5 ms·

The State of Indiana Has a Pregnancy Tracking App

32 points by young_breezy 4y ago

midislack 4y ago
- gambiting 4y ago
  You lack the foresight or the awareness of how this pans out in some cases in other countries, and there is no reason to believe this wouldn't happen here - miscarriages happen(very often in fact!) and people have been accused of terminating their pregnancy and put in prison when in fact it could have just been a regular miscarriage. The risk you put yourself under from the judicial system(which is rewarded for prosecutions) is unacceptable, no matter what your views on abortion are.
  - withinboredom 4y ago
    Worse is how it can be weaponized by just downloading it to an emulator and using someone else’s information. It’s terrifying.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- bilekas 4y ago
  > As a person who is against abortion, I fail to see a problem with this. Well obviously. > If you’re dumb enough to have a GovCorp tracking pod You realize its only a problem because the government has decided you cant choose what happens to you in the first place ? Whatever your opinions on abortion, it's incredibly you simple accept it as a 'given' that a gov app would be tracking you by default. That's not an OK thing to accept.
  - midislack 4y ago
    What's the purpose of your smart phone? It's different than what you think!
    - iakov 4y ago
      You seem to have a fun answer to this. Please, enlighten us!
- MandieD 4y ago
  As a person who minded my own business on abortion until one saved my fertility and possibly my life, I’m grateful that the state left which manner in which my ectopic pregnancy was ended up to me and the hospital staff. “But that wasn’t an abortion! That was a medical emergency!” In Poland now, and Ireland before women’s liberation a few years ago, I’d likely have had the tube taken out, because that’s what a certain “Catholic” interpretation says is saving my life, with the end of the (absolutely unviable) pregnancy is just a sad side effect. Bam! Instant 50% reduction in fertility! In El Salvador, I very well would have just bled to death. Well, I wouldn’t have, because I’m wealthy enough to fly somewhere sane or pay a doctor under the table - methotrexate is one of the oldest chemotherapy agents, but also how most ectopic pregnancies, including mine, are ended in places with decent medical services. Nearly ten years after that, I finally had my long-desired child.
  - midislack 4y ago
    Sadly I know a woman who had an abortion at 17 which ruined her fertility for life.
version_five 4y ago
State of Indiana
Rebelgecko 4y ago
The author seems to be making a big leap: assuming that when someone is accused of a crime, it's the responsibility of the accused to prove that a crime didn't actually happen. Is that actually the case? My possibly-very-flawed layman's view of the legal system is that it's on the prosecutor to prove that you did something wrong. So if you just say "oh I played around with the app and gave it random input" or "I had a miscarriage", then the onus is on the government to explain why that isn't the case.
- kadoban 4y ago
  > My possibly-very-flawed layman's view of the legal system is that it's on the prosecutor to prove that you did something wrong. It is, but practically there's some big issues with that. Including: The police can investigate, including in ways that are going to be very uncomfortable, costly and annoying for you. This app will definitely be used as evidence. Some of the anti-abortion laws are being written as allowing people to sue you. That shifts the burden of proof away from "beyond a reasonable doubt" to something much easier. If you do get charged with a crime _many_ people take plea bargains for good game-theoretic reasons. You can tell yourself that you'd definitely fight it until the end, but often that'd be idiotic, and traumatic if you really did. These kinds of things tend to get used disproportionally against the poor and the marginalized.
- LatteLazy 4y ago
  Bear in mind: If you can reasonably prove it wasn't you, you can likely go home within a day or two. If you can't, you get to personally spend a fortune on a lawyer and wait in jail and attend court for 6months to ultimately be vindicated but bankrupt and unemployed...
  - withinboredom 4y ago
    My father-in-law picked up his wife’s medication (narcotics) the day after she died from cancer. Just going through the motions… arrested and charged with fraud. He’s still waiting on his court date, nearly four years later. Thank god he was allowed to post bail, go to his wife’s funeral, and live his life while he waits. His daughter who was in the car was also charged just for being in the car (she had no idea what was going on), and denied bail. She wasn’t allowed to come to the funeral. There were several points at which someone could have said “dude, I’m really sorry, but you know your wife passed away yesterday?” Not a single person did that in that small town. I guess the point is, even if you can prove it was someone else, or that you were just in the wrong place at the wrong time, you can spend years in jail just waiting to tell a judge.
whateveracct 4y ago
isaacfrond 4y ago
Reminds of me of this charming example of United Statesian justice: Alabama woman charged after losing unborn baby in shooting https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48789836 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48789836
- aaron695 4y ago
- _-david-_ 4y ago
  That is a bit misleading. If a woman doesn't buckle her child's seat belt she can be charged even if somebody hits her car. In this case she started a violent argument with another person and it resulted in the death of her child. Also, the article was from years ago. The charges were literally dropped despite an indictment from a grand jury.
  - riedel 4y ago
    As someone coming from a different ethical background I think your comment is complete inline with what would irritates me regarding the case (without considering the legal outcome). Putting an unborn on the same level as a child and to even blame anyone for triggering gun use while being unarmed themselves seems totally outside my reality. It should be taken into account the article is not from US media. Typically in Europe it would probably not be considered misleading for the aforementioned reasons.
    - _-david-_ 4y ago
      The majority of states in the US considers killing a pregnant woman the same as killing two people (assuming it doesn't happen during an abortion). This is consistent with the existing laws in most states. Using a gun even if another person is unarmed can be justified. If somebody is trying to kill you, you have a right to defend yourself. If you have a gun then you can use it. If somebody was unarmed, trying to kill you, while you are holding a bat would you find it acceptable to use the bat to defend yourself? If you would defend yourself then a gun is no different. If you would not then we disagree on the concept of self defense and don't think we are going to agree on anything high level when we can't agree on the core principles.
exabrial 4y ago
Who cares?

