Criminal or a Health Matter?

Having read through the many comments on this thread, I'm actually struggling with what happened being characterised as an "abortion". The Mother chose to end the child's life at 32 weeks, when it was certainly viable in terms of a live birth and continued survival. She lied in order to do so, albeit in difficult circumstances, but was that really her only option? So when does an "abortion" become something else, as it certainly wasn't a pre-24 week foetus ? I'm horrified at the thought of what that child experienced in the womb as it died. Did it suffer? I would also imagine that the nightmare experience of then giving birth to that dead, fully developed child will live with that woman forever.. and so it should. So yes, I understand some of the reluctance here to support a custodial sentence, as that was my initial reaction too. However, having reflected on even the scant information that we have, although I feel sorry for the three other children who will be affected, the bulk of my sympathy is with that poor, dead baby, who was so tragically denied a chance at life.

Casdon

Glorianny

Germanshepherdsmum

Glorianny, what is the point of talking about what would have happened if she killed the child after it was born, and post-natal depression? She deliberately killed the child whilst it was in her womb, at a stage of gestation where survival is usual with proper care. Stick to the known facts, such as they are.

I wasn't the one who posted she could have been charged with murder and have been given a mandatory life sentence.
I think it is relevant that a woman who had killed her baby would probably not be given a custodial sentence, but this woman has been. I think it is part of a general and growing view that women who have abortions are somehow "bad" women.

You win the generalisation of the day prize for that Glorianny, it’s not true that women who kill their babies ‘would probably not be given a custodial sentence’ at all. It depends entirely on the circumstances, and there are cases in the papers daily where women are indeed sent to prison because they have killed their babies.
I don’t agree with the judges decision in this case based on what we know, but to turn that into a perceived slight on women who have abortions is several steps too far.

Sorry Casdon but can you post some evidence for this claim please.
I probably should have said "women who kill their babies in the first year of life" when the crime is infanticide.
www.claims.co.uk/knowledge-base/court-proceedings/infanticide-and-criminal-law#:~:text=the%20criminal%20law-,What%20is%20meant%20by%20infanticide%3F,on%20it%20as%20a%20defence.

Although I don’t think she should have been given a custodial sentence, I do feel rather less sorry for her than I did yesterday. She killed the baby at 32-34 weeks gestation. One of my babies was born at 34 weeks. A beautiful absolutely normal little girl, with soft brown hair. She was induced as she was ill and then in NICU being treated for ten days. She weighed 6lb. She knew my voice, when I spoke to her in her incubator she responded.
This baby girl would have been about the same. She deserved to live. If the mother couldn’t cope with her then she could have put her up for adoption. It’s very sad.

People don’t always take advice unfortunately.

I understood that had she pleaded guilty earlier the sentence would have been a suspended one.
I wonder who was advising her.

Women should be free to abort their babies at any time before birth, and by any means they choose. The destruction of a human life other than by means sanctioned by the law is a criminal act. The law serves a very important purpose, and that is to protect human life except in the circumstances which the law allows. There has to be a deterrent to prevent cases such as this.

Whether you think the law is right or not, is neither here nor there Glorianny. You don't get to pick and choose which bits of the law you think are fair. You just have to respect that a law has been passed and stick to it.

Glorianny

AGAA4

This was not the usual type of abortion where the embryo or fetus would have little chance outside the womb. At 32 weeks the baby could have lived.
I don't think many have said abortions are wrong and that women who have them are bad.
This self termination however was wrong.

Nobody I think has said it was right. Just that the law which was used is out of date, and that the criminalisation of women who have abortions such as this one, serves no purpose whatsoever

The law surrounding abortion, which is by no means limited to this (amended) 1861 Act, is not out of date unless you consider that wom

Glorianny, on what basis can you possibly say that ‘a woman who had killed her baby would probably not be given a custodial sentence’? That is absolute nonsense, as Casdon has pointed out.
What evidence do you have for ‘a general and growing view that women who have abortions are somehow ‘bad’ women’? More absolute nonsense unless you live in the US. What is extremely ‘bad’ is that in this case the woman waited until her child would probably have survived birth, and apparently googled various methods of bringing about a late miscarriage.

AGAA4

This was not the usual type of abortion where the embryo or fetus would have little chance outside the womb. At 32 weeks the baby could have lived.
I don't think many have said abortions are wrong and that women who have them are bad.
This self termination however was wrong.

Nobody I think has said it was right. Just that the law which was used is out of date, and that the criminalisation of women who have abortions such as this one, serves no purpose whatsoever

This was not the usual type of abortion where the embryo or fetus would have little chance outside the womb. At 32 weeks the baby could have lived.
I don't think many have said abortions are wrong and that women who have them are bad.
This self termination however was wrong.

Glorianny

Germanshepherdsmum

Glorianny, what is the point of talking about what would have happened if she killed the child after it was born, and post-natal depression? She deliberately killed the child whilst it was in her womb, at a stage of gestation where survival is usual with proper care. Stick to the known facts, such as they are.

