SALT LAKE CITY (March 12) - As Melissa Ann Rowland's unborn twins got closer to birth, doctors repeatedly told her they would likely die if she did not have a Caesarean section. She refused, and one later was stillborn.

Authorities charged 28-year-old Rowland with murder on Thursday, saying she exhibited ''depraved indifference to human life,'' according to court documents. Prosecutors said Rowland didn't want to be scarred, and one nurse told police that Rowland said she would rather ''lose one of the babies than be cut like that.''

The case could affect abortion rights and open the door to the prosecution of mothers who smoke or don't follow their obstetrician's diet, said Marguerite Driessen, a law professor at Brigham Young University.

''It's very troubling to have somebody come in and say we're going to charge this mother for murder because we don't like the choices she made,'' she said.

Court documents did not list an address for Rowland, and she is not listed in telephone books for the Salt Lake City area. It could not immediately be determined whether she had an attorney.

Rowland was warned numerous times between Christmas and Jan. 9 that her unborn twins would likely die if she did not get immediate medical treatment, the documents allege. When she delivered them on Jan. 13, one survived and the other was stillborn.

The woman sought medical advice in December because she hadn't felt the fetuses move, documents said.

Regina Davis, a nurse at LDS Hospital in Salt Lake, told police that during a visit there, Rowland was recommended two hospitals to go to for immediate care. Rowland allegedly said she would rather have both twins die before she went to either of the suggested hospitals.

On Jan. 2, a doctor at LDS Hospital saw Rowland and recommended she immediately undergo a C-section based on the results of an ultrasound and the fetus' slowing heart rates. Rowland left after signing a document stating that she understood that leaving might result in death or brain injury to one or both twins, the doctor told police.

The same day, a nurse at Salt Lake Regional Hospital saw Rowland, who allegedly told her she had left LDS Hospital because the doctor wanted to cut her ''from breast bone to pubic bone,'' a procedure that would ''ruin her life.''

LDS Hospital can't comment on the case because of medical privacy issues and the pending court case, said spokesman Robert Pexton.

The doctor who performed an autopsy found that the fetus died two days before delivery and would have survived if Rowland had undergone a C-section when urged to do so. It was not immediately clear how far along Rowland was in her pregnancy.

She was charged in Salt Lake County with one first-degree felony count of criminal homicide. Rowland was being held on $250,000 bail at the Salt Lake County jail, and was scheduled to appear in court Tuesday.

If convicted, she could be sentenced to between five years and life in prison.

A spokesman for the district attorney, Kent Morgan, said Rowland is married and has other children, but he did not know how many.

''We are unable to find any reason other than the cosmetic motivations by the mother'' for her decision, Morgan said.

Caesarean sections usually involve delivery through a surgical incision in the abdomen and front wall of the uterus. Dr. Christian Morgan, a family practice doctor who regularly performs C-sections at the University of Utah Health Sciences Center, said he had never seen vertical skin incisions performed at LDS Hospital for a first-time C-section.

''Even when you need to get a baby out in minutes, it can still be done in the bikini incision,'' Christian Morgan said.

I don't believe she should be charged with murder.

First, there is no gaurantee the baby would have survived with the Caesarean section.

Second, its not as if she killed the baby. The baby dieing was an act of god or some other force that she had no control of.

Charged with murder, for chosing to try and give birth the natural way, based on something that *might* happen? Are you kidding me?

Yeah here's what she looks like..might give you nightmares...http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/US/West/03/11/mother.charged.ap/story.rowland.ap.jpg

What desperate guy boned her? :eek: I'm suprised he was able to get it up :eek:

Perhaps she looks better from the neck down.

I saw this on the news this morning. It's crazy!

Originally posted by Dutabi84
Charged with murder, for chosing to try and give birth the natural way, based on something that *might* happen? Are you kidding me?

No she refused to have the C section only because she didn't want a scar! She deserves to be charged for murder.

Originally posted by MandieR1980
No she refused to have the C section only because she didn't want a scar! She deserves to be charged for murder.
I don't know about that.

There is no law in America prohibiting abortion. It's still pro choice, right? Well, in this case, it's pretty much a judgement call. She was still pregnant when she made the choice, and I firmly believe that a woman chooses what she wants to do with HER body and it's not up to anyone else to question her choices or tell her what's right and what's wrong. Those babies weren't born yet. She didn't kill them with her bear hands. So I wouldn't necessarily say that she's a murderer. But what I wonder is, if she didn't want the babies in the first place [and she mustn't have considering the fact that a stupid scar meant more to her than her children] than why did she carry them to full term? She could've had an abortion, but she waited until the last minute to decide that she didn't care about the fate of the babies. I wouldn't call her a murderer, but she certainly is a fool.

Originally posted by Sourbabie
I don't know about that.

