Sebelius signs Alexa's Law
BY DION LEFLER
The Wichita Eagle
Terri Brooks has lost a lot -- a
14-year-old daughter murdered and a
granddaughter never to be born.
But on Wednesday, 11 months to the day
after the slaying of her pregnant
daughter, Brooks won a victory when Gov.
Kathleen Sebelius signed Alexa's Law,
which makes it a crime to harm a fetus.
"I'm overwhelmed. I can't believe it,"
Brooks said. "It's just very emotional to
think we made it this far."
Asked what she would say to the governor,
Brooks, her voice choking, could only
produce two words: "Thank you."
The new law will allow prosecutors to
bring double charges against a person who
attacks a pregnant woman -- once for
harming the mother and once for harming
her fetus.
Alexa's Law draws its name from the case
of Chelsea Brooks, a pregnant teen killed
last year in what prosecutors say was a
homicide-for-hire plot by her boyfriend.
Alexa was the name Chelsea had chosen for
her unborn daughter.
Chelsea's former boyfriend faces a
homicide charge that could bring him the
death penalty. Prosecutors allege he had
Chelsea killed in an effort to avoid being
prosecuted for having sex with the
underage girl.
Terri Brooks and her family made several
trips to Topeka in the past several months
to advocate for Alexa's Law and tell their
story in legislative hearings.
Conservative lawmakers who pushed the bill
through the Legislature were also pleased
that Sebelius signed it.
And Now...the Rest of the Story: Posted: 05-21-07 21:56pm
wrote:
Brunk had tried for years to
get a fetal protection bill through the
Legislature as the Unborn Victims of
Violence Act.
But it was blocked by abortion-rights
proponents who worried that defining a
fetus as a separate human being could open
the door to more restrictions on
abortions.
Brunk exempted abortion and acts of the
mother from prosecution under Alexa's Law,
in an attempt to keep it out of the
abortion debate at the Capitol.
Opponents said Alexa's Law does little to
protect pregnant women and they think in
some cases, it could be used to aid
prosecutions of women who don't take care
of themselves while pregnant.
"More than 30 states have laws similar to
UVVA (Unborn Victims of Violence Act), and
violence against pregnant women in those
states has not stopped or even been
minimized," Julie Burkhart, director of
the abortion-rights group ProKanDo, said
in a written statement.
"Similarly, this law will not help
pregnant women in Kansas escape the perils
of violent behavior, either," she said.
ProKanDo and other groups opposed to
Alexa's Law had advocated for increasing
penalties for harming a pregnant woman,
while not defining the fetus as a separate
person.
"What we need are laws that will place
value on the lives of the women who give
life," Burkhart said.
Sen. Phil Journey, R-Haysville, shepherded
the measure through the Senate.
He said he doesn't think there's much
chance prosecutors will misuse Alexa's Law
to go after pregnant women.
During the legislative process, it was
revised to apply only to a specific set of
crimes, all violent.
"It's intended to be very narrow in its
application," Journey said.
Alexa's Law was packaged into a
comprehensive crime bill that also
establishes prison sentences for serial
burglars, clarifies when residents can use
deadly force to protect themselves,
outlaws household-chemical bombs and makes
it easier to enforce laws against
possession of drug paraphernalia.
"Taken as a whole, it was a good bill for
the governor to sign," Brunk
said.
From the same link as above.
|
trina1
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Jun 2005 Posts: 528 Location: , Lost in Oz.
Posted: 05-21-07 22:19pm
Is the rest of the story for those you
think might not go and read the first
post?
Just an FYI....I don't know about this
message board....but any other I have been
on.....you are only suppose to post the
first few paragraphs of an article and
then a link....so as not to "infringe" on
the original sites article. That is what I
did.
|
trina1
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Jun 2005 Posts: 528 Location: , Lost in Oz.
Posted: 05-21-07 22:22pm
I think....and I would hope you all would
agree....that the important thing here is
that Alexa was a "wanted" child and by
giving her personhood....maybe her death
will not go unpunished. Both her and her
mothers death was premeditated and
brutal.....and I don't believe any human
should experience that kind of death.
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4045 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 142
Thanked:13
Posted: 05-21-07 22:24pm
trina1
wrote:
Is the rest of the story for
those you think might not go and read the
first post?
Just an FYI....I don't know about this
message board....but any other I have been
on.....you are only suppose to post the
first few paragraphs of an article and
then a link....so as not to "infringe" on
the original sites article. That is what I
did.
You cut the article off right before it
explained that the law exempts abortion.
The rest of the article had comments by
opponents. I felt it misleading to not
include that information especially since
we are in the abortion forum. Nothing
personal, and I do know that it's courtesy
to only post the first few paragraphs of
an article in many forums.
|
trina1
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Jun 2005 Posts: 528 Location: , Lost in Oz.
Posted: 05-21-07 22:45pm
Birch
wrote:
trina1
wrote:
Is the rest of the story for
those you think might not go and read the
first post?
Just an FYI....I don't know about this
message board....but any other I have been
on.....you are only suppose to post the
first few paragraphs of an article and
then a link....so as not to "infringe" on
the original sites article. That is what I
did.
You cut the article off right before it
explained that the law exempts abortion.
The rest of the article had comments by
opponents. I felt it misleading to not
include that information especially since
we are in the abortion forum. Nothing
personal, and I do know that it's courtesy
to only post the first few paragraphs of
an article in many
forums.
I realized that after I went back and read
where I cut it off. It was not my
intention to be misleading....as I did
post the link....and figured people would
just go there and read where I left off.
At any rate.....it is there for the
reading.
|
Jules
Moderator
Joined: 19 Aug 2006 Posts: 3795 Location: Merrie Englande, UK
Thanks: 87
Thanked:71
Posted: 05-22-07 01:35am
This bothers me a bit because how can one
foetus's life be judged more valuable than
another? Either a foetus has personhood
or it doesn't.
|
trina1
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Jun 2005 Posts: 528 Location: , Lost in Oz.
Posted: 05-22-07 07:35am
PurestGreen
wrote:
This bothers me a bit
because how can one foetus's life be
judged more valuable than another? Either
a foetus has personhood or it
doesn't.
Exactly....but it is a start. It is more
than we had a year ago....and maybe a year
from now "someone" will realize that all
human life is valuable...not just certain
ones.
