Now
Fair
22°
High
28°
Low
11°

Two sides to safe-haven debate

Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By NANCY HICKS / Lincoln Journal Star

Sunday, Jul 22, 2007 - 12:07:48 am CDT

When a Lincoln woman gave birth at St. Elizabeth Regional Medical Center, then left the baby at the hospital, she was doing exactly what most safe haven laws in other states allow — leaving her infant daughter  in a safe place.

In every state except Nebraska and Alaska, a mother can leave a newborn at a designated safe haven, generally a hospital, police station or fire station.

Safe haven laws are intended to protect children by providing places at which an unwanted child can be dropped off, said  Sen. Rich Pahls of Omaha, one of two senators who introduced safe haven bills in the Nebraska Legislature in January.

Story Photo
(photos.com)
Consequences of safe haven laws

Supporters of safe haven laws say they protect children and provide options for parents of unwanted babies.

The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, which opposes safe haven laws, offered these unintended consequences in a 2003 report by the same name.
  • Create opportunity for upset family members, disgruntled boyfriends or others to abandon babies without mother’s consent.
  • Encourage abandonment because it is perceived as easier than going through counseling and making an adoption plan.
  • Deprives biological father of his legal right to care for a child.
  • Deprive children of access to information about their family and medical histories.
  • Send signal, especially to young people that they do not have to assume responsibility for their actions and that deserting one’s children is acceptable.
  • Don’t stop unsafe abandonment of babies.

“It’s that simple,” Pahls said. 

Most children dropped off at safe haven sites survive and are adopted, he said, while many who are dropped off in unsafe places die.

So why hasn’t Nebraska passed a safe haven law?

Some people think they’re ineffective.

“There is kind of a gut level reaction to safe haven bills,” said Adam Pertman, executive director of  the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, an independent, nonpartisan research-based agency. “How can you vote against helping abandoned babies?”

But he doesn’t believe the laws have slowed the rate of unsafe abandonment.  

 “We don’t appear to be saving babies,” Pertman said, noting that women continue to leave newborns in trash bins, parking lots and bathrooms in states that have safe haven laws.

“At a minimum the number of kids left in horrible places is not diminishing,” he says.

And the laws have other consequences, according “Unintended Consequences,” a 2003 report from the institute. Abandoned babies do not have identities. They don’t have medical or biological histories.  Birth mothers don’t get counseling to help them deal with shame and grief, and birth fathers lose all rights.

Lobbyists representing groups ranging from the Nebraska state Medical Association and Hospital Association to adoption agencies and attorneys echoed these reasons in public hearings and privately when Nebraska lawmakers were considering a safe haven bill.

And Omaha Sen. Ernie Chambers, using similar arguments to those found in the “Unintended Consequences” report, has been a successful roadblock.

Rather than saving babies, he said, the law would encourage more young women to abandon their babies.

Abandoning babies would be made easy and “carry the imprimatur of the state,” Chambers said. 

“Hard cases make bad law,” he said in a telephone interview last week.

Texas passed the first safe haven law in 1999 after 13 newborns were abandoned in Houston. Other states jumped on board to adopt a law that seemed to make sense.

The National Safe Haven Alliance reported in 2006  that at least 806 infants had been legally surrendered since Texas passed that first law.

But those numbers don’t tell the whole story, opponents contend. 

In fact, they are convinced the laws do not make babies safer. 

“It appears that the rate of unsafe abandonments has not been diminished by these laws,” said Pertman, also the author of “Adoption Nation.”

The number of kids left in safe havens is used as evidence to show the laws work, he said. “That presumes that every child was going to be killed or put in a toilet.”

“I think that is outrageous and not supported by the evidence. There is no evidence these kids were at risk.”

Most of these mothers would have found another safe way to deal with their babies, Pertman said.

And unsafe abandonments continue in states with safe haven laws.

Two young mothers in Broward County, Fla., have been accused of killing their newborn girls in the past two months. One was left in a black trash bag outside a home.  The other was at the bottom of a trash chute.

