Home » ACLU Insider
ACLU Insider
Read about ACLU issues on our site and around the Internet, and leave us a comment!
 Subscribe to our feed
ACLU And Lambda Legal Argue That Doctors, Not Legislators, Should Determine Medical Treatment
Crossposted at ACLU National and Lambda Legal.
CHICAGO- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit heard oral arguments today in a case defending the right of transgender people to receive medical care while they are incarcerated. Under Wisconsin law, prison doctors are prohibited from prescribing hormone treatment to transgender inmates. The law is being challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Wisconsin and Lambda Legal.
"The district court correctly struck down a discriminatory law that denied transgender people, and no one else, crucial care for a serious medical condition," said John Knight, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Project. "We hope that the court of appeals affirms this ruling and recognizes that medical treatment decisions must be based on medical, rather than political, justifications."
In 2005, the state of Wisconsin passed a law that barred prison doctors from providing transgender inmates medically necessary hormone therapy or sex reassignment surgery while in state custody. The ACLU, the ACLU of Wisconsin and Lambda Legal sued the state on behalf of transgender inmates, some of whom had been receiving hormone treatment in Wisconsin prisons for years. An injunction was granted to continue hormone treatment until a ruling was made. In April 2010, after a full trial, a federal district court struck down the so-called "Inmate Sex Change Prevention Act." read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on February 8, 2011 1:00 PM | Categories:
Standing up for the First Amendment in Chicago
Protests and demonstrations often are aimed at an audience that would strongly prefer not to hear the message. For example, the First Amendment protects the right of labor unions to picket on sidewalks in front of workplaces engaged in allegedly improper employment practices. Likewise, the First Amendment protects the right of people of all political beliefs to protest on sidewalks in front of their elected officials' offices. Thus, the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois often advocates to insure that groups have the right to express their messages to the audiences they want to hear those messages.
Unfortunately, Chicago has an ordinance that bans protests within 150 feet and 30 minutes of a religious service in a house or worship, with the exception of labor protests. But various groups seek to engage in protests that target parishioners coming in and out of such services, including alleged victims of sexual misconduct by priests who protest in front of Catholic churches. Last year, the Chicago police enforced this ordinance against protesters in front of the Scientology church. Another group that seeks to protest in front of a house of worship during a religious service is the Gay Liberation Network (GLN), an activist organization in Chicago that advocates on behalf of LGBT rights. GLN is planning a demonstration outside of Chicago's Holy Name Cathedral on February 13th, to advance equal marriage rights for all persons in Illinois. The demonstration is planned for the public sidewalk and is not intended to disrupt religious services inside the Cathedral, but simply to advance the GLN's message to parishioners attending services on that date.
On January 21st, the ACLU of Illinois wrote to the Chicago Police Department on behalf of the GLN. The ACLU explained that the GLN will not obstruct the flow of pedestrian traffic on this sidewalk, or block parishioners from entering or leaving the Cathedral. The ACLU's letter makes clear that this broad ban violates the First Amendment. The ACLU pointed out that the ordinance contains an exemption for labor picketing, creating speaker-based and content-based discrimination. We also noted that while the City can regulate disruptive activity that interferes with the conduct of a religious service, the government cannot ban all expressive activity within 150 feet of all places of worship. We asked the CPD to let us know if they were going to enforce the ordinance at the GLN's demonstration.
On January 25th, Chicago Corporation Counsel Mara Georges responded, saying that the City "does not intend to enforce" this ordinance at this time. This means that a peaceful demonstration will be able to go forward. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on January 27, 2011 4:41 PM | Categories:
Act Now! Push Death Penalty Repeal in Illinois Past the Finish Line
Cross posted at the Blog of Rights
Randy Steidl is one of 20 men who've been exonerated and released from Illinois' death row in recent years. Las t Tuesday, he and I sat just a few feet apart when the Illinois Senate passed Senate Bill 3539 -- repealing the state's irretrievably broken death penalty system.
The Senate vote on Tuesday was a result of a lot of hard work and advocacy by Illinois ACLU members and the general public--every email, every visit with a legislator, every phone call contributed to this legislative victory.
Now, your voice can make the difference in shutting down Illinois' broken death penalty for good. Push this win past the finish line: Tell Illinois Governor Quinn to sign Senate Bill 3539 into law.