There is no law in America prohibiting abortion. It's still pro choice, right? Well, in this case, it's pretty much a judgement call. She was still pregnant when she made the choice, and I firmly believe that a woman chooses what she wants to do with HER body and it's not up to anyone else to question her choices or tell her what's right and what's wrong. Those babies weren't born yet. She didn't kill them with her bear hands. So I wouldn't necessarily say that she's a murderer. But what I wonder is, if she didn't want the babies in the first place [and she mustn't have considering the fact that a stupid scar meant more to her than her children] than why did she carry them to full term? She could've had an abortion, but she waited until the last minute to decide that she didn't care about the fate of the babies. I wouldn't call her a murderer, but she certainly is a fool.

Abortion is only legal for a certain time during pregnancy and then it's murder. That's why Scott Peterson is up for 2 charges of murder not one.

Originally posted by MandieR1980
Abortion is only legal for a certain time during pregnancy and then it's murder. That's why Scott Peterson is up for 2 charges of murder not one.
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know that.

Well then she is a murderer.

Originally posted by Dutabi84
Charged with murder, for chosing to try and give birth the natural way, based on something that *might* happen? Are you kidding me?

yea, that's pretty dumb...she shouldn't be charged...


and ok, this is rude, but come on, looking at her, should she REALLY be worrying about a C-section scar? Ok, that was a cheap shot...but I'm 14, what are you gonna do, sue me on a charge of verbal assualt? But seriously, my mom has had 3 C-sections and I've never seen a scar...so it's not all about the scar factor either.

Originally posted by Ewan's My Man
and ok, this is rude, but come on, looking at her, should she REALLY be worrying about a C-section scar?

I was thinking the exact same thing.

Originally posted by Ewan's My Man
yea, that's pretty dumb...she shouldn't be charged...


and ok, this is rude, but come on, looking at her, should she REALLY be worrying about a C-section scar? Ok, that was a cheap shot...but I'm 14, what are you gonna do, sue me on a charge of verbal assualt? But seriously, my mom has had 3 C-sections and I've never seen a scar...so it's not all about the scar factor either.

Same here. My stepmom had C-sections with all her kids (she had 3 too - but her 2nd child died of SIDS when he was 3 months old in March '85), and I've never seen scars on her, either.

My mom had C sections with both me and my brother her scar is there but it's very close to her private area so that's probably why you've never seen it.

Originally posted by webwarrior762002
Originally posted by MandieR1980:
My mom had C sections with both me and my brother her scar is there but it's very close to her private area so that's probably why you've never seen it.

I want to ask you something:do you hate your mother for having
a C section? And do you think people who have them will be
scarred for life?

no why would I hate my mom for having a C section? and you get scars from having any surgery I got a huge one from my gastric bypass.

She most defnitely should be charged with murder. Her actions were callous, dengerous, and I believe, because she knew of the great risks long before, she did them with premeditation.

Of course by the looks of her, she'd be wise to plead insane. She deserves prison time though. And for God's Sake, I hope she has her tubes tied.

Originally posted by webwarrior762002


I want to ask you something:do you hate your mother for having
a C section? And do you think people who have them will be
scarred for life?

Why would someone hate their parents for having a C Section? I wouldn't be here if my mom didn't. There was no way possible for me or my sisters to be born other then a C-Section.

She's just selfish and vain.

Originally posted by Ewan's My Man
Why would someone hate their parents for having a C Section? I wouldn't be here if my mom didn't. There was no way possible for me or my sisters to be born other then a C-Section.

Yeah, I'm a little stumped by that question.

My sister and I also had to be born that way. Mine was emergency, so my mother has a big straight scar instead of a nice little C shape--oooh, big deal. (I actually like the idea that I was born that way, lol. My mother likes it better too.)

Originally posted by Dutabi84
Yeah here's what she looks like..might give you nightmares...http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/US/West/03/11/mother.charged.ap/story.rowland.ap.jpg

They kept flashing that on Inside Edition. Scary.

Originally posted by MandieR1980
no why would I hate my mom for having a C section? and you get scars from having any surgery I got a huge one from my gastric bypass.

Hell, I have acne scars. Scars are not the end of the world. Like was said before, if she really didn't want them, why didn't abort sooner?? Unless she planned on getting a lot of dough from the adoption. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by dawsongirl

They kept flashing that on Inside Edition. Scary.

Yes, I just saw that segment on Inside Edition 5 minutes ago.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
IE said that an autopsy of the baby boy that died revealed he would have survived if she had had the C-section. She claimed that a fear of a scar was not true, saying she had had 2 c-sections before. Then she was acting like she didn't know the risk, saying that if she had known what she could have done to save "them" (them? Um, one of your children did survive lady) she would have.

What a fruitcake.

Oh my gosh, that is awful. How could someone do that to their own babies? I hope she gets life in prison, from the sounds of things she knew all the risks and was just to vain to chance a scar. That is pathetic, disgusting, and heartless.

