Ohio Woman, Britney Watts is accused of abusing a corpse after a miscarriage, but an Ohio grand jury decided not to indict her.
In a case that drew national attention and sparked concerns about the criminalization of pregnancy loss in a post-Roe v. Wade America, a grand jury in Trumbull County, Ohio, declined to indict Brittany Watts, a 34-year-old woman facing abuse of corpse charges related to her miscarriage.
Watts' ordeal began after experiencing complications during her 22-week pregnancy. Denied treatment at a Catholic hospital due to delays and complications, she ultimately miscarried at home. The remains of the fetus clogged the toilet, and fearing further complications, Watts disposed of them outside before going to a hair appointment. A concerned friend directed her back to the hospital, where a nurse contacted authorities upon hearing about the events.
The subsequent investigation and charge of abuse of corpse, punishable by up to a year in prison, ignited strong reactions. Supporters rallied for Watts, highlighting the potential chilling effect of criminalizing miscarriages, particularly for women of color like Watts. Conversely, prosecutors argued the case focused on "outrage" caused by the disposal method, not the miscarriage itself.
However, the grand jury ultimately sided with Watts and her legal team, who argued that the abuse-of-corpse statute lacked clear definitions and unfairly targeted Watts for a devastating experience beyond her control.
The decision brought relief to Watts and her supporters. In a statement, she expressed gratitude for the community's support and pledged to continue fighting for change. Her lawyer, Traci Timko, emphasized the emotional toll of the ordeal and called for clearer legal frameworks and broader education surrounding miscarriages.
The case also reignited a debate about reproductive rights in the wake of Roe v. Wade's overturn. Groups like Ohio Physicians for Reproductive Rights commended the grand jury's decision and reiterated the dangers of criminalizing reproductive outcomes. They urged for policies that ensure women can access necessary medical care without fear of legal repercussions.
While Watts' case may be behind her, it leaves behind a potent reminder of the complexities and anxieties surrounding miscarriage, particularly in a climate with restricted abortion access. It also highlights the critical need for clearer legal protections and increased understanding of women's reproductive experiences.