Join us by signing this statement of support. Then, send it to your friends: Help us gather signatures from 50,000 members and supporters all across the country. We'll deliver this statement of support to his office next week.
Last week, as I witnessed the State Senate pass this milestone for justice and the rule of law, I have never been so proud to be part of the ACLU, so proud of our work and so proud of our supporters. Help us achieve a victory for justice in Illinois -- and across the country.
With your help, we can finish the job and make history. By Ed Yohnka, Director of Communications and Public Policy
read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on January 20, 2011 10:52 AM | Categories:
Download the Brief
 The latest copy of the Illinois Brief, the ACLU of Illinois' quarterly newsletter is available for download. This issue covers important current issues like civil unions, repeal of the death penalty and the ACLU's suit challenging the application of eavesdropping laws to individuals making recordings of public conversations with police. Download a copy today! read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on January 19, 2011 4:06 PM | Categories:
Pregnancy Discrimination: it's illegal, even in bars.
This morning's Chicago Tribune discusses an incident at a Roselle bar when an expectant mother was asked leave specifically due to her pregnancy. According to the article: Civil rights experts said that, despite any good intentions, it would be wrong to send a woman packing just because she was pregnant.
"There are certain things for which you are not able to discriminate against someone, and one is their gender," said Ed Yohnka, an American Civil Liberties Union spokesman. "And only women can have babies. You can't discriminate against a pregnant person."
According to the Illinois Human Rights Act: "It is unlawful to discriminate in the full and equal enjoyment of facilities and services by any place of public accommodation."
...In Illinois, it is illegal to serve a guest who shows signs of intoxication, but it can also be illegal to deny service to a woman just because she is pregnant, said Sheila O'Grady, president of the Chicago-based Illinois Restaurant Association, which offers training on responsible alcohol service.
Read the whole thing. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on January 12, 2011 9:49 AM | Categories:
A "Near-Death Experience" for Death Penalty Abolition in Illinois
By Ed Yohnka, Director of Communications and Public Policy
Cross-posted at the Blog of Rights
On Thursday afternoon, the Illinois House of Representatives was a raucous place -- with talk of a deal on a tax increase, Medicaid reform and proposed budget cuts all sweeping around the chamber, members created a cacophony of sound that echoed around the huge chamber. But late in the afternoon, as the House began to consider Senate Bill 3539 -- a measure to end Illinois' broken death penalty system -- the chamber became hushed. Every member seemed to grasp the importance of the debate, coming after a decade in which the State of Illinois has operated under a death penalty moratorium because so many innocent men were released from death row.
Rep. Karen Yarbrough and other supporters made clear, concise points in favor of repeal. They noted that the state has spent more than $100 million over the past decade prosecuting death penalty cases, despite the fact that no one has been executed. They also made clear that the death penalty is not a deterrent and that supporting the death penalty means accepting the very real possibility that the state of Illinois will execute an innocent person. Perhaps most compelling were the voices of several previous supporters of the death penalty -- including Reps. Susan Mendoza, Paul Froehlich and Mike Boland -- who said that they no longer could support the risk of executing the innocent. It was compelling and moving.
Opponents of the bill trotted out two familiar but ultimately empty arguments. First they suggested that the only appropriate penalty for those who committed heinous crimes is the death penalty and relied repeatedly on gruesome references to murders in Illinois. These repeal opponents also pushed the notion that law enforcement needed the death penalty as a "tool" to coerce suspects to confess to particular acts. Yet one of the sad realities in Illinois is that we have seen a host of false confessions; confessions elicited by law enforcement using such "tools."
The debate reached a crescendo when Rep. Yarbrough closed her argument saying that the House had a chance to make history and to close the book on Illinois' failed death penalty system.
As the votes were being tabulated, everyone watched with anticipation as the "yes" votes inched up above 50 (with 60 necessary for passage) and then in shock as the count froze at 59 votes in favor. Rep. Yarbrough immediately asked for "postponed consideration" a technical procedure that allows the sponsor time to search for any additional, necessary votes.
After approximately an hour, the measure was called for a second vote where it reached the magic threshold of 60 votes.
