"Why are young people not having children?!"

welcome to the orphan crushing machine that first crashes the mother. you also gotto love the slight "polices are heroes and caring human beings" twist.

Don't be ridiculous. The machine that crushes the mother is not the orphan crushing machine - that's the orphan making machine. Different part of the same pipeline. Don't confuse them - they are maintained by different companies.
- The companies are subsidiaries of the same parent corporation. They can control the amount of orphans in circulation at will. Congress said "definitely not a monopoly" so it's all good though.
- Orphan Co. Limited ?

So i looked into it. Such deaths are not uncommon in the US. The issues that can cause maternal deaths can show up 24-48 hours after birth and the mother, having just gone through major traumatic body altering experience, may not trust her feelings that there is something wrong, and statistics show that neither do doctors. But in the US early release is the standard because maternity beds up time is money.

But i also learned of the Newborn and Mothers health protection act of 1996, that guarantee a stay of 48 hours vaginal or 96 hours c-section birth. And this must be covered by all medical insurance.

But x2. If the doctor agrees to an early dismissal, and the wife said anything but a full unquestionable rejection of the premise of early dismissal then they may be ejected. Which is a lot to ask of a new mother. At which point an advocate is the only way to reverse it. Husbands or family better be aware and on their shit i guess.

Note the story does not indicate the specific age of the baby or even that the cause of death is related to having given birth or something like post partum depression, which is also a potentially worrying cause over a longer term. It could have been an utterly accidental death or unrelated health condition.
You raise a valid set of concerns, but no indication whether it is pertinent to this story.
- The article in question.
  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/phoenix-baby-left-alone-after-mother-dies-rescued/
  It does say the mother recently gave birth. One can reasonably assume that the child in question is who she gave birth to. No matter what, the title and the article are terribly written.
  Edit: fixed link
  Edit 2: here is a slightly more responsibly written article and title.
  https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/phoenix-baby-saved-mother-death-b2779209.html
- Right, i don’t have that information, but when looking this up i came across a comment that said deaths soon after birth are not uncommon and that unnerved me so i went down a rabbit hole. Not saying that this is directly related… i just had to tell someone my findings

"Baby rescued from apartment after single-mother tragically died days earlier"

Didn't think it was that difficult

It's not, but then the headline wouldn't subconsciously bias you towards rage clicking.
- I don't think the headline would make you rage click, it's pretty neutral. The over the top reaction to said headline however...
They don't know she was a single mother. They don't know who she was because they weren't told. The father could have been on a business trip for all we know. That proposed headline injects one plausible guess as to why the baby would have been alone, but without any actual data to back it up.
It also fails to indicate that the baby was alone. You try to imply it by 'single mother', but whose to say that there wasn't someone else in the house that might have been important, like a sibling or extended family member? The detail that the infant was alone was key, but omitted in your version. Of course it's awkward to try to indicate the baby was alone without using the word 'left' in the context of a headline appropriate short sentence.
They could have injected the word "tragically" before dies for a bit more consideration, though people can see that the tragedy is pretty self evident.
Infant only suspect in mother's mysterious death
I think that's a worse headline because it doesn't involve the sad imagery of a baby alone for 4 days. "Tragic" is a kitschy word to include in a headline. And neither your headline nor the one in the meme place the mother up-front.
- Well ... Full disclosure. I'm not a journalist
- As someone else in the comment section pointed out, this death and the infant's precarious situation probably could have been avoided if America's shitty for-profit healthcare system wasn't such a god awful shit show.
  The original headline ignores the mother all together to put the focus completely on the child, seeking to engage potential readers with ragebait only to throw cold water on them in the article where they disclose the death of the mother. All in order to completely sidestep any discussion of why exactly a new mother would suddenly die in our country "with the greatest healthcare in the world!"
  A statistic that is becoming more and more common.
  Edit: there's also an overly heavy focus on dumping praise on the cops, which is ridiculous since they were simply doing their job.

We all have our own models of how the world works. This frames how we understand the meanings of content.

The phrase "baby left alone" in no way implies it's the mother's fault. It is correct, a baby was left alone, in as much the fault of the 'system'.

This meme feels more like something to instil anger and hatred than anything actually useful.