Since 2000, when the Florida law was passed, 75 babies have been left anonymously at fire stations or hospitals statewide while 35 babies were found  in bags, trash chutes or canals, according to a story in the Miami Herald. About one-third of the babies abandoned illegally were dead.

“Women who are so distressed, in denial, so psychotic that they would put a kid in a trash bin are not reading billboards and asking their boyfriend for a ride to the police station,” Pertman said

He acknowledges he is relying on anecdotal  evidence for his conclusion that unsafe abandonment has not diminished in states with safe haven laws.

But he says his organization will soon update its 2003 report with numbers from states that now keep track of both legal and illegal abandonments. 

Finding good data is a problem and hinders the ability to determine the effectiveness of safe haven laws, said Nina Mbengue, with the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Historically, states have not tracked unsafe abandonments. Nebraska, for example,  has no central database, only newspaper stories indicating that at least four babies have been abandoned since 2000, including the infant left at St. Elizabeth on July 13.

Even some states with Safe Haven Laws don’t record unsafe abandonments. 

Iowa records the number of babies left at safe haven sites — eight since the law became effective in the summer of 2001. But it doesn’t record illegal abandonments. Newspapers have reported at least four, said Roger Munns, spokesman for the Iowa Department of Human Services.

Just two of the legal abandonments were completely anonymous. A couple of children were born in hospitals, then legally abandoned, Munns said.

The reason for Iowa’s law was to highlight a mother’s options so she might take a safe route in a moment of panic, he said. 

But women who stuff their baby into a trash bag aren’t making decisions, says Pertman. They’re reacting.

Most babies abandoned and left to die still have their umbilical cord.  Their mothers are often women who did not know they were pregnant and did not give birth in hospitals.

Putting a baby in a toilet is a reaction of the moment, Pertman said, and safe haven laws don’t address the needs of these women,

Because Nebraska has no safe haven law, the Lincoln woman who left her baby at the hospital has been ticketed for misdemeanor child abandonment.

Lancaster County Attorney Gary Lacey said his office likely will file the charge this week. It carries a penalty of up to a $1,000 fine and a year in prison, but Lacey said his office likely will recommend probation.

“This is not something you can just ignore,” he said Friday. “The law is there. It says you will not abandon a child. ...

“I don't think you can bring someone in this world ... and then just run off.”

If the mother had left the baby in an unsafe place and the child died, he said, she would be “facing charges way more serious than this.”

Reach Nancy Hicks at 473-7250 or nhicks@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Politics > Back to Top of Story

All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Okie wrote on July 22, 2007 7:59 am:
" I'm surprised that Senator Ernie does not support this law. "

Just one? wrote on July 22, 2007 8:39 am:
" Even if ONE baby is spared and later adopted by a loving family, isn't that enough to pass this kind of law?!?! "

Cara wrote on July 22, 2007 11:45 am:
" Why don't they have the positives of the safe haven laws instead of just the consequences? Shouldn't a story show both sides? "

Typical male wrote on July 22, 2007 11:46 am:
" Mr. Lacey states: "I don't think that you can bring someone in this world and then just run off." That statement right there shows how he has never given birth. In terms of filing charges on behalf of this mother, is he acting on the child's behalf? I don't think so. Is he acting on the mom's behalf? I don't think so. Is he acting because there's a public outcry? Probably not since most of the responses are in support of the mom. Does he know under what circumstances that the mom left the child behind? I think the mom left the child behind in a safe place where she thought the child would be protected and cared for. There are other options available like adoption but for whatever reason she chose not to take advantage of them. I commend the mom for leaving the child behind. Better to leave the child behind now than to take a chance of worse things happening to it in the future. I can't imagine the desparate thoughts that were going on in her head and I admire her for having the awareness to at least leave the child in some place safe. To pursue this matter any farther legally is a waste of time, money & man power. Let HHS do their job & provide the baby with a home & whatever services that they can connect the mom up with. "

