Last March Deborah Zimmerman gave birth to a 4 lb., 6 oz. girl named Meagan.As joyous as this may sound, doctors diagnosed little Meagan Zimmerman with fetal alcohol syndrome. A disease characterized by Meagan’s flat face, small wide-set eyes, a diminutive body and a blood alcohol level twice that of Wisconsin’s legal finding of intoxication.You see, Deborah allegedly was in a bar drinking Blind Russians – a combination of vodka, Kahlua, and Bailey’s Irish Creme – 12 hours before she gave birth to her daughter. Zimmerman allegedly told hospital officials that she didn’t want a child. In the hospital she reportedly said, ‘…I’m going to kill this thing because I don’t want it anyways.’Enter court officials: Joan Korb, the assistant district attorney for the county where Zimmerman resides, caught wind of the story and decided that Zimmerman should be held responsible for the treatment of her unborn child. Korb didn’t start a support group, host a telethon, or go on Sally. She went a step further.Zimmerman has been charged with attempted murder of an unborn fetus. If convicted, she could spend up to 40 years in prison for harming her unborn child by drinking alcohol – something that is totally legal.And she is not alone. In Cincinnati, a Hamilton County prosecutor attempted to try a 17-year-old girl for two counts of vehicular manslaughter for crossing a median and killing a pregnant woman. In mid-July, the South Carolina supreme court ruled that a woman could be charged with child abuse while taking drugs during her pregnancy.But where does the abuse stop? Jogging, driving recklessly or not following a doctor’s instructions could bring harm to a fetus. Where is the line drawn; and who is going to accept responsibility for drawing it?So let’s get all of this straight. If a woman goes to a clinic and pays money for a doctor to surgically remove the fetus, then it is legal. But, if one were to drink during pregnancy or abuse drugs then we have made the leap from elective surgery to a first degree felony.The people upset by all of this and prosecuting these women are not far right-wing anti-abortion zealots. We are dealing with an assistant district attorney and the SUPREME COURT of one of our fifty states. I am sure that everyone in the legal profession is familiar with Roe v. Wade. You know that insignificant supreme court ruling that legalized abortion.Could Zimmerman’s alleged action be mistaken for some kind of twisted home abortion? Or, if it is attempted murder and she is convicted of such a charge, what kind of precedent does that set? Can we now hold doctors liable for performing a procedure that was deemed legal by the Supreme Court of the United States of America?As much as I’d like to see someone go to jail for intentionally trying to destroy an unborn child in an act as torturous and deplorable as drowning it in alcohol, that kind of activity is not illegal because a woman can do what she wants with her body. Zimmerman is in alcohol rehabilitation and sees her daughter weekly. The baby shows signs of motor skill delay. She eventually wishes to regain custody of the daughter she threatened and attempted to kill.Cases such as Zimmerman’s have not held much water around the nation. As much as we all want to stand up and scream, ‘Boil her in oil,’ the highest court in the land has dictated that she has the power to decide what is right for her body.And that is nothing new. Since the beginning of time many women have declared that a woman’s body is her temple and she can do whatever she wants with it. Unfortunately, if that leads to the birth of a baby subjected to heart defects, brain damage, and even death post-patum, (such as those caused by fetal alcohol syndrome) then I guess you and I are going to have to live with that.Douglas Huber is a senior majoring in journalism from Cincinnati, Ohio.