Manslaughter or Negligent Homicide of a Foetus?

[vergiss]

Alright. Let's imagine, hypothetically, that abortion is illegal:

Scenario 1: A woman named Maria is 10 weeks pregnant and has suffered from severe depression for several years. She attempts suicide, and although she survives, the physical stress on her body causes a miscarriage. Due to to the miscarriage, was not actually intended to be the outcome of her actions, is she now guilty of a crime? If so, which crime - and why?

Scenario 2: A man is speeding in his car. The road is slippery because it's raining, and he crashes into a car being driven by another man and his 10 weeks pregnant wife. Fortunately, all passengers survive with nothing worse than a few broken bones and nasty lacerations. However, also as a result of the stress on her body, the pregnant woman miscarries. Besides the obvious (dangerous driving etc), is the driver responsible for the crash now guilty of another crime, because his actions indirectly resulted in miscarriage?

Scenario 3: A woman named Lucy is 10 weeks pregnant. On the advice of her doctor, she takes a medication that may cause miscarriage as a side-effect. She is aware of this risk, as is her doctor, however they both ignore the warning. The miscarriage indeed occurs. Is she now a criminal? What about the doctor?

 

[talloulou]

Alright. Let's imagine, hypothetically, that abortion is illegal:

Scenario 1: A woman named Maria is 10 weeks pregnant and has suffered from severe depression for several years. She attempts suicide, and although she survives, the physical stress on her body causes a miscarriage. Due to to the miscarriage, was not actually intended to be the outcome of her actions, is she now guilty of a crime? If so, which crime - and why?

I'd think she'd get off with a lovely insanity plea. Maybe do some time with a psychiatrist how's that sound?

Scenario 2: A man is speeding in his car. The road is slippery because it's raining, and he crashes into a car being driven by another man and his 10 weeks pregnant wife. Fortunately, all passengers survive with nothing worse than a few broken bones and nasty lacerations. However, also as a result of the stress on her body, the pregnant woman miscarries. Besides the obvious (dangerous driving etc), is the driver responsible for the crash now guilty of another crime, because his actions indirectly resulted in miscarriage?

I guess it depends on if a cop thinks he was reckless driving or if it's considered an accident.

Scenario 3: A woman named Lucy is 10 weeks pregnant. On the advice of her doctor, she takes a medication that may cause miscarriage as a side-effect. She is aware of this risk, as is her doctor, however they both ignore the warning. The miscarriage indeed occurs. Is she now a criminal? What about the doctor?

Depends? What is the medication for and does she absolutely need it? Are there safer medications? Is her life in danger if she doesn't take the meds? Or are her and her doctor trying to get around the abortion laws.

 

[Jerry]

Alright. Let's imagine, hypothetically, that abortion is illegal:

Scenario 1: A woman named Maria is 10 weeks pregnant and has suffered from severe depression for several years. She attempts suicide, and although she survives, the physical stress on her body causes a miscarriage. Due to to the miscarriage, was not actually intended to be the outcome of her actions, is she now guilty of a crime? If so, which crime - and why?

No abortion ban will ever come into existence which holds the mother criminally liable for the accidental or intentional demise of her ZEF. She is charged with nothing.

Scenario 2: A man is speeding in his car. The road is slippery because it's raining, and he crashes into a car being driven by another man and his 10 weeks pregnant wife. Fortunately, all passengers survive with nothing worse than a few broken bones and nasty lacerations. However, also as a result of the stress on her body, the pregnant woman miscarries. Besides the obvious (dangerous driving etc), is the driver responsible for the crash now guilty of another crime, because his actions indirectly resulted in miscarriage?

The man may be charged by the state with a manslaughter variant, as appropriate to the circumstances. He would likely be charged with a class 5 felony, receive 6 mo.-2years in prison and pay a fine.

Scenario 3: A woman named Lucy is 10 weeks pregnant. On the advice of her doctor, she takes a medication that may cause miscarriage as a side-effect. She is aware of this risk, as is her doctor, however they both ignore the warning. The miscarriage indeed occurs. Is she now a criminal? What about the doctor?