So, by that slim margin, Senate Bill 3539 moves to the Senate where it is expected to be considered today or tomorrow (before the new legislature convenes on Wednesday).
Keep your fingers crossed. And keep those calls coming. Illinois may be about to make history. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on January 10, 2011 10:42 AM | Categories:
Drug-sniffing dogs are wrong more than right
A Chicago Tribune analysis of three years of suburban police department data finds that less than half of alerts by dogs lead to the discovery of drugs or paraphernalia. And that rate drops to less than a third for Hispanic drivers:
Advocates agree that many dog-and-officer teams are poorly trained and prone to false alerts that lead to unjustified searches. Leading a dog around a car too many times or spending too long examining a vehicle, for example, can cause a dog to give a signal for drugs where there are none.
Civil rights advocates and Latino activists say the findings support complaints that police unfairly target Hispanic drivers for invasive and embarrassing roadside vehicle searches.
Adam Schwartz, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, said the innocent suffer from unjustified searches.
"We've seen a national outcry about being frisked and scanned at airports," Schwartz said. "The experience of having police take your car apart for an hour is far more invasive and frightening and humiliating."
Read the entire front-page article in the Tribune. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Ofelia Casillas on January 6, 2011 1:25 PM | Categories:
ACLU of Illinois weighs in on Ten Commandments controversy
A proposal by members of the Saline County Board to post a plaque with the Ten Commandments on the property of the County Courthouse recently drew a sharp objection from the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. Recently, the Saline County Board discussed the proposal including the idea having a public referendum to assess support for the display. Perhaps most surprising, a member of the Board publicly suggested that it was time for the Board to "take a stand and defy the courts."
The ACLU of Illinois recently sent a letter urging the Board to reject this unconstitutional proposal. The letter notes that the Ten Commandments "are highly religious," noting that many of the Commandments are religious in nature (i.e., banning idol worship). The ACLU of Illinois also pointed out the string of court decisions that bar the display of the Ten Commandments on public property, because such displays send the message to some Americans that they are outsiders and second-class citizens.
The ACLU of Illinois will continue to monitor this proposal.
Download a copy of the ACLU's letter. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on December 6, 2010 9:43 AM | Categories:
The Road Behind, the Road Ahead for LGBT Equality in Illinois
Cross-posted at the Blog of Rights: This week, Illinois changed the course of history.
By a vote of 32-24, the Illinois Senate approved the Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act, which will extend important legal protections to gay, lesbian and straight couples across the state. Now, the bill moves on to the desk of Gov. Pat Quinn, who has promised to sign it.
The legislation will secure important rights and benefits to couples that seek civil unions: the ability to share pension benefits and health insurance, the right to dispose of a loved one's remains with dignity, the right to visit in the hospital and make emergency medical decisions for a loved one. The bill will end the many indignities, and out-right cruelties faced by LGBT couples when dealing with life's most difficult moments: serious illness, financial hardship and death.
This battle began years ago. It was in February of 2007 that then-newly elected state Rep. Greg Harris first introduced civil union legislation. Despite Illinois' "blue state" reputation, this bill was not a slam-dunk. Indeed, it was only in 2005 that the Illinois Human Rights Act was amended to include protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Advocates, legislators and Illinoisans of all stripes have worked tirelessly for four years to move civil union legislation forward, inch by inch.
The ACLU of Illinois was proud to work with advocates across the state to secure this critical victory:
In the Village of Woodstock, Patrick told the story of his partner's death and the morgue's refusal to release the body for burial. In the City of Lockport, Sue and Lori met with their representative, talked to the press and sent letters seeking legal recognition for their union and commitment. In the City of Pekin, a constituent arrived at her representative's office, oxygen tank in tow, to talk about the fear that her partner would not be allowed to visit her in the hospital. In downstate Champaign-Urbana, the ACLU chapter generated hundreds of calls, emails and letters in support of the bill. Just as this was a statewide effort, now the victory too belongs to every Illinoisan.
