quote:A woman accused of murder because she allegedly refused a Caesarean section that could have saved her unborn twin denied the charge Friday, rejecting claims that she avoided the surgery because she feared scarring.
"It was all medical concern. None of it was vanity, " Melissa Ann Rowland told the Associated Press a day after prosecutors charged her with exhibiting "depraved indifference to human life" in avoiding the C-section. One nurse told police Rowland said she would rather "lose one of the babies than be cut like that."
Rowland said her other two young children, ages 7 and 9, both were delivered by C-section.
Um...she's had two children via C-section already? It seems like she'd be a prime candidate for yet a 3rd C-section anyway. Surely she would've known that before even getting pregnant, let alone in the time leading up to the birth.
This whole thing sounds weird.
Is it possible that she was in so much pain from labor (I assume the other twin was delivered vaginally) that she could have said that and not really meant it?
I can't believe they're charging her with anything.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