As is the case with South Dakota's abortion ban, the doctor would not likely be permitted to prescribe a medicine which could kill the fetus. He could be guilty of a class 5 felony. The woman will not be charged.

 

[FallingPianos]

without knowing exactly what the law says, I cannot answer.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Alright. Let's imagine, hypothetically, that abortion is illegal:

Actually, you'd have to not only assume abortion to be illegal, but assume that it's illegal on the grounds that fetuses are legally declared persons. Though they claim it as the basis for their arguments, most anti-abortion advocates are not willing to take this step-- for good reason.

Scenario 1: ... Due to to the miscarriage, was not actually intended to be the outcome of her actions, is she now guilty of a crime? If so, which crime - and why?

The miscarriage was part of the intended outcome of her actions-- did she imagine that she could kill herself without also killing the child? This is first or second degree murder, though she'd have a good claim to an incompetence defense, if she could demonstrate clinical depression.

Depends on where the law stands on attempted suicide. It's usually grounds for involuntary admission to a treatment facility in the US.

Scenario 2: ... Besides the obvious (dangerous driving etc), is the driver responsible for the crash now guilty of another crime, because his actions indirectly resulted in miscarriage?

There's a remote possibility of negligent homicide-- but he'd normally have to have been driving impaired for prosecutors to consider pushing it that far.

Depending on how the anti-abortion statute was worded, he might be in violation of it. There might also be another law protecting fetuses against accidental death by third party-- but that's an extra layer of hypothetical.

Scenario 3: ... Is she now a criminal? What about the doctor?

I would imagine that any anti-abortion statute in place in a civilized country would include an exception for medical necessity, or else it would have been knocked down by the Courts.

This one is iffy, and depends on just how great the risk of miscarriage was, and just how necessary the medical treatment that caused the miscarriage was. It would be fairly easy to set a legal standard by which this can be tolerated, without allowing a convenient "back door" for chemical abortion.

 

[jimmyjack]

Alright. Let's imagine, hypothetically, that abortion is legal:

Every woman aborts her child.

What shall we do when there is no new generations?

 

[Jerry]

Alright. Let's imagine, hypothetically, that abortion is legal:

Every woman aborts her child.

What shall we do when there is no new generations?

Nothing. No one would be around.

This is where it hits the fan and all logic gets tossed, so I'm out.


Late.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Alright. Let's imagine, hypothetically, that abortion is legal:

Every woman aborts her child.

Why on Earth would this occur, when the vast majority of people-- man and woman alike-- desire to have children and raise a family?

Hell, even most of the small minority of American women who've had abortions have gone on to have children later.

What shall we do when there is no new generations?

We will go extinct; this is the fate of every species that refuses to reproduce.

You might look to Western Europe as an example, with their falling birth rates. Their only source of population growth is their influx of immigrants from Africa and Asia.

Strangely enough, most of Europe has more restrictive abortion laws than the United States.

 

[jimmyjack]

Why on Earth would this occur, when the vast majority of people-- man and woman alike-- desire to have children and raise a family?

Hell, even most of the small minority of American women who've had abortions have gone on to have children later.

The Egyptians desired children too; that didn’t save the first ever superpower from self-destruction.

We will go extinct; this is the fate of every species that refuses to reproduce.

You might look to Western Europe as an example, with their falling birth rates. Their only source of population growth is their influx of immigrants from Africa and Asia.

Strangely enough, most of Europe has more restrictive abortion laws than the United States.

The problem Europe has is small in comparison to America, immigration is the only way you can avoid bankruptcy, and to be honest I’m quite confident that you will become bankrupt with or without mass immigration.

 

[ngdawg]

The Egyptians desired children too; that didn’t save the first ever superpower from self-destruction.

Ancient Egyptians aborted themselves into oblivion??? WTH does that civilization have to do with anything?

The problem Europe has is small in comparison to America, immigration is the only way you can avoid bankruptcy, and to be honest I’m quite confident that you will become bankrupt with or without mass immigration.

You need to pick up a newspaper. It's quite the opposite.

 

[jimmyjack]

Ancient Egyptians aborted themselves into oblivion??? WTH does that civilization have to do with anything?

Read the previous comments.

You need to pick up a newspaper. It's quite the opposite.