Passage of civil union legislation represents an important -- and incredible -- step on the road towards full equality for LGBT individuals in Illinois. But of course, it is only a step. As we look into the future, the road ahead towards marriage equality for all is rife with resistance and obstacles. It will be no easier, and probably more challenging, than the pavement we have just traveled over. But we will keep moving tirelessly, relentlessly forward -- and we hope you will join us on the journey. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on December 2, 2010 7:22 PM | Categories:
Civil Unions Bill Passes Illinois House and Senate in Historic Moment for Fairness
Gay and lesbian couples won't have to testify against each other in state courts. They will be able to file wrongful death suits on behalf of a deceased partner. They will have access to pensions. They will never be turned away from visiting a sick partner in a hospital.
Such are the rights that would be available under a civil unions bill that passed both state houses this week, and that after the governor's promised signature, would be expected to go into effect next summer.
The ACLU of Illinois tirelessly advocated for these changes that would extend basic fairness to all couples in Illinois. To read more about the law and the ACLU's position on the new law, go to the Chicago Tribune's page-1 story.
For a look at how the national media covered the momentous occasion, read the Associated Press story, which ran in national publications.
read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Ofelia Casillas on December 2, 2010 10:22 AM | Categories:
Big Moves in Springfield
I came down to Springfield this morning with ACLU of Illinois Executive Director Colleen Connell and Board President Jill Metz to join the rest of the ACLU team as we fight for two of our major legislative objectives during this fall veto session: passing SB 1716 Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act and SB 3529 which would end the death penalty.
The bill to repeal the death penalty was passed out of the House Judiciary II - Criminal Law Committee on a 4-3 vote. This important vote moves the bill one step closer to vote of the full House, and we are working hard to move legislators to support the bill. You can help by call your legislators today. Visit: action.aclu.org/call2enddp.
We just finished an amazing press conference of Illinois religious leaders, speaking out in support of passing SB 1716, the civil union legislation. This important bill would provide basic legal benefits to gay and lesbian (or straight!) couples who have been denied them under current Illinois law. We are hopeful the bill will swiftly move towards a vote in the next day or so. You can urge your legislator to support the bill by visiting: action.aclu.org/ilcu.
Stay tuned - and follow us on twitter and facebook for the latest. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on November 30, 2010 12:06 PM | Categories:
ACLU amends challenge to eavesdropping law
In August 2010, the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois filed a lawsuit arguing that civilians have a right protected by the First Amendment to make audio recordings of on-duty police officers. The plaintiff in the lawsuit is the ACLU of Illinois as an organization, because we want to audio record police as part of our on-going police monitoring and advocacy. Specifically, the ACLU of Illinois challenged the use of Illinois Eavesdropping Act to prosecute individuals who record police conversations with civilians that take place in public, while police are performing their duties, and when those conversations are audible to the human ear. The ACLU contends that such prosecutions unlawfully preclude individuals - and organizations such as the ACLU of Illinois - from being able to record police interactions on public streets and thoroughfares and disseminate that information to policy makers in order to address specific policy concerns.
In a decision issued on October 28, U.S. District Court Judge Suzanne Conlon dismissed the complaint on grounds of standing, holding that the ACLU could not pursue the case since it had not been threatened with prosecution. The court also dismissed the suit without prejudice. The court did not address the first amendment merits of our suit.
On November 18th, the ACLU of Illinois filed a motion asking Judge Conlon to reinstate the lawsuit, and to allow us to file an amended complaint, so that we can move forward to the substantive questions we raise about the eavesdropping law. The filing adds new allegations to support the ACLU's standing, including adding our executive director and senior field manager as additional plaintiffs.
We look forward to pursuing the matter to a successful conclusion.
______________________________
Download:
read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on November 19, 2010 12:37 PM | Categories:
Executive Director Colleen Connell on Airport Body Scans and Gropes
Executive Director Colleen Connell appeared on WTTW's Chicago Tonight to discuss the new TSA backscatter body scanners and "enhanced" pat-downs:
(note: the video is mislabeled) read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on November 19, 2010 11:00 AM | Categories:
Airport Body Scanners: 'Stupid and Punitive,' the ACLU's Colleen Connell discovers
Colleen Connell, executive director of the ACLU of Illinois, was catching a flight a few months ago out of O'Hare when she experienced one of the airport's new body scanners. She then discovered that even as the Transportation Security Administration stresses that they are acting to maximize privacy and respect travelers, the process is far from either.
And the scanner was only the beginning of privacy violations for Colleen Connell.
