Elizabeth Holmes Faces Years in Prison for Her Crimes in Theranos Collapse
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
The kind of person who was ok lying to patients about critical blood tests is the kind of person that would have a child to reduce their prison sentence. (Relevant because the subhead said the judge is considering her pregnancy in determining the sentence).
Practically it is a bit more complex. Single fathers tend to have higher income than single mothers, and social economic status tend to correlate to better welfare for children. Single mothers are also more likely to be below the poverty line than single fathers. Single fathers are also more likely to live with their parents, which might mean that grandparents are more involved with single fathers than single mothers. That might also align to better welfare for the child.
But those are complex question and I don't know any study that actually compares single mothers with single fathers and looks at the welfare outcome of the child. Culturally I doubt such study would be allowed, and thus we are back to culture. What we do know is that children raise by a single parents tend to do worse than children raised by two parents, so in that sense children welfare would be better off if the law did not care about the gender of the primary care giver.
> Single fathers are also more likely to live with their parents [than single mothers]
First time I heard of this. Where are the statistics to support it?
Social economic status being such strong effect (effect on education, health, social strength), I would be very surprised if social expectations and limitations on the father would be strong enough to overwrite those benefits. It is also possible that since society expect fathers to spend their time focusing on the job, grand-parents and the other people around the family feel more social pressure to step in and help out.
Some other random number I found doing a glancing blow into the topic, single fathers have significant higher adjusted risk of dying than both single mothers and partnered fathers by a factor of 300% (study done in Canada). A bit strange.
That's not an argument! For what it's worth, in my experience, high social/economic status jobs don't expect fathers to take too much time taking care of their kids; doing so will cost them their status.
Children of unavailable fathers may be affected even if they have grandparents to look after them.
> The research suggests that grandparents could play an important role for every grandchild in single father or single-mother households.
The research you linked to doesn't make a big difference between single fathers or mothers. It also simply mentions grandparents' potential relevance in raising children with a single parent.
I think it's about the welfare of children, not gender.
Otherwise, it is gender discrimination.
Apparently her kids aren't with the guy who was COO of Theranos, it's a hotel heir in SF.
Kind of nuts that being pregnant can affect the term of a prison sentence when the welfare of the kid is not in jeopardy.
The question is, why would the mother being in prison be taken into consideration when the father being in prison never is?
Societal expectations of motherhood and fatherhood exist, and before the prison thing can be fixed, those expectations must be fixed first. In my opinion.
You're not wrong, but it seems a bit insane to let a woman leave jail on bail, get pregnant, then allow the woman to use that pregnancy to argue for a more lenient prison sentence.
This was entirely predictable. It's not like Holmes didn't know she was going to jail, it was only a question of how long.
A woman who would do that isn't fit to be a parent, is not looking out for the best interests of the child and that the kid isn't losing out on much by having her absent from their life. Doubly so when the dad has the resources to raise the kid without her.
It's a symptom of a much sicker culture, SBF is another one (SV/VC and Politically connected insider from an Ivy League) and the woman who ran Alamdea (Standford grad) that needs to be prosecuted to fullest extent of the Law: it will serve as a deterrent that 2008 couldn't or wouldn't. If the FBI moves forward the extradition then we can perhaps start to take this seriously, because as of right now the Bahamas has been the only one to do anything, as they just took FTX's tokens [0], but that is seriously the lowest hanging fruit because Japan is still holding people's BTC after nearly a decade and done exactly nothing to return them after MTGOX's failure.
The harsh reality is their is a multi-tier justice and legal system in the US, and to be honest it will be incredibly difficult to indict him on full charges; but if they do, then perhaps we can start taking the legal system serious.
But I agree, this kind of behaviour needs to be curtailed because it just emboldens them.
0: https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/18/investing/ftx-bahamas-seizure...
Also her Medicine Professor while at Stanford denies that she has a naturally deep voice.
What it does bring to relief, quite plainly, is that there are indeed a special group of human beings with which the law - and society itself - has no idea how to handle.