‘A real woman would had buried her child’: Social Media Discussion of the Disposal of Fetal Remains

---

This essay is the second of a two-part series on fetal remains and cultural politics.

---

In the aftermath of the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade and triggering abortion bans in a large swath of conservative states, national and local media have increasingly offered sensationalist coverage of women arrested for miscarrying at home and disposing of fetal remains in dumpsters. The implicit assumption behind these arrests, and the media attention to them, is that women are self-aborting in states where abortion provision is now illegal, and then trying to hide the evidence, or that they are carrying unwanted pregnancies and then committing infanticide. But the actual charges focus on the disposal of fetal remains: women are arrested on charges such as “abuse of a corpse,” “abandonment of a dead body,” or “concealment of the death of another.”

In a Facebook discussion of Georgia resident Selena Chandler Scott’s miscarriage in March of 2025 and her arrest for “abandonment of a dead body” and “concealment of the death of another,” commenters warred over Chandler Scott’s fate. Chandler Scott had miscarried a 19-week pregnancy at home, placed the products of conception in a bag in the dumpster, and later fainted from blood loss. When 911 was called on her behalf, a witness told responders about the fetus in the dumpster, and Chandler Scott was subsequently arrested. More than 50 people commented and argued with each other on the County Facebook page announcing the arrest. It was a mix of local gossip and people drawn by national coverage of the case, and included some who knew Chandler Scott, including her mother.

Social media discussions are a rich source for understanding how a diverse range of people think about miscarriage and the proper way to handle the premature end to a pregnancy. A close look at the Facebook discussion of Chandler Scott’s arrest reveals the influence of shifting norms for the handling of fetal remains over centuries (see part one of this essay series). The comment thread also shows how these arrests themselves, even when charges are dropped, reinforce the idea that women should be punished for interpreting a loss as something other than a baby, whether or not the fetus was viable or the pregnancy salvageable. It is important to take note of these public discussions because these arrests don’t just reflect history: they participate in creating future reproductive norms.

In the Facebook discussion, participants wrestled with complex ideas about fetal personhood, the point at which a dead fetus should be treated as a deceased person, and the care owed (or not) to dead bodies. The politics of abortion informed the debate but were not the focus of it. In a perhaps surprising twist, pro-choice defenders of Chandler Scott often shared intuitions informed by approaches to miscarriage that would have been familiar to medieval and early modern Europeans and Americans, while anti-abortion attackers reflected the innovations of post-Roe miscarriage management.

I had expected that those cheering on Chandler Scott’s arrest would have assumed that Chandler Scott had tried to have an abortion, and would be condemning her on those grounds. Strikingly, many participants in the discussion focused specifically on the question of how Chandler Scott handled the remains of her miscarriage, refraining from accusing Chandler Scott of covering up an abortion. Arguing with a defender of Chandler Scott, Alexis insisted, “a miscarriage I can understand but she knew what she was doing when she threw that baby away like it was just a piece of trash. No matter how far along she was that was still a child and deserved a whole lot more than what she gave it period! I have kids and couldn’t imagine ever doing that to one of mine so yeah she’s sick and deserves to rot for that.” Krysta agreed. It wasn’t about the miscarriage, it was about what she owed the lost child. “Don’t you think that baby deserved more? And don’t you think the mother should have wanted to find a way to have a funeral for her sweet baby she lost??”

Those defending Chandler Scott pointed out that women miscarry all the time – about 20% of recognized pregnancies miscarry – and most miscarriages are flushed down the toilet. But to Chandler Scott’s critics, the fact that Chandler Scott had miscarried a formed fetus made a crucial difference. When Ricky pointed out that Chandler Scott had miscarried at 19 weeks, before the 20-week stage at which a pregnancy loss counts as a stillbirth, Hallie replied, “the difference is at 19 weeks that baby has a face !! My niece was born at 21 weeks she had full baby features . You know the gender at 19 weeks. It’s beyond cells or a fetus or whatever yall wanna call it at that point. She threw a BABY in the trash idgaf what nobody says.” Many commenters agreed with Hallie. What mattered was whether the fetus resembled a baby, regardless of whether it was viable. In this intuition is an echo of the ancient idea that ensoulment occurs at the point when the fetus is formed and recognizable as a human – an idea that was taken for granted for many centuries, until nineteenth-century scientists declared that human development was continuous from conception and politicians and theologians translated this idea into absolute abortion bans.

