A woman in my state was declared brain-dead. Her family wanted to let her go. However, she was nine weeks pregnant–and the state refused.
They are keeping her body alive. Not for her. Not because there’s hope she’ll wake up. Not because her family asked her to. They’re keeping her alive for the embryo. She has become a womb with a heartbeat. A vessel. A corpse turned into an incubator.
If this isn’t dystopia, then what is?
I posted about it. I said, “Georgia is keeping a brain-dead woman’s body alive against her family’s wishes because she was nine weeks pregnant. They’ll only pull the plug after they pull out a baby. If using corpses as incubators isn’t dystopia then I don’t know what is.”
Someone replied, “So, you would rather kill an unborn wanted family member rather than have a piece of the woman you have lost? That’s reasonable…”
Let’s be clear: this wasn’t about a grieving mother begging doctors to preserve her baby. It was the state overriding the wishes of the family. Of the people who knew her. Loved her. Watched her slip away. And now they’re forced to watch her body turn into a baby machine.
I responsed, “No, I’d rather respect a person’s dignity in death and not treat their body like a farm tool. If the family wanted a ‘piece’ of her, they could have kept a lock of hair, not forced a fetus to develop inside a corpse. Grief doesn’t justify dystopia.”
When you don’t have a good argument, you fall back on gender. On insults. But gender doesn’t erase the ethical horror here: a government deciding your dead body isn’t yours anymore. That once you’re brain-dead, you’re fair game for state use–if you’re carrying a fetus.
This isn’t compassion. This is forced birth through necromancy. It’s Christian nationalism turning science fiction into state policy.
If a living woman chooses to stay on life support to try to save her pregnancy, I support her. That’s her decision. I may be an anti-natalist who thinks no one should breed, but I also believe in people having freedom of choice. Call it a contradiction if you want. That’s not what’s happening here though.
This was never about life. It’s about control.
And if you don’t think using someone’s dead body as a uterus without consent is grotesque then ask yourself why you think women only matter when they’re carrying something.
Sisyphus Shrugged 
It’s not often I’m stunned by the inhumanity of humanity, it becomes almost blasé sometimes but this is horror. Holy crap that’s just monstrous, you know I’m not religious – but keeping a body alive to incubate a nine week old foetus? That makes me nauseous, how long will it be before the state says – ok she’s dead but we can keep her organs alive and make at least 10 babies for Jesus!
It feels to me that woman are an inconvenience to these people, they don’t mind using them but it’s the whole allowing them to be given rights a man might use that offends them. If these people stay in power it’s only a matter of time before lobotomies become mandatory after puberty/marriage which will be happen at the same time. Then they’ll just make womb machines and sex dolls so they don’t have to put up with conversations that aren’t about man things.
That’s just awful, wow we are done for.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly. It’s not just horrifying—it’s revealing. This isn’t some fringe thing anymore. It’s the logical conclusion of a system that sees women as tools, not people. If you can override death to ‘preserve a fetus,’ what can’t the state justify in the name of life?
You nailed it: it’s not that women are sacred, it’s that it’s inconvenient unless you’re producing something. And once they realize they don’t need consent or consciousness to use your bodies, how far off are those womb machines and lobotomies?
At this point it feels less like dystopia is coming and more like we’re already living in a beta version.I’m sick of watching this happen and having people tell me it’s about values or faith. It’s about power. It’s always been about power.
LikeLike
True, the seem to be trying to iron out the bugs so that when they are ready there will be no way out, no recourse. When I look back at all the loonie blogs, posts on social media and news reports from the right the thing I can’t get to grips with is that the followers of the right are now cheering for the very things they have been rallying against.
The loss of freedom not only of speech but control of your body, the mindless acceptance of anything their leaders say, the shouting down of facts with slogans, the devaluation of life – I could go on for hours. Why can’t they see that they are worshipping the people who are turning this planet into a hell?
This is the main reason I want to remove myself from the human sphere, I don’t want to participate in this self inflicted slow death. I guess through this is what they want, the disgruntled to shut up and go away. Every descenting voice will hamper their progress. Keep up the good fight x
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hope you don’t mind but I re-blogged this, I’m terrified, this is just awful.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t mind at all. Get the word out and tell any of your fellow countrymen and women to not come here.
