Woman who killed her baby has conviction over turned, Court says six day old baby isn't a person

[Coyote]

The idea of criminally prosecuting a woman for what happens to her unborn fetus should be really disturbing to most woman. It opens up a pandora's box of retributional legislation against a pregnant woman.

Really? So if a woman shoots up heroin causing her full term baby to be still born. She should face no charges of child abuse?

No. She should just be sterilized.

How Nazi of you.

How dumb of you.

Should a woman who uses an IUD face charges of child abuse?

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

The idea of criminally prosecuting a woman for what happens to her unborn fetus should be really disturbing to most woman. It opens up a pandora's box of retributional legislation against a pregnant woman.

Really? So if a woman shoots up heroin causing her full term baby to be still born. She should face no charges of child abuse?

No. She should just be sterilized.

We agree, heroin addicts like prostitutes have no business having children, heroin addicts and prostitutes should be sterilised. There are many people who shouldn't be allowed to have children, period.

 

[Liberty777]

The idea of criminally prosecuting a woman for what happens to her unborn fetus should be really disturbing to most woman. It opens up a pandora's box of retributional legislation against a pregnant woman.

Really? So if a woman shoots up heroin causing her full term baby to be still born. She should face no charges of child abuse?

No. She should just be sterilized.

How Nazi of you.

How dumb of you.

Should a woman who uses an IUD face charges of child abuse?

No sir, how dumb of u.lol

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

The idea of criminally prosecuting a woman for what happens to her unborn fetus should be really disturbing to most woman. It opens up a pandora's box of retributional legislation against a pregnant woman.

Really? So if a woman shoots up heroin causing her full term baby to be still born. She should face no charges of child abuse?

No. She should just be sterilized.

How Nazi of you.

How dumb of you.

Should a woman who uses an IUD face charges of child abuse?

"Should a woman who uses an IUD face charges of child abuse?"

No that would be ridiculous.

 

[Silhouette]

It seems the issue of live, breathing, viable kids outside the womb and their civil rights is an issue starting to take fire: New Civil Rights Movement: Children-Americans.

 

[Liberty777]

She'll do it again. Sad but true.

 

[Coyote]

The idea of criminally prosecuting a woman for what happens to her unborn fetus should be really disturbing to most woman. It opens up a pandora's box of retributional legislation against a pregnant woman.

Really? So if a woman shoots up heroin causing her full term baby to be still born. She should face no charges of child abuse?

No. She should just be sterilized.

We agree, heroin addicts like prostitutes have no business having children, heroin addicts and prostitutes should be sterilised. There are many people who shouldn't be allowed to have children, period.

I don't have a problem with prostitutes having children. I agree there are many who shouldn't - but who has the right to decide for them? That's the difficulty.

But if someone deliberately murders his or her children or abuses them....then perhaps an acceptable alternative is to allow that person to choose between prison and sterilization.

When it's prior to birth however - it's another issue. Not so very clear.

 

[JakeStarkey]

the op has been proved correct

the fetus was not a person at the time of the car wreck

close the thread, please

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

She'll do it again. Sad but true.

She should be sterilised, mandatory, then she can do what she wants, except put another child at risk.

 

[Silhouette]

^^ prison mandatory.

 

[Silhouette]

I don't have a problem with prostitutes having children. I agree there are many who shouldn't - but who has the right to decide for them? That's the difficulty.

But if someone deliberately murders his or her children or abuses them....then perhaps an acceptable alternative is to allow that person to choose between prison and sterilization.....When it's prior to birth however - it's another issue. Not so very clear.

So If I murder a live, viable child outside the womb I have the choice to not go to prison? Seems like the word "child" could be extended or expanded in that new type of murder case. I mean if one person can kill a child and just opt for sterilization, would there be any limit to the age that child could be "quasi-legally killed"??

We are talking about live human beings, separate and viable outside the womb here. Now it's OK to kill them? Oh democrats...you have gone too too far.

WTF??

