The stress of being in jail has a negative impact on the fetuses development. It's shameful that we aren't prioritizing the well being of the next generation. It's also against the state's interest to do anything that would hurt their future taxable income.

Possibly. Unfortunately, the state has to balance that risk against the risk that the murderer mother may commit additional crimes if freed. There is no perfect solution

> There is no perfect solution

It is difficult to square that statement with "pro-life from conception" as mentioned earlier. On the one hand you recognize the need for nuance, and in the other case not.

The life of the child is valuable. The lives of people on the street (which would be endangered by letting a suspected murderer go free) are also valuable. We should do all we can to protect as many lives as we can. (I can accept abortion when the life of the mother is at risk.)

Why punish the fetus for the mother’s alleged crime ?

No punishment is occuring, the mother has not been tried or sentenced. She is being detained to keep others safe.

Even from a joint genetic property perspective the same outcome as yours would be reached.

The state has improperly seized that property and inhibits its conversion into a birthed human being that inherits all constitutional rights.

(this framework exists outside of the pro-life pro-choice false dilemma)

> The physical location of the mother doesn't make any difference to the child

Preposterous. Sleep, diet, activities, even socializing all impact the development of a fetus. These are the domains of choice to which free people are entitled, none of which are freely available in a cell.

It's not just "medical care" to which we're entitled. Even sunlight must be an option.

The state has to balance the interest that the child has in receiving adequate care, with the interest that outside society has in not having murderers walking freely in the street. Ideally, the state would provide the best care that it can inside the jail/prison.

Sure, but is the mother there for murder? Does this cost more than some alternative that’s “too soft”?

She is accused of murder.

  Harrell, 24, has been jailed without bond since July, when she was accused of fatally shooting another woman and charged with second-degree murder

So she's not even convicted yet, is that correct?

Sure, but what's your point?

Being accused of murder can lead to detainment, which naturally bears the risk of temporarily detaining innocent people. That's the tradeoff society has agreed to.

Yes, of course the state is balancing interests, where did I imply otherwise?

Here's the issue. If a fetus is a person, that person has the rights granted to them by the constitution. This includes:

* Right to an attorney to represent it and its needs. (6th Amendment)

* And the right to bring a Habeas Corpus suit before the court.

In short the argument is going to go like this:

Jail is a dangerous place. If the mother is killed, likely the fetus/person will be killed as well. Hence the Habeas plea.

I think if you are at all serious about fetuses attaining personhood status (with all the rights and privileges thereof), you would want the court to do something to protect the life of the fetus here, even if the court can't separate the mother from the fetus.

> I think if you are at all serious about fetuses attaining personhood status (with all the rights and privileges thereof), you would want the court to do something to protect the life of the fetus here, even if the court can't separate the mother from the fetus.

100%. The mother should be kept in good conditions, isolated from other inmates that might harm her child, with adequate medical care.