Nice try.

Source.

 

[ngdawg]

Ok, so now in addition to you not knowing anything about human sexuality, the effects of abortion on an individual or a community nor who even gets HIV and how..you know squat about economics...
Just once could you post a site, a fact, something, that has to do with what you claim?? That source states the US deficit..it has NOTHING to do with a declining population and everything to do with spending. As a matter of fact, the influx of immigrants to this country, in particular, illegals, puts a tremendous strain on an already strained budget. So again, read a freakin newspaper.

 

[jimmyjack]

Ok, so now in addition to you not knowing anything about human sexuality, the effects of abortion on an individual or a community nor who even gets HIV and how..you know squat about economics...
Just once could you post a site, a fact, something, that has to do with what you claim?? That source states the US deficit..it has NOTHING to do with a declining population and everything to do with spending. As a matter of fact, the influx of immigrants to this country, in particular, illegals, puts a tremendous strain on an already strained budget. So again, read a freakin newspaper.

There is an example of denial if ever I saw one.

 

[Enola/Alone]

There is an example of denial if ever I saw one.

No, seriously Jimmyjack, ngdawg's asking a reasonable question. It doesn't do this debate any good for you to brush reasonable questions off like that. What's your reasoning?

 

[jimmyjack]

No, seriously Jimmyjack, ngdawg's asking a reasonable question. It doesn't do this debate any good for you to brush reasonable questions off like that. What's your reasoning?

I claimed that every great civilisation that existed has one thing in common, and that is “self destruction”. They never fall through war or external forces, the destruction comes from within. Look through history and see for yourself, the USA is in the same situation, largely due to its dependence on oil, but more so because it has bills it cannot pay since there are nowhere near enough tax payers to contribute to the huge bills that need paying.

It seems that they have put all there eggs in the same basket.

 

[Enola/Alone]

I claimed that every great civilisation that existed has one thing in common, and that is “self destruction”. They never fall through war or external forces, the destruction comes from within. Look through history and see for yourself, the USA is in the same situation, largely due to its dependence on oil, but more so because it has bills it cannot pay since there are nowhere near enough tax payers to contribute to the huge bills that need paying.

It seems that they have put all there eggs in the same basket.

But how is the US "self-destructing"?

 

[ngdawg]

I claimed that every great civilisation that existed has one thing in common, and that is “self destruction”. They never fall through war or external forces, the destruction comes from within. Look through history and see for yourself, the USA is in the same situation, largely due to its dependence on oil, but more so because it has bills it cannot pay since there are nowhere near enough tax payers to contribute to the huge bills that need paying.

It seems that they have put all there eggs in the same basket.

And YOU need to get it through your head that it's not how many taxpayers there are, it's a matter of BUDGET. Byt your reasoning, I should have had 10 kids....that way I'd have more money in the house. WTF???
And regardless, this has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the subject, even remotely.

 

[zymurgy]

Alright. Let's imagine, hypothetically, that abortion is illegal:

Scenario 1: A woman named Maria is 10 weeks pregnant and has suffered from severe depression for several years. She attempts suicide, and although she survives, the physical stress on her body causes a miscarriage. Due to to the miscarriage, was not actually intended to be the outcome of her actions, is she now guilty of a crime? If so, which crime - and why?

Scenario 2: A man is speeding in his car. The road is slippery because it's raining, and he crashes into a car being driven by another man and his 10 weeks pregnant wife. Fortunately, all passengers survive with nothing worse than a few broken bones and nasty lacerations. However, also as a result of the stress on her body, the pregnant woman miscarries. Besides the obvious (dangerous driving etc), is the driver responsible for the crash now guilty of another crime, because his actions indirectly resulted in miscarriage?

Scenario 3: A woman named Lucy is 10 weeks pregnant. On the advice of her doctor, she takes a medication that may cause miscarriage as a side-effect. She is aware of this risk, as is her doctor, however they both ignore the warning. The miscarriage indeed occurs. Is she now a criminal? What about the doctor?

I think the problem is that existing law has significantly changed the definition of criminal behavior.

I go with the tried and trued definition that a crime needs a victim and intent. Based on this, only scenario #1 applies.