 

[Flopper]

Interesting (though tragic) case. Apparently she got sloshed, got in the wreck, the baby had to be removed via C-section due to injuries, and didn't survive dying 6 days after removal by the doctors.

“… the central question in the case was whether the state Legislature intended ‘to hold pregnant women criminally responsible for engaging in reckless conduct against themselves and their unborn fetuses, such that they should be subject to criminal liability for prenatal conduct that results in postnatal death? Under the current statutory scheme, the answer to this question is no.’”

I will have to ponder this in my head, I am far to tired to objectively consider the legal ideology of punishing mothers for improper prenatal care at this time.

The court ruled that the legislature did not intend to hold pregnant women criminally responsible for conduct with respect to themselves and their unborn fetuses unless such conduct is done intentionally. The court did not consider the question of whether the 6 day old was a person or not. That's an anti-abortionist interpretation. The issue was not whether the 6 year old was a person or not but whether there was criminal intent.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

The idea of criminally prosecuting a woman for what happens to her unborn fetus should be really disturbing to most woman. It opens up a pandora's box of retributional legislation against a pregnant woman.

Really? So if a woman shoots up heroin causing her full term baby to be still born. She should face no charges of child abuse?

No. She should just be sterilized.

We agree, heroin addicts like prostitutes have no business having children, heroin addicts and prostitutes should be sterilised. There are many people who shouldn't be allowed to have children, period.

I don't have a problem with prostitutes having children. I agree there are many who shouldn't - but who has the right to decide for them? That's the difficulty.

But if someone deliberately murders his or her children or abuses them....then perhaps an acceptable alternative is to allow that person to choose between prison and sterilization.

When it's prior to birth however - it's another issue. Not so very clear.

"But if someone deliberately murders his or her children or abuses them....then perhaps an acceptable alternative is to allow that person to choose between prison and sterilization."

They get no choice, they have forfeited all rights to either civil rights or human rights.

If someone deliberately murders a child and/or children they should be executed, in an ideal society with it's priorities right, to save taxpayers money, they'd just be taken out and shot in the back of the head, the same sentence for anyone who sexually abuses a child and/or children.

Anyone who is guilty of emotional abuse of a child and/or children, they get no choice, they also have forfeited all rights to either civil rights or human rights, they would be automatically sterilised and given a 30 year prison sentence without parole.

Where children are concerned we should have a Zero Tolerance approach.

 

[Silhouette]

The court ruled that the legislature did not intend to hold pregnant women criminally responsible for conduct with respect to themselves and their unborn fetuses unless such conduct is done intentionally. The court did not consider the question of whether the 6 day old was a person or not. That's an anti-abortionist interpretation.

WHAT???? THE????? ****?????!!!!

Why stop at 6 days? Why not extend the "you can kill a child" leeway up to 2 years? More?

 

[Coyote]

I don't have a problem with prostitutes having children. I agree there are many who shouldn't - but who has the right to decide for them? That's the difficulty.

But if someone deliberately murders his or her children or abuses them....then perhaps an acceptable alternative is to allow that person to choose between prison and sterilization.....When it's prior to birth however - it's another issue. Not so very clear.

So If I murder a live, viable child outside the womb I have the choice to not go to prison? Seems like the word "child" could be extended or expanded in that new type of murder case. I mean if one person can kill a child and just opt for sterilization, would there be any limit to the age that child could be "quasi-legally killed"??

We are talking about live human beings, separate and viable outside the womb here. Now it's OK to kill them?

WTF??

You're going a bit over the top here. I never said it's "ok to kill them", so get off your high horse.

You could give someone a choice of sterilization and a reduced prison term - I'm just throwing out ideas.

What's more important? Punishment or - making sure she's never in a position to have another child to abuse? You can not legally mandate sterilization - this country went down that road once and it led to horrendous abuses.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Interesting (though tragic) case. Apparently she got sloshed, got in the wreck, the baby had to be removed via C-section due to injuries, and didn't survive dying 6 days after removal by the doctors.