Read the Tribune's Steve Chapman blog post to find out what happened next.
read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on November 16, 2010 10:32 AM | Categories:
Wanted: Illinois High Schools Seeking to Expand First Amendment Efforts
The Illinois First Amendment Center (IFAC) Illinois High School Media Mini-Grants Program is seeking applicants for grants that aim to help Illinois public or private high schools with existing media programs improve their First Amendment activities.
Funds can help equip newsrooms with hardware and/or software needed to produce print or online newspaper; expand or improve multi-media training program for students; increase student broadcast media; develop training programs to improve newspaper copyediting; expand photojournalism programs or training; provide reporters with training on investigative reporting; launch/establish a new Web reporting version of an existing publication; advance journalism excellence and free expression; educate students on news literacy; and improve First Amendment awareness among students.
The funding is not aimed at starting a journalism program where none existed. However, if seeking funds for a new journalism effort, please inquire about the 2010-2011 Illinois High School Newspaper Contest for Illinois high schools that have not had a scholastic journalism product within the past two years. Please keep in mind that this program is also not intended to help fund yearbooks.
To apply for the Illinois High School Media Mini-Grants Program, complete the grant application request form and submit it with narrative via email to Sue Montalvo, IFAC director, at smontalvo@illinoispress.org on or before January 15, 2011.
For more information and grant guidelines, visit the Illinois First Amendment Center. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on November 1, 2010 11:34 AM | Categories:
It's Time for the Student Non-Discrimination Act!
Northern California School officials required a female student to participate in school-sponsored "counseling" designed to discourage students from being lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. Officials also denied the student access to the girls' locker room.
"All I ever wanted was to be able to go to school and just be myself. But I couldn't do that when the people I was supposed to be learning from were judging me and telling me something was wrong with me," the girl said. "How was I supposed to learn when I was constantly scared?"
In a public school in Memphis, Tennessee, two male students had their private relationship revealed to the school principal by another student. In response, the principal wrote their names on a list she posted next to her desk, in full view. The principal then called one of their mothers.
"Did you know your son is gay?" the mother said the principal told her. The principal added that she didn't like gay people and wouldn't tolerate homosexuality at her school. Both students reported that they had to endure verbal harassment from teachers and students as a result of the principal's actions.
Take Action to end discrimination against students now! Learn More. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on November 1, 2010 11:20 AM | Categories:
An Unconstitutional Recall
by Harvey Grossman, Legal Director of the ACLU of Illinois
 On November 2, voters in Illinois will decide whether to amend our state constitution to allow for a recall election for the office of governor. While the concept of recall raises no civil liberties concerns, the process proposed in the amendment is contrary to democratic principles and violates the constitution.
Recall is a political matter. In most states with recall, the law requires no grounds or bad conduct by the office holder and the process directly expresses the will of the voters through a special election. Impeachment, the other mechanism by which an official may be removed from office, requires specific wrongdoing and is a legal process carried out by the legislature. Eighteen states provide for the recall of state officers and the requirements generally are rigorous. Besides the 2003 recall of California Governor Grey Davis, only one other governor has ever been recalled-- Governor Lynn Frazier of North Dakota in 1921.
Those who favor recall believe it places deserved power in the hands of the voters and eliminates the need to rely on legislators to impeach officials. Objectors, on the other hand, believe terms of office are relatively short and that recall elections are unnecessarily expensive. Whatever one may think of the merits of recall, everyone agrees that the procedures for recall must be fair and treat all voters equally. Unfortunately, the Illinois proposal does not meet these basic requirements.
The amendment to be considered by Illinois voters requires that a recall petition be signed by a number of voters equal to at least 15% of the total votes cast for governor in the last gubernatorial election, with at least 100 signatures from each of at least 25 separate counties. It is this requirement for voter signatures from multiple counties that throws an unconstitutional wrench in the works.
Nearly 50 years ago, the Supreme Court affirmed the core principle of "one man, one vote". This value is now deeply engrained in our national psyche, as well as our law. In addition to apportionment schemes, the courts have applied the doctrine to the collection of signatures as part of an electoral process, including for the nomination of candidates, the formulation of new political parties and other voter initiatives. In fact, the Supreme Court has required that all procedures that are an integral part of the election process must pass muster under one person, one vote. The collection of signatures for a recall election clearly falls within the rule.