LikeLike
Its Frankinsteinian and freaky as fuck. But would the woman who died want her child to live, no matter how dystopian or ghoulish the method leading up to its birth?
I don’t care what a state wants. Especially a Christian American state. They usually want to preserve all life until it ceases to be potentially Republican. Then its “Kill the fuckers in the name of Jesus!”
Those who were closest to the woman should certainly be heard above any interfering officials and pseudo-compassionate laws.
But what would she truly have wanted? Is anybody considering that?
Her body, her choice. Nobody else’s.
If she can’t make that choice then those who knew her the best should do right by her. And maybe they were, maybe they weren’t.
It should certainly not be a state decision.
But there is no such thing as dignity, decency, or disrespect, when you’re gone.
You’re just gone.
So this issue is not about the woman’ herself’s own life. Or death. Its about her relationship with her potential child in her own mind before she died, and its also about those who loved her most who are left behind. If those two things tally, then no problem. (Other than those state cunts).
But something doesn’t quite fit for me. If her folks loved her and she loved the idea of her potential new child, why would they go against what she wanted? Her child’s birth.
Its so easy to assume things when we don’t have all the information. Whatever angle someone comes from. I totally get your revulsion at the situation, K. But the one person in all of this that matters most is the one person who has no say whatsoever.
That is a much greater tragedy than the macabre circus that is playing all around her, in my opinion.
Though maybe even worse than that is how such officialdom will hi-five itself for saving this kid and then do nothing to help the kid when they need psychological compensation for what the state’s ultra-pretend humanity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hear what you’re saying, and I appreciate that you’re not just parroting talking points. But here’s the thing: the woman’s wishes were known—her family, the people closest to her, wanted to let her go. They weren’t guessing. They were grieving and trying to honor her. And the state said no.
This isn’t a question of “maybe she would’ve wanted this.” It’s a question of who gets to decide what happens to a person’s body. And the answer was not her family. Not even her advance directives if she had them—because in states like Georgia and Texas, once you’re pregnant, your rights and your death wishes become secondary to a fetus.
You’re right that death leaves a void, and that people can project onto it. But that’s exactly why consent is the only solid ground we’ve got. Without it, we’re guessing. And when the state steps in to guess for you—and always lands on “use the body for fetal development”—it stops being grief and becomes policy. Brutal, dogmatic policy.
This isn’t about honoring someone’s love for a potential child. It’s about using corpses as tools of ideology. Even if the fetus lives, the precedent it sets is chilling: that women’s bodies—dead or alive—are public property if they’re pregnant.
If we’re truly going to talk about tragedy, let’s talk about a government that won’t let you die with dignity, won’t respect your family’s grief, and will absolutely not be there when the baby it “saved” needs care. That’s not humanity. That’s bio-political horror.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I do get that you have some overarching Nazi cunts in America these days. I hear that there wishes were known then there should be no debate, Trump’s crew won’t ever let folks die with dignity. He is oblivious to the word.
LikeLiked by 1 person
He knows nothing about being president. He didn’t know the first time around. All his knows is it gives him more money and power and that’s all he needs to know. And he’s screwing over even the people who voted for him, and they’re still cheering him on.
LikeLike
Add on comment. Is the compassion we should feel, for the thinking, feeling woman when she was alive, the actual person? Or is it for her now when she is, to all intents and purposes, dead, and no longer who she really was?
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s the crux of it, isn’t it? Once someone is dead, we can’t ask them. So the only ethical choice is to honor what we know they wanted while alive—because the person doesn’t magically become public property at death.
If anything, death demands even more respect. We don’t desecrate graves. We don’t harvest organs without consent. We don’t violate the dead to serve the living. And yet—because there’s a fetus involved—suddenly compassion for the woman herself is optional. Her personhood becomes negotiable.
But she didn’t stop being her the moment her brain died. Her body is still hers. Her family still grieves her. Her death doesn’t erase her humanity—it makes honoring it all the more urgent.
So yes, the compassion should be for the thinking, feeling woman, not just in memory, but in how we treat her remains. Because how we treat the dead reflects what we believe about the living.
LikeLike