 

[FISHX]

Alright. Let's imagine, hypothetically, that abortion is illegal:

Scenario 1: A woman named Maria is 10 weeks pregnant and has suffered from severe depression for several years. She attempts suicide, and although she survives, the physical stress on her body causes a miscarriage. Due to to the miscarriage, was not actually intended to be the outcome of her actions, is she now guilty of a crime? If so, which crime - and why?

she is guilty of attempted willfull destruction of life above all else suicide is illegal and suicide was her intention.

Scenario 2: A man is speeding in his car. The road is slippery because it's raining, and he crashes into a car being driven by another man and his 10 weeks pregnant wife. Fortunately, all passengers survive with nothing worse than a few broken bones and nasty lacerations. However, also as a result of the stress on her body, the pregnant woman miscarries. Besides the obvious (dangerous driving etc), is the driver responsible for the crash now guilty of another crime, because his actions indirectly resulted in miscarriage?

He is guilty of death by dangerous driving.

Scenario 3: A woman named Lucy is 10 weeks pregnant. On the advice of her doctor, she takes a medication that may cause miscarriage as a side-effect. She is aware of this risk, as is her doctor, however they both ignore the warning. The miscarriage indeed occurs. Is she now a criminal? What about the doctor?

Does she need these drugs to live?
Are the drugs an ongoing treatment from before pregnancy occured?
Was she told the percentage of risk of miscarrying?

 

[ngdawg]

she is guilty of attempted willfull destruction of life above all else suicide is illegal and suicide was her intention.

A common thought, but largely erroneous. Suicide is not a crime. http://www.straightdope.com/columns/040326.html

the basic notion of suicide as a crime wasn't swept away in France till the revolution, and in England it took even longer: ignominious burial wasn't abolished until 1823 nor property forfeiture till 1870, and the deed itself remained a crime (albeit only a misdemeanor, and a rarely prosecuted one at that) until 1961. In many jurisdictions you can still be prosecuted for helping someone kill himself, and assisted suicide remains a hotly debated topic not just in the UK but in much of the world.

In the U.S. suicide has never been treated as a crime nor punished by property forfeiture or ignominious burial. (Some states listed it on the books as a felony but imposed no penalty.) Curiously, as of 1963, six states still considered attempted suicide a crime--North and South Dakota, Washington, New Jersey, Nevada, and Oklahoma. Of course they didn't take matters as seriously as the Roman emperor Hadrian, who in 117 AD declared attempted suicide by soldiers a form of desertion and made it--no joke this time--a capital offense.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Of course they didn't take matters as seriously as the Roman emperor Hadrian, who in 117 AD declared attempted suicide by soldiers a form of desertion and made it--no joke this time--a capital offense.

Now, isn't that what government is for-- to assist the citizens in accomplishing what they set out to do? :smile:

 

[Enola/Alone]

Now, isn't that what government is for-- to assist the citizens in accomplishing what they set out to do? :smile:

It's like forcing someone who's been convicted of streaking to run naked through Times Square or something. Crazy Romans.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Hey, worked for innumerable parents, first time they caught their kids smoking cigarettes...

 

[tryreading]

No abortion ban will ever come into existence which holds the mother criminally liable for the accidental or intentional demise of her ZEF. She is charged with nothing.

The man may be charged by the state with a manslaughter variant, as appropriate to the circumstances. He would likely be charged with a class 5 felony, receive 6 mo.-2years in prison and pay a fine.

As is the case with South Dakota's abortion ban, the doctor would not likely be permitted to prescribe a medicine which could kill the fetus. He could be guilty of a class 5 felony. The woman will not be charged.

Yeah, there will be no punishment for the woman. Very few people, even most of the very adamant anti-abortion folks, want any punishment for the woman, even if abortion were to become illegal. And no legislator will try to pass a law to punish her anyway.

The man in the car and the doctor might receive punishment, but not the woman who actually seeks an abortion. Its ironic. I'm pro-choice, but still wonder about people who want to criminalize an action, but impose no punishment on the perpetrator.

 

[Proudly Pro Life JP Freem]

Again Foetus is latin for Baby. Hi vergiss.