J. Lemon wrote on July 22, 2007 11:47 am:
" Gary Lacey is wrong, the person in question left the baby at a safe place in safe hands. I would argue that if this istuation were to happen again, she would probably think she would be better off to not have the baby in a medical center, but rather in a back alley somewhere, and leave the baby for dead. For whatever reason, she could not care for the child, but had it's best interestes at heart by following the course she did, and Lacey is going to punish her for that? Furthermore, I feel the Journal Star was worng to publish her picture in the paper. You will not publish the name of a woman who left her child on the interstae shoulder to avoid embaressment to the kid, so why would you publish the name and picture of the mom in this situation. "

Curiousity. . . wrote on July 22, 2007 12:04 pm:
" Isn't this story a little biased? A prosecuting attorney's consulted about what charges might be brought up, their probable recommendation as punishment and their opinions on the matter. Even if the mom doesn't have a defense lawyer assigned to her, wouldn't been fair to consult a defense lawyer of some sort about the same issue? Politically, democrat & republican sides are both presented when covering an issue. Doesn't this incident merit the same courtesy? "

Mike wrote on July 22, 2007 4:05 pm:
" My concerns with the safe haven law, other than there is not statistical evidence that it works, is that the fathers and other family members are left out of the equation. Let's say I am the future father of one of these babies and the mother and I get in a fight - she leaves - I can't find her - she abandons the baby at a fire station in Kearney - and I've lost my rights to the baby and my child has lost its father. "

not sorry wrote on July 22, 2007 4:39 pm:
" This is why women choose to have abortions. Cheap, LEGAL, and all one has to endure is a little discomfort, and the occasional crazy person with a sign and a big mouth. No publishing of names, pictures, or armchair moralizing by the entire community. I feel sorry for this girl. I'm sure she thought she was "doing the right thing". You can get as huffy as you want, but I KNOW there are many of you who found yourselves relieved when YOUR daughter or girlfriend made that choice. Aren't you glad your neighbors and church fellows didn't have to read about it in the newspaper? "

disgusted wrote on July 22, 2007 6:03 pm:
" how can someone do this to there kid, she should lose custidy of the child, and should have to pay child support as well, and find the father, make him pay child support as well. they should be ashammed of themselves.The kid did nothing wrong to deserve this, and the state should not have to raise the kid, make the parents pay. "

Ex-EX-Nebraskan wrote on July 22, 2007 6:50 pm:
" I read with disgust that Nebraska once again distinguishes itself as a backwards state of half-witted people. The only smart ones are the ones who leave. I thought that Nebraska was really backward that they would not enact a hate-crimes bill but now I am just in awe of the total lack of reason whatsoever. "

Mike's comments wrote on July 22, 2007 8:10 pm:
" Made a good point about the father's rights and having a safe haven law. Ideally, it'd be set up like adoption laws where both the mom's & dad's signatures are needed in order to give a child up. That way the father's rights are also ensured. "

E. Chamber surprised wrote on July 22, 2007 8:13 pm:
" I'm surprised about Ernie not supporting this law. Think his comment about safe haven laws making it easier for more babies to be abandoned is a bit naive. Don't think this would be an easy decision for any parent to make. "

Agree......... wrote on July 22, 2007 8:31 pm:
" With ex-EX Nebraska. We are leaving as soon as possible. This young woman did what she felt was right. By the way, if the father's are all so concerned, WHERE are they?!?! No one can judge her unless they are Jesus. I hope she has a good life, the baby also. "

Mak wrote on July 22, 2007 8:38 pm:
" For your consideration. If a family or disgruntled boyfriend turned a newborn into a safe haven location without the consent of the mother, couldn't she report them for kidnapping? She could go to the police and they would reunite her with her baby. The same could be true for a boyfriend who knew his girlfriend was pregnant and then she left the baby at a Safe Haven location. As far as a lack of medical history, yes, that is very unfortunate, but there is an entire generation of children who don't know who half of their parentage is. As for encouraging young people to get pregnant and then not take responsibility, we give these young people the choice of aborting a child already, also effectively avoiding "responsibility." "

Educator wrote on July 22, 2007 8:55 pm:
" Regardless of which side of the debate one is on, there still seems to be no reason for publicizing the mother's name, photo, and address. She is already in enough turmoil; why make it worse? Charge her with a misdemeanor if you must, but why tell the world about it? What possible good could that do? I'm ashamed of the newspaper. "