Left is the word that indicates that someone actively left this baby alone. They could have said baby found alone. Baby discovered. Heck, baby alone for days after mother's death. Baby left absolutely implies it is the doing, or fault, of the person who left the baby. The person who is responsible. Now who will society assume is responsible for a new baby, but the mother?
Even you. You said, hey we could just as easily blame this on society as on the mother! No mention of the absent father.
- Are fathers (absent or otherwise) not a part of society?
in fact it even says “after mother dies”
What meme are your talking about? This is just a screenshot of a social media post.
Words do have meaning. Of course you can just imaging your own meanings but then you will be misunderstood.
Since when are memes useful? Theyre mainly propaganda tools but when theyre useless they're called memes.
It's not even certain it's reasonably the fault of the 'system'. There's no details about how or why the mother died or why she happened to be alone with the baby for a few days. A mother taking care of a baby for a few days by herself is not a crazy circumstance without further context. At one point my wife had work and I had to take our toddler on a trip for a couple of days and no one could possibly have accused that situation of me being alone with our toddler due to some failure of the system, even if something had tragically killed me along the way.
There are so many stories about the system failing a baby or a mother, we don't need to extrapolate this specific incomplete story with such details until the actual details are available, which may or may not be consistent with the tragic failures of the system.
There are so many things to be genuinely furious about.

I thought you could say "I was left alone after my friend passed" or something. It doesn't mean my friend left me purposefully but rather I was just alone after he died

It's about the framing. The focus is on the baby being "left alone," with passive language implying that somebody did that to them. Meanwhile, the mother's death is treated as an afterthought, only relevant as a circumstance in the baby's story.
- Well yeah, it's not newsworthy that a random person died. The newsworthy part is 'holy shit this baby lived somehow.'
- Yes. Because people who read local news stories tend to care more about infants than adults.
- I think you can say that someone was "left alone" without any implication that it was done to them, just that it merely happened.
- It doesn't imply that somebody did it to them. The baby was left alone by the circumnstances. It's kind of difficult to come up with as short a sentence that is reasonably possible to read without somehow using 'left alone' in it.

I... don't know, man, the info that she died is right there in the headline. I'm struggling to compose that sentence in English without using the word "left".

"Police rescue baby alone for days after mother dies" doesn't sound like English. "Police rescue baby alone after mother dies" sounds like the news is the baby doesn't have any other family and also sounds weird.

If you take motherhood out of it altogether it becomes more obvious, I suppose. "The man was left alone on a deserted island after the rest of the plane's crew died in the crash" is a perfectly valid way to frame that.

Blame English for using adjectives weird sometimes.

'Police rescue baby found alone after mother dies days earlier'
- Not a native speaker, but it sounds off to me.
- rage against babies
  That's what you got out of this? That she's raging against babies and not against a system that forces women to give birth but does nothing to support mothers or their children afterwards?
  ETA: oh wait you're that same fucking pronatalist cockthistle that's been crawling all over this post. Hail Satan, and have a lovely afternoon.

Ah... bait.

Are they gonna charge her ghost?

Depends was she black?

I don't know, maybe I don't realize the actual connotations of the phrase "being left alone", but IMO she's not just overreacting - she's gone absolutely batshit nuclear over some fucking (actually not) inadequate wording.

"Left alone" is an intentional act. The mother died so unless it was suicide she didn't leave the baby alone. And then it was in the US and the US has the highest maternal mortality in the West. The headline downplays the tragedy of the mother's death, ignores the tragedy of the high maternal mortality, makes it sound a bit like she was a bad mother rather than a mother that society didn't do right by.
Edit: even a suicide isn't leaving the baby alone because if you are that far out I'm not going to hold you responsible for the baby (although if I knew you I might have a very hard time forgiving / be unable to forgive you).
- “Left alone” is an intentional act.
  Not necessarily. "The man's death left his wife alone." There's no intention in that, nor even a hint of negligence.
  It seems an absolutely utterly normal phrase to describe what happened to the infant in the wake of her mother's death.
  They can't say much specific about her death or circumstances because her identity and circumstances of death were not released. They can't claim "orphaned" because they don't know enough about the family. All they know in the reporting is that circumstances left an infant alone with her dead mother's body. The only thing they have is the bodycam footage of an infant and terse description of the scene. No idea if her death was particularly related to maternity. They could have tossed the word 'tragic' in there but it seems self evident.

I hope that when the mother died, that all of her hardships and burdens sloughed away, and that she knows that her loved ones are safe so that she can rest in peace.

Then, I hope that all of that negative shit condenses itself into the world's most pristine Lego that haunts whoever came up with that tone and headline. When those who are responsible wear shoes, I hope that ghost Lego becomes a puddle.