“… the central question in the case was whether the state Legislature intended ‘to hold pregnant women criminally responsible for engaging in reckless conduct against themselves and their unborn fetuses, such that they should be subject to criminal liability for prenatal conduct that results in postnatal death? Under the current statutory scheme, the answer to this question is no.’”

I will have to ponder this in my head, I am far to tired to objectively consider the legal ideology of punishing mothers for improper prenatal care at this time.

The court ruled that the legislature did not intend to hold pregnant women criminally responsible for conduct with respect to themselves and their unborn fetuses unless such conduct is done intentionally. The court did not consider the question of whether the 6 day old was a person or not. That's an anti-abortionist interpretation.

Do you or don't you agree that a 6 day old baby is or isn't a person?

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

The court ruled that the legislature did not intend to hold pregnant women criminally responsible for conduct with respect to themselves and their unborn fetuses unless such conduct is done intentionally. The court did not consider the question of whether the 6 day old was a person or not. That's an anti-abortionist interpretation.

WHAT???? THE????? ****?????!!!!

Why stop at 6 days? Why not extend the "you can kill a child" leeway up to 2 years? More?

A 6 day old baby is a person, a baby in the womb is also a person.

 

[Silhouette]

You're going a bit over the top here. I never said it's "ok to kill them", so get off your high horse.

You could give someone a choice of sterilization and a reduced prison term - I'm just throwing out ideas.

So just to be clear, you think that murdering a live, viable human being outside the womb at a given age is something that shouldn't be tried or punished as murder?

A 6 day old baby is a person, a baby in the womb is also a person.

Only after a certain amount of time can a baby be viable after it is extracted from a womb. Before then it isn't a separate viable being capable of living on its own. That argument is as old as the hills.

But a live friggin' child outside the womb is a PERSON. To kill a person is murder. About that there is zero debate.

 

[Coyote]

The idea of criminally prosecuting a woman for what happens to her unborn fetus should be really disturbing to most woman. It opens up a pandora's box of retributional legislation against a pregnant woman.

Really? So if a woman shoots up heroin causing her full term baby to be still born. She should face no charges of child abuse?

No. She should just be sterilized.

We agree, heroin addicts like prostitutes have no business having children, heroin addicts and prostitutes should be sterilised. There are many people who shouldn't be allowed to have children, period.

I don't have a problem with prostitutes having children. I agree there are many who shouldn't - but who has the right to decide for them? That's the difficulty.

But if someone deliberately murders his or her children or abuses them....then perhaps an acceptable alternative is to allow that person to choose between prison and sterilization.

When it's prior to birth however - it's another issue. Not so very clear.

"But if someone deliberately murders his or her children or abuses them....then perhaps an acceptable alternative is to allow that person to choose between prison and sterilization."

They get no choice, they have forfeited all rights to either civil rights or human rights.

If someone deliberately murders a child and/or children they should be executed, in an ideal society with it's priorities right, to save taxpayers money, they'd just be taken out and shot in the back of the head, the same sentence for anyone who sexually abuses a child and/or children.

Anyone who is guilty of emotional abuse of a child and/or children, they get no choice, they also have forfeited all rights to either civil rights or human rights, they would be automatically sterilised and given a 30 year prison sentence without parole.

Where children are concerned we should have a Zero Tolerance approach.

You're much stricter than I am. Anyone who murders a child is guilty of murder and whatever penalties that incurs would apply. "Abuse" falls into a grey area that is harder to define and covers a broad spectrum of acts against a child. Sometimes - abuse/neglect can be handled by helping the parents cope or become better parents, for example.

I can not agree to mandatory sterilization (because, it's been abused in the past) but it would be nice to see some sort of sterilization option for certain crimes.

 

[Coyote]

You're going a bit over the top here. I never said it's "ok to kill them", so get off your high horse.

You could give someone a choice of sterilization and a reduced prison term - I'm just throwing out ideas.

So just to be clear, you think that murdering a live, viable human being outside the womb at a given age is something that shouldn't be tried as murder?

So just to be clear: read my ******* posts. No, I think it should be tried as murder.