A Mom wrote on July 22, 2007 11:11 pm:
" It's a shame that young women are in such dire circumstances that they would abandon their child. Why not give them an option that provides for the safety of the child? Even if only one life is saved, the law has a benefit. This young woman who left her newborn at St. Elizabeth, obviously considered the safety of her daughter. I realize that not all of these women would be able to think past the act of hiding what they consider shameful, but why not give them the opportunity. I can't imagine the desperation they must feel at the moment they are placing their child in the garbage or abandoning in a place to die. I feel for them, and hope that there is something our society can do to limit these types of events, even if it is a law that allows a newborn to be left somewhere safe. It seems to me that this law is not the solution in the big picture, but it is a place to start. I am very glad that the woman who left her child at St. E's will likely receive probation, she left her child in a safe place and did not harm her in any way. I'm just another Mom who is saddened when I read of the desperate act of a Mother who is afraid or mentally ill. "

to disgusted wrote on July 22, 2007 11:17 pm:
" Yeah, I figure that you have anger towards this young woman. Consider this though, she could have given birth at home, put the baby in a trash can and perhaps never have been caught. Here, she took a huge risk, maybe because she loves her child, just a guess.. she left the child in the nursery at the hospital in the care of nurses and other medical professionals. This child was not harmed in any way whatsoever, and will grow up either with this girl as a mom or be adopted. No scars and no damage.. why spew hate towards someone who really tried to do the right thing? "

Cara wrote on July 23, 2007 1:08 am:
" Isn't it possible that she actually thought Nebraska had a safe haven law??? When alot of other states make create those laws, one may just assume that Nebraska did as well. And maybe she did go into the hospital with the intention of telling the nurse that she wanted to give the baby up for adoption. When everyone was so happy for the new mother maybe she was emabarrassed about wanting them to keep her baby. It is hard for someone with no support to be in this situation. The baby is so lucky that it's mother loved it enough to leave it in the hospital instead of taking and doing who knows what. And I'm sure that the family that has the baby now is happy and feels blessed that the girl loved her child enough to actually go into a hospital, instead of delivering in a bathroom or such. I do feel in some way that the state of Nebraska failed this girl when she needed help. There should've been some tell tale sign when she wa in the hospital that she needed someone to help her or at least to listen to her...Where was the social worker? Generally, isn't someone assigned to single mothers? I'm not trying to be critical of ANYONE, I'm just wondering where everything fell apart? "

Former HHS worker wrote on July 23, 2007 7:29 am:
" Some of the kids worked with had such horrible backgrounds. Molested by their parents, gang raped, were given illegal & prescribed drugs from their parents, 15 people (both adults & children) living in a 3 bedroom/1.75bathroom apartment. Nightmares. Mom leaving behind a baby in a hospital seems so mild compared to these cases. It's a serious situation but at least baby now has a chance to be with people who will love it & give it a decent home. And baby was left in a safe place. She shouldn't be villified because of this. Counselled yes but not left hung out to dry. "

Wm Morris wrote on July 23, 2007 8:24 am:
" I would like to second Ex-ex-Nebraskan's remarks. "

MO wrote on July 23, 2007 8:48 am:
" With all the people out there that can't have children and so desperately want one, this child will not be in harms way. Someone will take this child as their own and treat it better than some of us mothers can treat our children because we work full time jobs and don't have the time we would like to spend with our kids. I believe this woman did the right thing and someone should appeal to a really great attorney on her behalf to get her off of any charges she may be facing. Leaving a child you have given birth to will cause her enough turmoil, she doesn't need to be punished in a court of law also. Let her mourn however she needs to, but let her be. SHE DID THE RIGHT THING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

React with Love wrote on July 23, 2007 9:16 am:
" I don't see the father of this baby stepping up demanding his rights or getting his name & address in the paper. It's easy for people to judge harshly for what she did and yet, if she kept it, they'd be judging if the state was supporting her and the baby. You haven't walked in her shoes. Why don't you try to react with love for once? "