The proposed constitutional amendment violates one person, one vote because by requiring 100 signatures from each of at least 25 separate counties, the signatures of electors in less populous counties will have greater value than the signatures of electors in more populous counties. While one person, one vote generally requires election districts to have approximately equal numbers of voters, the populations of registered voters in Illinois counties vary widely, from 3300 in Pope County to nearly 2.9 million in Cook County.
For example, using the 2006 gubernatorial election as an index, a recall petition would require approximately 530,000 signatures. Under the proposed amendment the electorate in Illinois' most populous 24 counties (6.4 million voters) which contains 84% of the registered voters could not petition for a recall, but 530,000 of the remaining 16% of registered voters (1.2 million) properly distributed among the 78 remaining counties could successfully petition for the recall of a governor. This disparity clearly violates the one person, one vote principle. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on October 26, 2010 9:30 AM | Categories:
New brief filed in ACLU v. Alvarez
Yesterday, the ACLU of Illinois filed a new brief in our case, ACLU v. Alvarez, seeking to end prosecutions for recording public conversations with police. The brief, simultaneously arguing for a preliminary injunction and opposing the defendant's motion to dismiss the case, states:
The two motions before the Court--the ACLU's motion for a preliminary injunction and defendant's motion to dismiss--share a common question of law. That question is whether the ACLU has a First Amendment right to audio record, in a manner that is otherwise lawful, police officers engaged in their public duties in public places. The answer to that question is yes. Such audio recording are every bit as integral to freedom of expression as other forms of protected expression. Because no contrary compelling or even substantial state interest is served by the contested application of the statute, the Court should therefore find that the Illinois Eavesdropping Act (the "Act"), as applied to the ACLU's planned recording of police conduct, violates the First Amendment.
Download the entire brief. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on October 7, 2010 9:29 AM | Categories:
Collecting DNA at Arrest: A Bad Idea Justified by a Bad Prosecution
Crossposted at HuffingtonPost
By Ed Yohnka, Director of Communications and Public Policy
There is an old adage that "bad cases" make "bad law." In the past
week, Illinois residents have seen the media analog to this adage --
"bad cases" create editorials calling for "bad public policy." The
recent news coverage of the decision by prosecutors in Lake County,
Illinois to drop charges against Jerry Hobbs, five years after he was
arrested and charged with the murder of his daughter and her friend,
closes a sad chapter for this family. The story is a tragedy at every
level -- two young girls brutally slain, a father "confesses" after
hours of endless questioning, DNA excludes the father, and the
prosecutors in the case hold the father for up to two years after they
know that the DNA evidence is present. It is a sad tale about false,
coerced confessions and a rush to judgment -- the type of case that has
caused so many Americans to question the criminal justice system and
oppose the application of the death penalty, lest an innocent person be
put to death.
But these lessons are not the ones being drawn in some quarters.
In an amazing leap of logic, some law enforcement officials and others
spoke to the Chicago Tribune as prosecutors moved toward
freeing Mr. Hobbs, suggesting that the case suggested the need for
another change in policy -- collecting DNA from all persons arrested for
a crime in Illinois, instead of waiting until conviction (as currently
required). read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Ofelia Casillas on August 10, 2010 11:07 AM | Categories:
The Choices No One Wants
This morning, RH Reality Check and the ACLU are publishing the words of Amy S, a lifelong Illinois resident, who was faced with the news that the baby she was carrying had a catastrophic brain malformation.
In her own words: The genetics counselor confirmed the prognosis. If the baby was carried to term, he would essentially be a vegetable. He would never sit, eat, or recognize his parents. He would have seizures, not be able to regulate his temperature or blood sugar, and likely be in great, great pain. And I thought, no way. Not my child. I would not let him suffer and die because I couldn't muster the courage to do what I had to do for him to pass away in a more humane way.
Read the whole story. Thank you to Amy for your courage in sharing your experiences.
Do you have a story to share? We're listening. Visit action.aclu.org/rhstories or go to http://acluroadtrip.org. read more and leave a comment »
Posted by Allie Carter on August 3, 2010 1:03 PM | Categories:
|