Chandler Scott’s defenders referred to norms around burying miscarriages that prevailed before the late twentieth century, but, echoing urban experiences from more than a century prior, they pointed out that trash disposal might be the only alternative for those who don’t own property. Nyasia argued, ““SHE LIVED IN AN APARTMENT WHERE WAS SHE GOING TO BARRY IT. At the dog park ??? Yall sound stupid. She had a natural miscarriage ( her body rejected the baby) everyone don’t have money laying around just in case there baby die ??” Rose scolded Noah–another commenter–that “She had a natural miscarriage, wtf what she supposed to do? Bury it? She lives in an apartment dick. cremation? 200+ dollars. Funerals? EVEN MORE. (Speaking as someone who had a miscarriage at 19weeks and had to pay so much for the cremation before the urn).”

Many commenters responded that Chandler Scott should have called 911 and let medical staff handle the fetus. Three quarters of a century after hospitals had become the overwhelmingly normative location of birth and death in the United States, Chandler Scott’s critics presumed that hospitals would handle fetal remains appropriately and with dignity.

Another commenter shared a photo of a miscarried 19-week fetus in a hospital setting, wearing a hospital baby hat and framed by a baby blanket [image]. The photo was taken from Live Action, an anti-abortion activist group, but it is clearly a hospital scene, with the woman who has just miscarried holding her baby in her palms, displaying it for the camera. It is a representation of the “right” way to have a miscarriage, and it combines pro-life activism with modern miscarriage support practices. This is what Chandler Scott’s critics believed should have happened in Chandler Scott’s case.

Some with direct experience, though, pointed out that this presumption about what happened to the products of conception at a hospital was wrong, or at least not the full story. Teresa explained, “as someone who has worked, OB and Nursery, I have more than once placed a miscarried baby this age in a red garbage bag to be disposed of in an incinerator if the parents didn’t want the funeral home to take care of the baby. She only done what they would have done at the hospital.” Kelly also described, “I know it sounds inhumane, but to be honest, if she had taken it to the hospital they would have incinerated it, after it was red bagged in the biohazard TRASH. 99% of people don’t have a funeral for a fetus that gestation so the hospital “takes care of” that, which equals throwing it in a red bag and trashing it until it is incinerated.”

But even some who acknowledged the reality of the situation wanted to punish Chandler Scott for not going to the hospital. Denise shouted at Vanessa, “wtf worng with you. You don’t throw a baby in the dumpster you call 911.” Vanessa responded, “so the hospital can put it in the trash at a later date?? What do you think happens to fetal remains???” and Denise replied, “well that’s for them to do.. not her A** a real woman would had buried her child.”

Some said the fetus in the dumpster was a health hazard as well as a moral issue. Calling upon the history of public health concerns about the sanitary disposal of the dead, as well as, likely, the current pro-life attempt to make an environmentalist argument that abortions create biohazard, Debbie opined, “She didn’t flush a blood clot, she put a formed human in a trash bag and didn’t dispose of it properly. Good grief, think of the garbage men dealing with a ripped bag. The biohazard.” Jennifer pushed back, “6 inches of tissue? I dispose of that much menstrual waste in the trash every month why would we be expected to do anything different?” Vanessa explained, “as someone that has actually studied how groundwater generally works….no. six inches of fetal remains isn’t contaminating groundwater any more than a dead bird is. Which is to say, not really at all.”