A mother wrote on July 23, 2007 9:18 am:
" Cara, Thank you, I am sure she thought that Nebraska had a safe haven law. I work in a law office and thought Nebraska had a safe haven law. Granted if I were getting ready to leave my baby somewhere I would probably check into that sort of thing. I would like to hope that this girl was scared and alone and had no idea what to do. She thought leaving the baby at a hospital were it had care would be the best thing to do. Can I imagine leaving my child somewhere, no. But I have never been a scared single mother. And in the worse case, maybe she didn't want the baby. Maybe she was irrespsonsible and got pregnant and wanted nothing to do with it. The alternative would have been throwing the baby away. She didn't do that. She left it in a HOSPITAL!!! I can't think of a much better place to leave an unwanted newborn. "

to not sorry wrote on July 23, 2007 9:22 am:
" To not sorry, you are missing the point. This is not about abortion, this is about this woman NOT wanting to have an abortion (pro life maybe??) yet panicking and not knowing what to do when she did give birth. She should not be punished. Abortion, ie the killing of an unborn human being, is legal. I am sorry to here you felt it was the choice for you to make. While I don't agree with it, I do acknowledge that that decision was yours and the fathers alone. But this woman, choosing life for her child, is now be punished because there is not supporting legislation for the action she felt she had to take. By the way, I hold one of those signs up at the abortion clinic. I am not crazy as you would villify me. I believe we can do better for our women and their unborn children than abortion. "

osisbs wrote on July 23, 2007 9:49 am:
" No matter how sane a law is, there will always be right-wing God-bothering whack-o folks against it. They're against condoms, against birth control, against abortion, against abandoning a baby in a safe-haven, but the worst part is that they're absolutely opposed to taxes to build the schools, clinics, daycares, pools, libraries, roads and other things that go along with bringing every fertilized egg to term. They operate in George Bush's non-reality-based world of fantasy. It's no wonder they all support him and his murderous campaigns to get everyone to heaven right now. "

sad wrote on July 23, 2007 9:57 am:
" This woman at least left her baby in a safe place where the baby would be taken care of and the right decisions would be made for her. However, the woman is 21 years old and I'm sure knew better than to "sneak" out of the hospital. People act out in fear and we don't know what this woman's life was like or what she was dealing with; however, she still could have talked with someone at the hospital and the options would have been spelled out to her. Punishing her for actually leaving her baby is going to scare other young people into doing the wrong thing; let's make sure safe haven information is out there so this doesn't happen again. "

not not sorry wrote on July 23, 2007 10:06 am:
" To not sorry, you are missing the point. This is not about abortion, this is about this woman NOT wanting to have an abortion (pro life maybe??) yet panicking and not knowing what to do when she did give birth. She should not be punished. Abortion, ie the killing of an unborn human being, is legal. I am sorry to here you felt it was the choice for you to make. While I don't agree with it, I do acknowledge that that decision was yours and the fathers alone. But this woman, choosing life for her child, is now being punished because there is not supporting legislation for the action she felt she had to take. By the way, I hold one of those signs up at the abortion clinic. I am not crazy as you would villify me. I believe we can do better for our women and their unborn children than abortion. "

M wrote on July 23, 2007 10:06 am:
" Why not have these safe haven laws out there in case a mother doesn't want her baby? It says, either way there are still going to be abandonments in trash bins, toilets, etc.. so why not have the option to dropping a baby off at a hospital where it can be cared for. I don't see any reason to give that woman a ticket because maybe she felt like what she was doing was the right thing. "

dont know wrote on July 23, 2007 10:32 am:
" If this kind of law would ever been put in place in Nebraska, what about fathers and other family members? There are so far other options to pick that wouldn't involve dumping the baby somewhere...adoption and abortion are two. I'm not judging her because I could care less what she does with her life. She chose an option, she could have even took the baby and left it on a door step. Does anyone remember reading an article that was in the journal star about a man (i think this was in china) who put his 3 year old son in a "drop box"? "

Don, So. Sioux City NE wrote on July 23, 2007 10:36 am:
" I am appalled at what the paper has publiched. Do you publish the name, picture of a woman who dumps the baby in a trash can? I am sure this young lady feels terrable, but she did the right thing for the baby. Now if HHS would find a relative that would be happy to raise this darlin girl and give her a chance in this crazy mixed up world, I would be happy as an Uncle to raise and care for this baby. "