I'm with you in the first half, but people are reading way too much into the connotation of "left alone". Anyone who at least read the full headline would not see the mother being accused of anything. "left alone" is merely descriptive and does not demand nor suggest that someone's actions or even negligence caused it.
Trying to write an accurate, comprehensive, short headline is tricky if trying to dance around this level of presumptuous offense.
- I thought the same as you did before coming in here thinking the headline was fine but reading some other comments I can see their point of view. Different people just see different things, it's all just perspective. You've really gone on an unhealthy crusade in here demanding everyone see your side and that it's the only valid one.
- I think it’s because left alone implies intention, and an explanation is only offered at the end of the headline. Whereas other phrasing can avoid that. Baby found alone after mother dies, for instance. Or even Baby found alone by police after mother dies.
  Honestly, if I’m going to overthink it, I think it’s because of the cultural tropes of the U.S. and advertiser-driven media. Saying that the police rescue the baby sort of sets up the sentence for misinterpretation, but police rescuing the baby instead of merely finding it is more emotive - it drives engagement, it reinforces the notion that police are protectors.
  And following, left alone vs found alone. Police rescue baby found alone […] is sort of narratively poor. There’s a disjoint that I’m sure someone smarter than me can describe, but Police rescue baby left alone […] is a better ‘fit’, even if it’s factually looser. It may have to do with cultural preconditioning where people expect police intervention only when the parent has taken an action.
  Heck, Baby left alone after mother dies is saved by police, establishes the narrative without burying the lede, and it even keeps the left alone phrase intact while establishing context before moving to other narrative.
  But anyway, my point, I guess, is that the title is editorialized for the wrong kind of drama, and that’s dumb. The situation has its own drama if they would appeal to empathy, rather than people’s desire to bootlick and see evil everywhere.

Plus, "where was the father? huh??" I understand they could've separated, but he still had responsibilities towards this baby. So, only if the journalists had confirmed he was deceased long ago it would make sense to make this omission... but they should said so.

Seems like the authorities didn't release a lot of actionable details to the press. They only see the baby and have a short description of the scene. Not where the scene was or the identity of anyone or a hint as to how the mother died. The journalists are simply reporting the partial story without anything further to go on at the moment. The press likely will be bored of the incident well before the details would be available.
but he still had responsibilities towards this baby.
This is going to sound harsh: If the woman can choose to abort or not, no he doesn't. If women want the sole responsibility on whether a fetus lives, they can get it. Fully. In that case: His wallet, his choice. His time, his choice. etc, etc.
Now, if there is an abortion ban, then it's a different story, and the man should have the legal responsibility for both mom and child, by default.
- yeah... I don't think that can be the "general rule" (e.g. law perspective) since socially men already have a lot of power.. But I take your point as logic and fair: For sure, if a couple goes in that discussion, and he is clear that he won't help at all, and she still goes along with it... then okay, maybe there's some fairness to the situation. Specially if she knows, and can handle all by herself (e.g. has some rich parents)
  Anyway, I think the "her body her choice" motto is more about rape victims... so, I believe you are just stretching the situation. Saying "his wallet, his choice" is way too much. Sounds politically incorrect in all ways. Penis and Vagina had a consent, in your example, and that should be: her decision for abortion. You want to extend it to his decision on being present... (or, asking for the abortion.) I think this was a given until recently. Parenthood tests are available, and having a judge 'force' such thing is relatively new for 'human history' (thousands of years without it.) anyway... I am just ranting by now. tl;dr I don't agree with you but whatever we are just random people on the internet.
- This of course presumes the father wasn't in the picture, which given all we know is that she was alone with the baby for a few days we can't say if he was just away for a week or something. Or perhaps the father is deployed in the military.
  Lot of discussion in this thread asserting a certain narrative when we just don't know. We know that, tragically, a mother died and that by some mercy the infant was rescued. That's really all we know.

I bet a LLM wrote that headline.

Twatter and ShitGPT have a lot to answer for. It seems like a significant amount of people have forgotten how to read.

Mother's truly are nothing to our society

What part of this says that at all?

The part where mom being dead is a footnote, not the headline.
- But it is in the headline....

That was an antinatalist community, this is child free.
That's like saying if a group of people don't like apples, they're the same as a group of people who have philosophies about wanting apples banned.
Similar general idea, completely different reasonings behind it.
I'm child free and not anti-natalist.
- Wait why in the fuck would antinatalists bomb an abortion clinic???? That doesn't make an ounce of sense?
Wait what? What connection is there between the bombing and this comm?

And now they are forced them to be raped and give birth since the birthrate is plummeting

what the fuck are you talking about?
- I think they're talking about the woman in Georgia who was in a coma but forced to have a child despite it being unhealthy for her and the child.
- Probably abortion bans and our abysmal rate of testing rape kits.