I can't even. Woman askes for IVF after killing

[AuntCloud]

her four-year old.

Here's the story. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 68,00.html

IVF in Israel is free to all until you have two living bio children. Women are eligible for unlimited treatments until age 45, if they need to use donor eggs they need to pay out of pocket.

I can't for some reason produce a coherent sentence over her lawyer's argument that she's in great distress over the death of her son, and more so given that she's the one who killed him. Also: "every woman has the right to be a mother". Really? if I burned down my house, would you all chip in to buy me a new one?

We'll see how the judges will rule this one.

[ILoveJellybeans]

Someone who murdered a kid shouldnt be allowed become a parent as theyve proved that they are not safe to look after children.

[crazyforkate]

Maybe they should change the law so someone who has committed crimes against a child (abuse, neglect, etc, including this murder) would not be eligible?

[So Says I]

Maybe they should change the law so someone who has committed crimes against a child (abuse, neglect, etc, including this murder) would not be eligible?

I agree. They need to close up that scary loophole, for sure.

Why does this psychopath want another pregnancy? Because she knows that no currently living person cares about her anymore and she thinks this will create someone who loves her? Is it for attention? Better treatment in prison?

[Claddagh]

That is terrifying! She has already proven she's not safe to be around with children, giving her another is just adding fuel to the fire. What happens if she kills that poor child? She needs to be kept away from kids all together.

[AuntCloud]

The scary part is her lawyer's argument about her "right", which rides the coat-tails of a deep-sated conviction in Israel about the right to become parent - no mention of a kid's right not to be raised by a psychopath. Hopefully the judges will make a very clear stance, but I'm not holding my breath. Saying loud and clear that a woman does not deserve to be a mother is simply. Not. Done.

Judging by the comments on the article, people were equally outraged. Someone posted "sure, we'll give you one more child, but if you kill "this one as well, that's it - no more kids for you!".

[merrily]

Kids aren't merchandise or pets. "Oh, you killed your goldfish... don't worry you can get another one. And another one." Not that it's ok to kill goldfish. But the comparison is just... mind boggling

[OkToBeTakei]

It reads that she was suffering from depression at the time and also tried to kill her self.

Not that I believe that that she should be given the automatic right to IVF. But that article was quite sensational in nature.

[sugarloaf]

I'm very uneasy about taking away someone's rights if it's true that her actions were taken because she was suffering from mental illness at the time. (As someone who suffers from mental illness) But for the sake of the potential child in question, I'd want to make sure that she's stable (and with a support network to ease the burden of a relapse) before I'd want her to have any more kids. But then I'm in favour (in theory, I have no idea how one would regulate this in practice without veering into eugenics territory) of all people being stable enough (in every sense- financial, mental health, general not-being-a-douchebag, relationships, etc) before they bring a child into the world. (It's why I won't be having kids- I'd fail the kind of test that I'd want to set)

[MandyLaLa]

She's in prison, what happens after she has the kid? She's divorced from her husband so who would raise the child?

[mg78]

She's in prison, what happens after she has the kid? She's divorced from her husband so who would raise the child?

I was going to post the exact question. In some countries they have programs where the mothers can live with their children for a couple of year, I think until is time to go to school. Is there a similar program in Israel? If not, she would be doing little parenting and dumping the responsability on someone else.

[AuntCloud]

I don't think she and her lawyer have thought as far as, you know, the needs of a child past the newborn stage.

*She* wants a baby. It's about *her*.

[valsa]

I'm very uneasy about taking away someone's rights if it's true that her actions were taken because she was suffering from mental illness at the time.

Are they really taking away her rights though?

They aren't saying she can't have kids, the question is whether or not government benefits should be used to pay for her to have another kid when she's already killed one.

I see it as closer to questioning, say, whether government health care should pay for Viagra for convicted rapists.

[AuntCloud]

Are they really taking away her rights though?

They aren't saying she can't have kids, the question is whether or not government benefits should be used to pay for her to have another kid when she's already killed one.

I see it as closer to questioning, say, whether government health care should pay for Viagra for convicted rapists.

Funding is only part of the problem - if she was married, and younger, she could have got pregnant during a conjugal visit. She's not, and she asks for extreme measures to have some chance of conceiving. It's up to the court to decide if it's indeed a right.

[valsa]

Funding is only part of the problem - if she was married, and younger, she could have got pregnant during a conjugal visit. She's not, and she asks for extreme measures to have some chance of conceiving. It's up to the court to decide if it's indeed a right.

That's a good point. Do they allow infertile young women in prison for other crimes have government funded IVF?

[Minerva]

I can see why allowing her IVF could be considered reasonable given that mental illness played a role in her murdering her first child, but I think it's reasonable for the state to not want to fund the creation of a pregnancy that will end in a child being born in prison. I could also understand the state never agreeing to cover her IVF even if she was declared stable because a child's life isn't something you gamble on no matter how small the risk.

[Syd+Marky]

I sincerely hope they dont allow it,but they might-given tha the reason their government has this policy in the first place so they can "outbreed" the Palestinians.(this is my understanding)

[yetanothermeg]

Parents with previous child abuse/neglect convictions commonly lose their parental rights and have subsequent children taken from them at birth. Even if the court does rule that it is her legal right to use IVF, that might not stop the appropriate agency from placing the child in foster care.

[OkToBeTakei]

I read she was 47. Is this true?

[AnywhereButHere]

I see no mention that the mental illness that led her to kill her first child has miraculously been cured, so I would hope that the courts will take that into consideration and not give her a potential new victim. Providing, that is, that she even gets released in time to raise a child.

[Burris]

2csSPkBEKus

[AuntCloud]

I read she was 47. Is this true?

Age is nothing when technology is on our side! she'll have to use donor eggs and donor sperm. If she's granted the procedure, that is. I'm not sure if egg donors have any say over who the recipient of their DNA is, but I'm pretty certain if they had any say, not many would jump at the opportunity.

[Chicken bones]

Besides the whole killing the first child issue, if she was not all that emotionally/ mentally stable before, IVF could pose a real problem. Having gone through IVF myself, I can say all the injectable hormones and the stress of egg removal, transferral of any fertilized eggs, more injectables, etc is very hard. My hubs had to ride quite the emotional roller coaster with me. Not that this woman should be allowed near any children anyway!

[2xx1xy1JD]

Since she doesn't meet the criteria for IVF, I'll assume that her case doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell.

Of course, her conviction is a factor!

Years ago, I remember reading about women well into their 40s who were able to get IVF to have babies after losing an only child in the army - but I can't imagine the same sympathy were extend to a murderer.