Woman in persistive vegetative state unexpectedly delivers baby

Pea-n-Me

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
A member of the Apache Tribe, the woman suffered a near drowning ten years ago and has been comatose ever since.

Now police are testing the DNA of all male staff at her care home to find out who the father of the baby is.

https://www.abc15.com/news/region-p...te-who-gave-birth-is-san-carlos-apache-member

John Micheaels, a lawyer now representing the family of the woman who was sexually assaulted has spoken out for the first time Tuesday.

"I represent the family of the young woman who just gave birth to a baby despite being in a completely vulnerable state while a resident and patient at Hacienda Healthcare. The family obviously is outraged, traumatized and in shock by the abuse and neglect of their daughter at Hacienda Healthcare. The family is well aware of the intense news and public interest in their daughter’s case, but at this time is not emotionally ready to make a public statement. The family would like me to convey that the baby boy has been born into a loving family and will be well cared for. On behalf of my clients, I ask that the media honor the family’s wish for privacy in this most difficult time."

How traumatic for the patient and her family!
 
This is a tragedy and a crime, but I still don't agree with every mail employee having to prove they are innocent. That's not how law enforcement is supposed to work. Having to submit your DNA is outrageous.
 
I'd love to hear the legal arguments.

I also wonder if they might get lucky enough to focus the subpoena in a specific direction by testing the baby via something like Ancestry and see if they get any results back indicating baby fits into the family tree of a specific employee?
 


Getting familial DNA from an outside company would certainly be a great break, but I think it's a long shot.

I don't think that having to submit a DNA sample is an outrageous requirement for a position in which you are trusted to care for helpless people in such intimate circumstances. However, I think it would make more sense to make it a uniform requirement of all employees, regardless of gender; part of the standard background check. DNA evidence can be used for many kinds of crimes, not just to prove paternity in a rape case, and I would think that having to provide it up front would help to exclude a lot of predators from the applicant pool.
 


It is a slippery slope IMO.
I can understand if there is evidence pointing to someone, and then getting a warrant to get their DNA, but for everyone? That seems like an invasion of privacy among other things.
I think requesting that employees submit a sample to help them is one thing, but to force them is another.
 
It’s terrible. I saw a headline that said, “Possible sexual abuse”... like what???

Well it's only allegedly, of course.

Getting familial DNA from an outside company would certainly be a great break, but I think it's a long shot.

I don't think that having to submit a DNA sample is an outrageous requirement for a position in which you are trusted to care for helpless people in such intimate circumstances. However, I think it would make more sense to make it a uniform requirement of all employees, regardless of gender; part of the standard background check. DNA evidence can be used for many kinds of crimes, not just to prove paternity in a rape case, and I would think that having to provide it up front would help to exclude a lot of predators from the applicant pool.

As to the bold, I think so too. Although with the increasing popularity of the testing the gaps are closing quicker than we might think. Based on the experience of my husband's family discovering an entirely unknown and complete surprise nearly 60 year old first cousin in my husband's generation within the past two years that was discovered on the basis of a match to two other first cousins who don't share a parent with each other or the new cousin the odds might not be too high after all. A district attorney or prosecutor who can combine that kind of evidence with the evidence the suspect had access to the victim based on employment will probably have a much easier time getting the DNA request warrant signed by a judge.
 
It is a slippery slope IMO.
I can understand if there is evidence pointing to someone, and then getting a warrant to get their DNA, but for everyone? That seems like an invasion of privacy among other things.
I think requesting that employees submit a sample to help them is one thing, but to force them is another.

Requesting a DNA sample but not forcing them? Do you think the perpetrator is going to willingly volunteer?

I'm not sure how there could be evidence pointing to a particular person.
 
Did a court order these tests to be done or did the local police just decide they would be mandatory?
 
This is disturbing on so many levels. I was so upset when I read this earlier today, that I didn't even want to finish reading the article.

Also, believe me, I understand how a reproductive system works. But since the victim is comatose, I am just surprised that the nutrition she is receiving is providing enough calories that she is still ovulating, etc after 10 years. I guess I would believe this would be the case for a certain amount of time after the accident, but 10 years later? That is probably what the perpetrator was assuming too.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top