Pregnant woman fined after having an attack of morning sickness...

[DrFaroohk]

As for DrFahrook's argument, by the logic presented, I should be able to speed if I'm running late for uni. If I'm caught I can just say that I'm having a serious attack of internal bleeding. -.-

I'm not sure what the first part of that has to do with anything. How about if you were actually having internal bleeding and had to speed to get to the hospital?

[Glados]

My point is though that no one would argue if another illness caused a person to need to pull over. If my husband pulls over due to low blood sugar causing nausea everyone says he is doing the smart thing. If a pregnant woman does the exact same thing, she is being entitled.

It is not just in this thread but in other's I have read as well. The prevailing attitude seems to be that since pregnancy can be prevented then pregnant women should stfu and suffer. It is not a matter of being entitled. It is a matter of being treated as anyone else with a medical condition is treated.

[the_std]

Glados, it wasn't her pulling over that was the problem. It was that she made an illegal left turn. If your husband did the same thing she did (make the turn, get caught, and kick up a giant fuss about it) then I'm sure we'd be decrying him in exactly the same way.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Exactly this. I don't see where the pregnant woman bashing is coming in, personally.

[Anthony K. S.]

If a man pulled over because of a medical condition no one would cry foul.

That's because if it was a man, then no one would care whether he got a ticket or not.


I have always tried to be deferential to women on this subject, simply because it's impossible for me to ever understand what a woman goes through during pregnancy.

However, I think that your analysis of this situation is a bit one-sided. You may be correct that the criticism of this woman (not necessarily on this board, but in general) may be the result of bias. However, you seem to ignore the fact that the support this woman is getting may be the result of bias as well.

The media must have known that a lot of people would automatically sympathize with the pregnant woman, regardless of the facts of the case. That's why they led off with the morning sickness in the title and lead line of the article, and mentioned the illegal turn last.

Now, if some people saw the story and got annoyed about pregnant women expecting special treatment, then the media would probably view that as a good thing, because it generates additional interest in the story. But the main draw of the story would be sympathy.

Had the driver been a man, would he have gotten less criticism? Perhaps. But I can say with near-certainty that he would have gotten a lot less support as well. Having studied journalism myself, I can tell you that it's a lot easier to get readers to sympathize (or even care) with a woman than with a man.

If this woman was viewed the same way that a man with a medical illness was viewed, then the story would have drawn fewer critics, fewer supporters, and a LOT more people reading the story and just moving on without even blinking.

And this is just my feeling on it, but I think that the support this woman would lose if she had been a man is actually greater than the criticism she would have been spared.


As for the people on this message board, it seems to me that they are viewing this woman as entitled because she broke the law and apparently believes that the authorities are under some obligation to let her off for it. I see no evidence that they would view the situation any differently if it was a male driver who expressed such a view.

What puzzles me is that she says the officer should have let her off with a warning. In this context, a warning would usually imply, "Don't do it again, or you will get a ticket next time."

If this is a situation that she could not have avoided, then what good would a warning do? There would be no way for her to prevent it from happening again.

On the other hand, if there are steps that she can take to prevent it from happening again ... Well, then, in my opinion, she should be saying, "I should have done that to begin with. Okay, I'll take my lumps, and make sure it doesn't happen again."

She can ask for the authorities to cut her a break, but she crosses over into entitlement when she acts like they were under an obligation to do so.

[Boozy]

I agree with most of what you've said. Pregnant women are revered because it's considered the holiest and most righteous thing a woman can do with her body and her life. It's a sexist attitude, frankly.

That's because if it was a man, then no one would care whether he got a ticket or not.

Unless he was autistic. If an autistic man made an illegal turn for autistic reasons, the Internet would care.

[Mytical]

First Anthony K. S. . Don't know if I could put it better myself.

If a man, who say had ate some bad sushi, did the exact same thing..and acted the exact same way..I would respond the same. The fact that this person is A) Female, B) Pregnant is actually immaterial. The fact that they think that they alone are 'spechul' is the problem.

[Panacea]

I'm with the folks who think this lady is an EW. If it was a man who had food poisoning, no one would care.

I hate double standards.

I don't blame her for doing what she had to to get off the road. At least she did so safely.

But that doesn't get her out of a fine. I would not have called the news. I would have gone to traffic court and asked for a reduced fine.

Her situation is not an excuse to break the law. It IS however, extenuating circumstances that justify reducing the penalty.

[BlaqueKatt]

The prevailing attitude seems to be that since pregnancy can be prevented then pregnant women should stfu and suffer. It is not a matter of being entitled. It is a matter of being treated as anyone else with a medical condition is treated.

If you really want to go down that road, did I choose to have migraines?
Did the previously mentioned person with blood sugar issues or person with food poisoning wake up and say, "you know what I want a medical condition"

If someone chose to cut off their toes to wear designer shoes*, would you treat them the same as the veteran who lost his leg in Vietnam? Would you treat someone recovering from say a boob job the same as a triple bypass recipient?

*yes women do this