Vanessa and Jennifer argued further about the propriety of the disposal. Jennifer thought the fetus wasn’t even treated as well as a pet. “The point is dont leave that around for someone else to find. Dispose of it the right way. Dont just throw you dead fetus in a bag for someone else to find in a hot dumpster! A human form that was growing inside your body. I guess if it was a dead DOG it wouldn’t be okay to put it in the dumpster?” But Vanessa noted, “with animals, our local humane society takes care of disposal, for free. There’s no such disposal pickup for fetal remains, other than you going to a hospital to just have them incinerate and trash it, but almost certainly not free.” Traditionally, deceased fetuses were, indeed, treated like deceased pets. But ironically, today’s arrangements for deceased pets are more formalized and thorough.

Critics extrapolated from Chandler Scott’s decision to condemn her as a person and a mother. Alexis opined, “if anyone was trash in the situation it is the girl not the baby. That baby deserves better than a dumpster. I hate to see how she treats the kids that are alive if this is how she treats her dead baby.” Connie asked, “it makes me wonder how in the heck was she raised? …throwing your baby in the trash? I feel so sorry for children, they have no idea about decency or morals, respect for human life and now at this age how will she learn.” Others questioned whether she could parent her other children. But those who knew Chandler Scott personally pushed back on the judgment. Sahara explained, “she growed up in a Christian home with very good parents we all make mistakes some aren’t as bad as other who are we to judge when it’s none of our business everybody feel how they feel it’s not always good voice opinions pray for her mental and keep it moving.”

Some commenters tried to shut down the larger debate with the logic that the very fact of Chandler Scott’s arrest showed that what she did was wrong and illegal. Maddie concluded, “at the end of the day it was wrong exactly why she was locked up for it , if she wouldn’t have got locked up for it it wouldn’t have been wrong but she did so it’s obviously WRONG.” Debbie also insisted, “There ARE laws or she wouldn’t have been arrested.” Krysta chimed in with, “It’s fucked up and let’s not forget. Seems to be illegal  ” For those who were offended by the idea of a pre-viable fetus being disposed of in the trash, Chandler Scott’s arrest was in itself proof that Chandler Scott deserved to be arrested. The charges would be dropped a short time later, after the county concluded that the facts didn’t support them. But that turn of events did not make it into this social media discussion.

Arrests like this one have increased since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and many conservative states have imposed strict abortion bans, prompting police and prosecutors to investigate pregnancy losses. The charges imposed have focused on the handling and disposal of the fetus, yet are understood by legal observers to be pretext for prosecuting suspected abortions. But they also reflect increasing popular dismay at treating fetal remains as waste, a perspective encouraged by the pro-life and miscarriage support movements that gained traction in the 1970s and 1980s.

The long history of shifting ideas about the meaning of pregnancy and pregnancy loss swirl around these debates, as participants contest each others’ interpretations of the meaning of fetal remains and the actions of women who miscarry. Traditional approaches to disposing of fetal remains more like waste or like dead animals can no longer be taken for granted, but have to be defended as reasonable approaches to a pregnancy loss. They have become a sign to many Americans of poor judgment, lack of maternal feeling, and failed womanhood rather than a practical response to a difficult situation. Unsentimental disposal of fetal remains, set apart from any suspicion of abortion or infanticide, is what offends. As arrests are reported and discussed on social media, the arrests themselves reinforce the idea that women should be criminalized for disposing of the remains of a formed fetus from a previable miscarriage. And yet, the line between an early miscarriage that commenters agree can simply be flushed down the toilet and one that triggers perceptions of personhood is murky, reflecting ancient ideas about fetal formation and ensoulment more than any modern scientific idea about prenatal development or religious idea about personhood starting at conception.

If police and prosecutors continue employing “abuse of a corpse” charges to investigate pregnancy losses, it will likely reinforce these developing cultural intuitions about fetal remains. And cultural intuitions, in turn, will justify arrests. Women will find their reproductive choices narrowed even further, and the chances that women will be punished for pregnancy losses will continue to grow.

 

---

Featured image courtesy Cottonbro Studio.