Disgusted wrote on July 23, 2007 10:52 am:
" I have mixed emotions about the entire issue, but would rather see a woman have the option of a safe place to have a baby, and hope that it will have better opportunities than what she could offer. What disgusts me is the choice of words that the journalist chose to use in this article. Every one of us reading this knows what happens, but what about ethical writing? "Stuffed in a trash bag" - my stomach turned at the choice of words here. I believe in the first amendment, but this is vulgar. "

JAZZY wrote on July 23, 2007 11:14 am:
" The save-haven law would work. I keep thinking of people I know that would love to have a baby , but physically can't conceive. This would give them a chance at raise one of their own, if not physically at least mentally. It would be better then putting them in foster care and the government paying for this child till they are 18. Give a loving couple a chance to be a parent. "

Nina wrote on July 23, 2007 11:15 am:
" I feel pity for this woman - first the guilt, desperation and anxiety of giving up her baby, then the legal ramifications. I don't doubt she gave an alias and skipped out because she had no way of paying the hospital bill. So she did what she could to make the baby safe. When my grandmother was a social worker in the 1930's, she would have babies left on her doorstep, and the mother would run and hide to make sure she came out and got the baby. Also babies were commonly left on church steps on Sunday morning during that period of depression and poverty. It's probably the best this mother could do to her way of thinking, but it would have been better to contact a lawyer ahead of time, who would set up an adoption and have the adoptive parents pay all medical expense, plus more, so the mother could better her life with some education. But many poverty-stricken people are scared of lawyers and don't realize there is free counseling, so her approach was the next best thing. We need a safe haven law, if you care about innocent babies' lives. "

sorta walked in her shoes wrote on July 23, 2007 12:47 pm:
" Had an unplanned pregnancy & wanted to give baby up for adoption. The dad denied baby was his & was no help. Neither was his family. My family felt this was my problem & should solve things alone. Friends too busy working & partying but at least they'd listen when needed to talk. HHS only wanted to cover benenfits paperwork & only gave me a list of adoption agencies to contact. No other guidance. No attorneys hung out in my social circle but didn't know any or which ones to go to. Contacted adoption agency & was assigned & reassigned to 6 different caseworkers during pregnancy. Agency would lay off people & then rehire them back when got their funding for new fiscal year. Some changed jobs. Sometimes would only be assigned to 1 for a week & then when would check in two weeks later would be reassigned to another caseworker that had been with earlier in the pregnancy. Never knew who I was dealing with. Didn't trust private adoption 1-800 numbers listed in newspapers. Wasn't affiliated with a church so didn't feel comfortable getting help from them. Very lonely, isolated time. Felt like a football getting tossed around with adoption agency but stuck with them because didn't think there was anyone else around. If mom who left her baby behind when through some of the stuff that I went through, I can see why she just walked away. Don't know her story but don't think that she should be penalized for doing what she thought was for the best for her baby. And possibly for her. Don't blame her for wanting to get away from it all. Bottom line, at least she made sure her daughter was cared for before walking a way. "

Another Mom wrote on July 23, 2007 1:30 pm:
" I can't see why issuing this law is such a big deal, it protects those who don't have the wisdom or knowledge to protect themselves. Knowing that these babies are safe from harm should be reason enough. 48 other states have this law in place what is wrong with that. The stats don't matter the babies do!! With places like Cedars who go beyond the call of duty I would feel better knowing these women have that choice rather than leaving these innocent babies just laying somewhere. Wake up and smell the coffee people, give these unhappy moms and babies a real choice no matter what the circumstance. "

LINCOLN wrote on July 23, 2007 2:07 pm:
" Even if we can help just one child from abuse or death, it would be worth it. Nebraska needs this passed. "

Lacey's lines wrote on July 23, 2007 3:00 pm:
" Wake up Mr. Lacey!!!!!!! Your line of ". . .can bring someone in this world. . .and then just run off" is so ignorant. Just because a woman gives birth, it doesn't make her a mother. Just because a man impregnates a woman doesn't make him a dad. Think of all the foster, step, adopted families out there that are families without biological ties. The girl ran away and now someone else can be a mom to the baby. Isn't that what everyone wants and in the baby's best interests? Just let the girl terminate her parental rights and move on. "