32 points by young_breezy 4y ago

midislack 4y ago

gambiting 4y ago
You lack the foresight or the awareness of how this pans out in some cases in other countries, and there is no reason to believe this wouldn't happen here - miscarriages happen(very often in fact!) and people have been accused of terminating their pregnancy and put in prison when in fact it could have just been a regular miscarriage. The risk you put yourself under from the judicial system(which is rewarded for prosecutions) is unacceptable, no matter what your views on abortion are.
- withinboredom 4y ago
  Worse is how it can be weaponized by just downloading it to an emulator and using someone else’s information. It’s terrifying.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
bilekas 4y ago
> As a person who is against abortion, I fail to see a problem with this. Well obviously. > If you’re dumb enough to have a GovCorp tracking pod You realize its only a problem because the government has decided you cant choose what happens to you in the first place ? Whatever your opinions on abortion, it's incredibly you simple accept it as a 'given' that a gov app would be tracking you by default. That's not an OK thing to accept.
- midislack 4y ago
  What's the purpose of your smart phone? It's different than what you think!
  - iakov 4y ago
    You seem to have a fun answer to this. Please, enlighten us!
MandieD 4y ago
As a person who minded my own business on abortion until one saved my fertility and possibly my life, I’m grateful that the state left which manner in which my ectopic pregnancy was ended up to me and the hospital staff. “But that wasn’t an abortion! That was a medical emergency!” In Poland now, and Ireland before women’s liberation a few years ago, I’d likely have had the tube taken out, because that’s what a certain “Catholic” interpretation says is saving my life, with the end of the (absolutely unviable) pregnancy is just a sad side effect. Bam! Instant 50% reduction in fertility! In El Salvador, I very well would have just bled to death. Well, I wouldn’t have, because I’m wealthy enough to fly somewhere sane or pay a doctor under the table - methotrexate is one of the oldest chemotherapy agents, but also how most ectopic pregnancies, including mine, are ended in places with decent medical services. Nearly ten years after that, I finally had my long-desired child.
- midislack 4y ago
  Sadly I know a woman who had an abortion at 17 which ruined her fertility for life.

version_five 4y ago

State of Indiana

Rebelgecko 4y ago

The author seems to be making a big leap: assuming that when someone is accused of a crime, it's the responsibility of the accused to prove that a crime didn't actually happen. Is that actually the case? My possibly-very-flawed layman's view of the legal system is that it's on the prosecutor to prove that you did something wrong. So if you just say "oh I played around with the app and gave it random input" or "I had a miscarriage", then the onus is on the government to explain why that isn't the case.

kadoban 4y ago
> My possibly-very-flawed layman's view of the legal system is that it's on the prosecutor to prove that you did something wrong. It is, but practically there's some big issues with that. Including: The police can investigate, including in ways that are going to be very uncomfortable, costly and annoying for you. This app will definitely be used as evidence. Some of the anti-abortion laws are being written as allowing people to sue you. That shifts the burden of proof away from "beyond a reasonable doubt" to something much easier. If you do get charged with a crime _many_ people take plea bargains for good game-theoretic reasons. You can tell yourself that you'd definitely fight it until the end, but often that'd be idiotic, and traumatic if you really did. These kinds of things tend to get used disproportionally against the poor and the marginalized.
LatteLazy 4y ago
Bear in mind: If you can reasonably prove it wasn't you, you can likely go home within a day or two. If you can't, you get to personally spend a fortune on a lawyer and wait in jail and attend court for 6months to ultimately be vindicated but bankrupt and unemployed...
- withinboredom 4y ago
  My father-in-law picked up his wife’s medication (narcotics) the day after she died from cancer. Just going through the motions… arrested and charged with fraud. He’s still waiting on his court date, nearly four years later. Thank god he was allowed to post bail, go to his wife’s funeral, and live his life while he waits. His daughter who was in the car was also charged just for being in the car (she had no idea what was going on), and denied bail. She wasn’t allowed to come to the funeral. There were several points at which someone could have said “dude, I’m really sorry, but you know your wife passed away yesterday?” Not a single person did that in that small town. I guess the point is, even if you can prove it was someone else, or that you were just in the wrong place at the wrong time, you can spend years in jail just waiting to tell a judge.

whateveracct 4y ago

isaacfrond 4y ago

Reminds of me of this charming example of United Statesian justice: Alabama woman charged after losing unborn baby in shooting https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48789836 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48789836

aaron695 4y ago
_-david-_ 4y ago
That is a bit misleading. If a woman doesn't buckle her child's seat belt she can be charged even if somebody hits her car. In this case she started a violent argument with another person and it resulted in the death of her child. Also, the article was from years ago. The charges were literally dropped despite an indictment from a grand jury.
- riedel 4y ago
  As someone coming from a different ethical background I think your comment is complete inline with what would irritates me regarding the case (without considering the legal outcome). Putting an unborn on the same level as a child and to even blame anyone for triggering gun use while being unarmed themselves seems totally outside my reality. It should be taken into account the article is not from US media. Typically in Europe it would probably not be considered misleading for the aforementioned reasons.
  - _-david-_ 4y ago
    The majority of states in the US considers killing a pregnant woman the same as killing two people (assuming it doesn't happen during an abortion). This is consistent with the existing laws in most states. Using a gun even if another person is unarmed can be justified. If somebody is trying to kill you, you have a right to defend yourself. If you have a gun then you can use it. If somebody was unarmed, trying to kill you, while you are holding a bat would you find it acceptable to use the bat to defend yourself? If you would defend yourself then a gun is no different. If you would not then we disagree on the concept of self defense and don't think we are going to agree on anything high level when we can't agree on the core principles.

exabrial 4y ago

Who cares?