, to cut people off of their old life style. The hope is to make people used to a new lifestyle, without criminality and hopefully better for the people in it too.

If a program is aimed at people, male or female, who used to prostitute to buy drugs, it makes sense to focus rules on this aspect. For the period of the probation, the program can use extra strong measures to keep people away from drugs and from prostitution. Ideally, you can device a way to keep people out of prostitution without keeping them away from consensual sex.

In practice, that might be hard or impossible. The program might be able to keep people from street-walking, but not from getting sexual partners who give them financial support. If the goal of the program is to keep people out of prostitution for the period of the parole, the only realistic condition might well be a strict ban on sexual contact.

User avatar
Stacy S.
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 3:46 pm UTC
Location: Virginia Beach, Virginia

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Stacy S. » Fri Nov 26, 2010 11:53 am UTC

It's hard to piece this together using the link in the OP. Making a judgment call would be like a jury retiring to render a verdict before the defense has spoken. I'm a little skeptical. I think the crime or injustice in this case, if there really is one, is solely that of improper or inadequate medical care for pneumonia.

She was a prostitute and regardless about how anyone might feel about that being a crime, it still is one.

She was given the opportunity to successfully complete a rehabilitation program in lieu of doing jail time for the crime. She chose the program. A little googling reveals that said program -- The Program for Reintegration Development and Empowerment of Exploited Individuals -- is a pretty strict program with lots of rules for behavior. While it is not jail, it's not exactly freedom either. She was likely (almost certainly) inpatient, meaning little or no unsupervised social interaction with the outside world and strict rules of social interaction with other patients. I suspect that the actions necessary to get pregnant are probably a pretty serious violation of those rules. Thus, she was booted from the program. Back to jail to do your sentence.

That makes the whole pregnancy thing a media-tried red herring.

Why would they bother? Because on its own, nobody would give a damn that a convicted thief and street hooker died as a result of poor medical care in a jail.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:02 pm UTC

Stacy S. wrote:I think the crime or injustice in this case, if there really is one, is solely that of improper or inadequate medical care for pneumonia.

She was a prostitute and regardless about how anyone might feel about that being a crime, it still is one.

Justice ≠ the Law.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
broken_escalator
They're called stairs
Posts: 3312
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:49 am UTC
Location: _| ̄|○

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby broken_escalator » Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:19 pm UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
Stacy S. wrote:I think the crime or injustice in this case, if there really is one, is solely that of improper or inadequate medical care for pneumonia.

She was a prostitute and regardless about how anyone might feel about that being a crime, it still is one.

Justice ≠ the Law.

I think the injustice bit refers to the later part of that sentence. As in, receiving improper or inadequate medical care for pneumonia (in jail) is an injustice.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:22 pm UTC

Clearly, but the sentence also excludes other forms of injustice from the case. From the next sentence, the argument seems to be that the law is the law, and so long as it's followed there can be no injustice. And that's bullshit.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Jessica
Jessica, you're a ...
Posts: 8337
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:57 pm UTC
Location: Soviet Canuckistan

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Jessica » Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:29 pm UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:Clearly, but the sentence also excludes other forms of injustice from the case. From the next sentence, the argument seems to be that the law is the law, and so long as it's followed there can be no injustice. And that's bullshit.
Also, the fact that she does clearly state that:
Stacy S. wrote:Because on its own, nobody would give a damn that a convicted thief and street hooker died as a result of poor medical care in a jail.
doogly wrote:On a scale of Mr Rogers to Fascism, how mean do you think we're being?
Belial wrote:My goal is to be the best brain infection any of you have ever had.

User avatar
broken_escalator
They're called stairs
Posts: 3312
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:49 am UTC
Location: _| ̄|○

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby broken_escalator » Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:44 pm UTC

I'm trying to see how saying we have a law against prostitution so it is a crime regardless of personal feelings implies that the law is the law and there can be no injustice. I feel like I don't understand your position, though I may agree with it.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:10 pm UTC

Stacy asserts as the thesis of her post that "the crime or injustice in this case, if there really is one, is solely that of improper or inadequate medical care for pneumonia" [emphasis mine]. This claim implies that injustice in this case does not lie in prosecution for prostitution, and Stacy immediately highlights this implication by explicitly discussing the prosecution.

As every other part of her post relates to the claim which I have identified as her thesis, it seems plain that the sentence in question is also placed in support of that claim. If so, it is inadequate to support that claim because of the uncontroversial principle that the law is not necessarily just. The only other possibility is that this one sentence is meant as a complete aside from an otherwise cohesive post; I reject that possibility as absurd.
Last edited by TheGrammarBolshevik on Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:15 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Jessica
Jessica, you're a ...
Posts: 8337
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:57 pm UTC
Location: Soviet Canuckistan

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Jessica » Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:15 pm UTC

As always TGB says things better than I could. Essentially making an appeal to something being "a law" and then using that appeal to question whether an injustice occurred is incorrect. One can do something unjust even when following the letter of the law. In this instance, an injustice was served to this woman who died in custody, whether or not the law was properly applied.
doogly wrote:On a scale of Mr Rogers to Fascism, how mean do you think we're being?
Belial wrote:My goal is to be the best brain infection any of you have ever had.

User avatar
broken_escalator
They're called stairs
Posts: 3312
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:49 am UTC
Location: _| ̄|○

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby broken_escalator » Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:06 pm UTC

Oh okay, now I see what you're saying. I do agree with your position and thank you for clarifying for me.

User avatar
PhatPhungus
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:40 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby PhatPhungus » Fri Nov 26, 2010 11:42 pm UTC

The problem is, her being pregnant doesn't even prove that she willingly had sex. Unless she admitted to it, they have no way of knowing whether she had sex or was raped.
__________
_____
__
_

Arete
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 12:13 am UTC

Re: Woman jailed for becoming pregnant, then dies.

Postby Arete » Sat Nov 27, 2010 1:30 am UTC

Some points:


1) Condoms. Or temporary intra-musculature (18 months normally) contraceptives. If you're going to put stupid legal ties on sexual relations, then give her a decent chance. Hell, the US is the only 'civilised' country which is paying drug users to get sterilised.

Oh. Wait.


No. Legally you can NEVER FUCKING EVER make a human being "not have sex". You can make them not have sex for money; the rest is total Nazism.

2) Oh..wait.



Yep, I give up.

Ms. Gillespie's legal troubles started with a pair of shoplifting convictions in 2004. In 2007, she was caught taking shampoo and steak from the Bridgeville Giant Eagle, and told the arresting officer that she did it because she was hungry. That year she was also caught stealing two $55 silver rings from Macy's, Downtown.

In 2008, she was picked up for soliciting men on Brownsville Road. Put on probation, she was referred to the Program for Reintegration Development and Empowerment of Exploited Individuals, which offers counseling and services to women arrested for prostitution.

She didn't comply with her probation terms and was sentenced to six to 12 months of jail or alternative housing in February 2009.



4 counts of minor larceny. ($110 worth of rings. Rack that one up against sub-prime loans.. please do.)

1 count prostitution.

1 count of getting pregnant.

1 death sentence.


Seriously.


If this is the "most sophisticated" 'democracy' (cough.. Republic) then fuck this shit. No better than burqa's.



If you're allowing this kind of thing, and not stringing up your corrupt politicians (Look, corrupt Republican!) then you're too fucking soft.


Left doesn't mean wet. I despair of this forum and the sentiments within it - the rest of the world isn't playing nice, and you debate this like it doesn't matter.


"Make. It. Personal".


Otherwise, stop posting, the whinge is pathetic.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: asoban, DJGreen, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 9 guests