I wasn't the one who posted she could have been charged with murder and have been given a mandatory life sentence.
I think it is relevant that a woman who had killed her baby would probably not be given a custodial sentence, but this woman has been. I think it is part of a general and growing view that women who have abortions are somehow "bad" women.

You win the generalisation of the day prize for that Glorianny, it’s not true that women who kill their babies ‘would probably not be given a custodial sentence’ at all. It depends entirely on the circumstances, and there are cases in the papers daily where women are indeed sent to prison because they have killed their babies.
I don’t agree with the judges decision in this case based on what we know, but to turn that into a perceived slight on women who have abortions is several steps too far.

Germanshepherdsmum

Glorianny, what is the point of talking about what would have happened if she killed the child after it was born, and post-natal depression? She deliberately killed the child whilst it was in her womb, at a stage of gestation where survival is usual with proper care. Stick to the known facts, such as they are.

I wasn't the one who posted she could have been charged with murder and have been given a mandatory life sentence.
I think it is relevant that a woman who had killed her baby would probably not be given a custodial sentence, but this woman has been. I think it is part of a general and growing view that women who have abortions are somehow "bad" women.

Glorianny, what is the point of talking about what would have happened if she killed the child after it was born, and post-natal depression? She deliberately killed the child whilst it was in her womb, at a stage of gestation where survival is usual with proper care. Stick to the known facts, such as they are.

Let's try to leave the emotional arguments out of this, shall we?

The law may be wrong, although I don't think it is, but disobeying it knowingly is no way to change it.

Nor have any one of us the right just to disregard laws we find personally inconvenient, irrespective of what law we are talking about.

This woman has other children, so she should have be able to recognise the early signs of pregnancy, and have done something, such as taking a pregnancy test and applying for a legal abortion earlier, if she either wanted one or felt forced to take that route.

Poor woman and poor children? Poor children with a mother who willingly risked bringing a deformed child into this world, yes. Whether or not she herself is to be pitied as you all seem to think I do not know, as I know nothing about why she chose to act as she did.

This is beside the point anyhow, because if the law degrees a prision sentence for what is after all manslaughter, no judge is at liberty just to ignore the laws provisions.

Of course not! Some States in the US ban abortion completely but that’s not the case in the UK.
The court/ judge knew all the facts of this case and acted accordingly.
Adoption would have been the best course but this woman chose to do what she did.

westendgirl

Oreo , how do you know these things? You pass judgement so easily. I do not think that any of us is in the position to lay blame. We are not the woman concerned ,so we have no idea what was in her mind, why the delay, why she did what she did. Perhaps some of us should stop pretending we do know and step back.

This, absolutely. I recognise that abortion is an emotive subject, but some of the comments on here are horrendous. Do you really want us to head down the same road as the US are going in this matter?

Germanshepherdsmum

We will have to agree to differ Wyllow. What we know from that very short article is minuscule in the scheme of things. .

Actually the 1861 Act does cover GBH. I suggest you read it in its current, amended form. It isn’t archaic, it’s much used today. And of course she didn’t cause GBH, she caused death. The charge against her could have been murder, which carries a mandatory life sentence. Still criticising the CPS?

Actually had she given birth to the baby (and if you are arguing that this was a viable child you could say she had) and killed the baby afterwards she would have been guilty of infanticide. Which hasn't carried a mandatory life sentence for some time.
In the 21st century it has become common for a severely post-natally depressed mother who kills her infant child not to receive a prison sentence, except in exceptional circumstances.
Lesser mental health problems can result in a custodial sentence but rarely do
The CPS could not have charged her with murder.
In the judge's summing up he admits
^I accept, however, that there is evidence of emotionally
unstable personality traits. More significantly, I accept that you feel very deep and genuine remorse for your actions.^
He also admits she is suffering from depression.
It is the most unacceptable and unreasonable sentence.

westendgirl

Oreo , how do you know these things? You pass judgement so easily. I do not think that any of us is in the position to lay blame. We are not the woman concerned ,so we have no idea what was in her mind, why the delay, why she did what she did. Perhaps some of us should stop pretending we do know and step back.

Why waste empathy?
She has been tried and sentenced so they knew the full facts of the matter and jailed her.
You can take sisterhood too far y’know.The judge was the one that passed judgement and for good reason.

Should people not face criminal charges if they have children ?

Oreo , how do you know these things? You pass judgement so easily. I do not think that any of us is in the position to lay blame. We are not the woman concerned ,so we have no idea what was in her mind, why the delay, why she did what she did. Perhaps some of us should stop pretending we do know and step back.

Wyllow3

(asked and answered as checked and GSM is right)

However If she had been tried for GBH she could have received a suspended sentence. The CP went in hard and it would be interesting to know what their reasoning was to take a mother away from her children when she presented no threat to them.

Because she committed a terrible act, not a ‘poor woman’ at all
The baby was surplus to her requirements and she did away with it on purpose.
There has be punishment for that, and the only way was to lose her liberty.She doesn’t lose her life.

She murdered her unborn baby. Truly evil woman.

My sympathies lie fully with the child who didn't have a chance to live. Nobody has the right to end another life.

Yes, Cheers. The requirement for penal servitude for life has been repealed through.