She alleges in her suit that “she witnessed the murder of her daughter” and said she “sustained severe emotional distress, shock and psychic trauma which have resulted in discernible bodily injury.”
The mother went for an abortion with the intent of killing her child, but the doctor failed to kill the child until after it was born and now the mother who wanted the child dead is suing because the child is dead? I’m confused.
It's our culture. The whole mindset of "It's my body! It's just tissue!" has been promoted ad hoc just so it's easier to go to the clinic.
Course, that only makes the reality all the more jarring when you realize it wasn't just 'tissue'. I think that was the case here.
The mother went for an abortion with the intent of killing her child, but the doctor failed to kill the child until after it was born and now the mother who wanted the child dead is suing because the child is dead? I’m confused.
“This is not about a pot of gold,” said Tom Pennekamp, her attorney
There’s your answer. She saw a pot of gold.
Indeed... As am I, but neither of us are more "confused" than this "mother" apparently is...
the infowarrior