If it's true that she caused her child's death to avoid a scar, she deserves to rot in a cell....where I'm sure her fellow inmates will give her many scars, among other things.

Originally posted by webwarrior762002

I do not condone risking the life of an infant, but I also can
understand her point of view:she would probably have been
ostracized for life if she had gotten a C section.

"Ostracized for life if she had gotten a C section"? What planet are you from? For starters, about 1 million are performed each year in the United States.

Originally posted by webwarrior762002

I meant the scar probably would have made her the object
of ridcule by a number of people in society.

LOL. I give up.

Originally posted by Cashodeen
LOL. I give up.

LOL me too that's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard that scar isn't even seen unless you take your underwear off LOL DUH

Originally posted by webwarrior762002


I meant the scar probably would have made her the object
of ridcule by a number of people in society.


Millions upon millions of people have scars...and millions of women have had caesarean sections. How would that make her the center of ridicule? More people lookd down on her now for what she did to her babies. I mean come on! How selfish is it to rather have one of your children die than have a scar?

This woman is pretty damn selfish but I don't think she deserves to be charged with murder. While it is true that she knew of the danger of having her children the natural way, she couldn't have known for sure that one would die. She just made an extremely stupid choice. I don't see why she couldn't have just had the C-section. Scars are not a big deal and it would likely not even be visible when she is dressed. My mother had a C-section with both me and my brother (with me she had placenta previa and with him it was just because his head was too big :lol: ) and she doesn't have a scar at all really. It just sort of faded over the years.

Originally posted by webwarrior762002
Originally posted by Cashodeen:
"Ostracized for life if she had gotten a C section"? What planet are you from? For starters, about 1 million are performed each year in the United States.

I meant the scar probably would have made her the object
of ridcule by a number of people in society.

How so? No one sees those things. And won't she be ostracized now anyway? More so even.

My mom said that woman said she already has scars from 2 previous c-sections so what would 1 more scar matter. I don't understand why she couldn't handle one more scar.

My mom also said that when she reads this kind of stuff in the paper she feels like cutting it all out and comparing it to articles about people having partial birth abortion and then sending it to someone, because they will prosecute someone who has a stillborn baby but they won't prosecute someone who has had a partial birth abortion.

Originally posted by webwarrior762002
I meant the scar probably would have made her the object
of ridcule by a number of people in society.
Ok, even if that was the case (which it's not because millions of women have scars for C-sections), a scar or ridicule is no reason to sacrifice a baby's life.

Originally posted by webwarrior762002

I meant the scar probably would have made her the object
of ridcule by a number of people in society.

A c-section scar is in a very private area that people just don't flash in public. If she were to wear anything that was skimpy enough to show it, no one would be looking at the scar.

Object of ridicule.... "I got this scar by saving my childrens life" or "My tummy is so pretty, thank God i let my baby die"

What's going to happen to the surviving baby? Is it going to Government facilities?? Staying with family members?

Originally posted by Bumblebee
This woman is pretty damn selfish but I don't think she deserves to be charged with murder. While it is true that she knew of the danger of having her children the natural way, she couldn't have known for sure that one would die. She just made an extremely stupid choice. I don't see why she couldn't have just had the C-section. Scars are not a big deal and it would likely not even be visible when she is dressed. My mother had a C-section with both me and my brother (with me she had placenta previa and with him it was just because his head was too big :lol: ) and she doesn't have a scar at all really. It just sort of faded over the years.

My mom had a c-section to get me out, too. Guess why? My head was also too big. I don't know if my mom has scars or not, I've never asked to see them. I've just never thought of it.



I think that woman, judging by her picture anyway, does look very scary. Something about her eyes. Maybe it's just me, but she looked very uncaring and evil.

Originally posted by Janice Johnson
What's going to happen to the surviving baby? Is it going to Government facilities?? Staying with family members?

It's been adopted by another family.

My mom had a c-section with my sister. She was 3 weeks early, but turned out fine. Only weighed 5 lbs, 11 oz though when she was born. She's now 10, will be 11 in July and is your typical 10 year old.

Originally posted by webwarrior762002
Originally posted by Cashodeen:
"Ostracized for life if she had gotten a C section"? What planet are you from? For starters, about 1 million are performed each year in the United States.

I meant the scar probably would have made her the object
of ridcule by a number of people in society.

Are you mentally incapacitated?

First off you have no idea where the scar is- which is somewhere you'd have to take your underwear off to see.

Second of all, who would ridicule someone for having a c-section scar?

Someone apparently as clueless as yourself.

Originally posted by webwarrior762002
I meant the scar probably would have made her the object
of ridcule by a number of people in society.

Originally posted by ~*Hannah_Lee*~
Ok, even if that was the case (which it's not because millions of women have scars for C-sections), a scar or ridicule is no reason to sacrifice a baby's life.

I think he/she meant that statement as a joke.