BD wrote on July 23, 2007 3:58 pm:
" I agree with Ex-EX NEBRASKAN. People in this state are as stubborn as they can get. No matter what you say or what you do, its always wrong and everybody fight it regardless. Greedy, Rude, Stubborn, Selfish etc, Nebraska!!! "

whatever wrote on July 23, 2007 9:14 pm:
" After the way the Journal Star handled this story I can't think of any circumstances where I would support a safe haven law. It's clear reporters will just dog these poor women in the name of a story. As far as how one got oneself in the position of needing to drop off a child, well that's a whole different story. It takes two to Tango and it takes really poor judgement to get yourself in that position. That's pretty clear no matter whether your are a moral or amoral person. Maybe we should reopen the old women's home in Milford. I told the story about that home to my teenagers and boy was that an eye opener, my how times have changed. Or, have they really? "

a mom wrote on July 23, 2007 10:45 pm:
" I think that this is the best law that can ever be put into effect in our state. If 1 woman knows that she can safely leave a child somewhere then that mean 1 baby will live tonight. Because of what happen to this 1 women how many girls in our state has heard about it and now are scared to death that they too might get into trouble and will end up leaving their babies in an unsafe place. They don't want to be ticket nor have their names posted everywhere like this woman has. She probably did the smartest thing in her life! I don’t know this woman but I can say that I am proud of her and I wish her the best of luck. I think her daughter will understand and now be brought up how her mother would have wanted her. No matter what the story is there is a negative side but it seems that Nebraska law makers can not get over the negative and see the positive. I am ashamed to live in Nebraska! "

Lisa wrote on July 24, 2007 8:47 am:
" Condoms Condoms Condoms... None of this abstinence only crap in LPS. Kids are kids are kids, they aren't going to stop because you say so. We need better education to these kids about safe sex and what options are available in every step of sexual conduct. Public school is sometimes the only way we can teach and educate young people. This will NOT eliminate these kinds of problems I am not that niave, but obviously what we're doing is not working. "

For Safe Havens wrote on July 24, 2007 9:02 am:
" So, Nebraska will support the Concealed Weapons Law, but not a Safe Haven for babies! Seems backwards to me. I would support a law that would allow Safe Havens. Better than a birth mother having the baby somewhere and leaving it to die! I personally don't understand how you could just leave your baby, but then I was not in that situation. It would be better that the situation were thought out before the birth, but maybe this person did not have any support. "

Frustrated wrote on July 24, 2007 9:47 am:
" I think this is all messed up! I support the mother in what she did, there are many other ways she could have "gotten rid" of the baby, she chose to do it in a safe place. As for the article stating that the Safe Haven law doesn't prevent babies from being discarded in trash cans, that is correct, but how is that much different than allowing them to have abortions. Safe Havens are just one more option for mothers. I am pro life but am not blind to the other side of the arguement. And by saying that you have the option to have an abortion and "kill" your baby before it is born is ok but then turn around and say that we aren't going to help you if you decide to have the baby and then don't know what to do with it. I guess I just don't see how we can support abortion and not support chosing life!!! A Safe Haven is just one more option and if it saves the life of one child it is worth it!! And for those of you who are so bent out of shape about stubborn, backwards Nebraskans. Why don't we do something about it? This is our state people, there are ways to go about showing support for the things you believe in! "

Goodgravy wrote on July 24, 2007 10:28 am:
" If this woman had not abandoned her baby at birth, but would have done so, say.....several weeks later....her baby was sick, admitted it to the hospital, took off.....is there a difference? Mr. Lacey is just upholding the law as it stands. I think everyone is mighty quick to judge in general. "

Lindsay wrote on July 24, 2007 10:55 am:
" Well Mr. Lacey, how come a mother gets ticketed for abandoning her child but a father doesn't? Hmmm...sounds like a double standard to me! "

Champion Ernie wrote on July 24, 2007 11:19 am:
" Hey, Ernie, thanks for being one of the roadblocks to passing a safe haven bill. While you are busy filibustering and offering YOUR opinion instead of representing your CONSTITUENTS' opinions on this matter, women are out there getting pregnant and need alternative solutions to having an abortion. You and the rest of your fellow senators need to quit nitpicking over wording and listen to what the people of this state are saying. QUIT SHELVING A SAFE HAVEN BILL!!!! Get to work and tackle the this tough issue. Don't be shy. Take a stand. Do what you were elected to do. Of course a safe haven bill isn't a total guarantee that moms will stop abandoning babies. Nothing in life is a guarantee but if this law prevents a baby from being tossed in the trash, ending up at the bottom of a laundry chute or left in a bathroom than it's one more child that is saved. "

The Quiet One wrote on July 24, 2007 11:24 am:
" Sen. Rich Pahls, Considering you are one of the first people mentioned in this article, not much has been said about you or you partner in introducing a safe haven bill to the legislature. Just wanted to say, thank you, thank you, thank you. "

prolife v. prochoice wrote on July 24, 2007 11:37 am:
" I'm a strong prochoice supporter. My boyfriend's a strong prolife supporter. We argue about it and end up just agreeing to disagree. We'll never change each other's minds. What a surprise it was that we both agree on a safe haven bill "

Monica Becker wrote on July 24, 2007 12:22 pm:
" I live in a state where we do have safe haven laws, and I believe that if it saves ONE infants life it is a good law.I had a baby at a early age and I was lucky enough to have family help. Thank God, because I was so overwelmed. Some of these girls have no place to turn for help, and so some of these babies are abused and yes ,sometimes even die. So Nebraska open your eyes and your heart to these courageous young girls and their innocent little ones and give them a chance to do the right thing, Just as this poor girl did and not be afraid!!!! "

My stars wrote on July 24, 2007 2:09 pm:
" Can the prosecutor's case be built on what might have happened if the woman kept the baby & then abandoned it later? Don't see any facts there. Just speculation. How many continuances will there be? Will there be a mistrial because of allthe publicity? That's what happened in a rape case recently. Think before you can neglect something that you would have had to take care of it first which this woman didn't do. "

I wrote on July 24, 2007 2:48 pm:
" No, safe haven laws won't save EVERY baby, but if it saves even one, isn't it worth it? "

SmooveB wrote on July 24, 2007 2:49 pm:
" To Just one?: What if one baby is spared, but a dozen others are not? "

Jean & Mike wrote on July 25, 2007 5:54 am:
" Massachusetts was the 46th state to enact a Baby Safe Haven law 3 years ago. Since passage we've had 6 babies safely surrendered under the law. All 6 Moms gave full medical records, 4 of six came back to sign full adoption contracts, some with the Dads. All 6 Moms gave familial histories to pass on to the babies. All 6 are alive of course. In the 4 1/2 years before our law passed, while our legislature saw several bills languish, we had 13 babies abandoned, 6 died, 4 came very close to death, 3 were stroies similar to the one in Nebraska. One baby was safely surrendered at a MA hospital, but the couple came over from the CT border thinking we had the same law as they did. CT passed a Baby Safe Haven law 5 years ahead of MA. Simply stated, the MA Baby Safe Haven law has worked, is now the best program of its kind in the country, is being copied in many states, and will work in NE. Get the law passed! "

a mommy wrote on July 25, 2007 11:00 am:
" this is terrible some people try forever to have a baby? i thinik ne would benifit alot from a safe haven law. what i dont understand is why she did not arrange an adoption for this child if she didnt want it. i will never understand how it is possible for anyone to just leave behind their child. even though i think this is terrible lets all thank god the baby wasnt found in a trashcan somwhere! "

Being Adopted wrote on August 5, 2007 10:22 pm:
" why doesn't the mom just keep the baby... i mean it will be hard but isn't life hard in its self? "

Dea.weeks wrote on August 14, 2007 8:00 pm:
" There is a debate on two bills about getting these safe haven laws in Nebraska in January. If you really want to save babies and adopt this law, show up at the legislature then. I will be there. "