How far along was she? If she was still in the legal realm of abortion how could it possibly be murder? 14 years seems extremely harsh.
The HuffPo article said she was 6 weeks and 5 days.
How far along was she? If she was still in the legal realm of abortion how could it possibly be murder? 14 years seems extremely harsh.
I don't disagree with the charge. Abortion is one thing. Forced abortion is another.
The HuffPo article said she was 6 weeks and 5 days.
Yeah that's a rough one. He's in prison for the same thing thousands of people are doing legally every day.So not murder then, in my eyes.
This is a good point too.No problem at all with this.. If he had kicked her in the stomach with the intentions of causing a miscarriage he'd be seeing at least if not more of a punishment..
The fact that he used medication to induce an abortion doesn't suddenly make the punishment more controversial. She could have died from bleeding due to his actions, the medication he gave her is supposed to be administered in a medical environment with supervision.
Even if she wanted to keep it and it was a child in her eyes? I'm not coming down on you, I just find this discussion and the different points of view interesting.So not murder then, in my eyes.
i think he committed a crime here, although i agree it wasn't murder or a crime against the fetus. what he did to her should probably be a crime, although I'm not sure what american law it would fall under. reckless endangerment maybe? There'd probably be more than one applicable charge.Yeah that's a rough one. He's in prison for the same thing thousands of people are doing legally every day.
His only crime was doing it through deception.
Even if she wanted to keep it and it was a child in her eyes? I'm not coming down on you, I just find this discussion and the different points of view interesting.
There is always the debate over personhood and I don't see a problem with letting it be defined by the mother. If she wanted to keep it and considered it her child then this man killing it could have the same emotional and psychological impact as if he killed her newborn.
If she didn't want it and was planning on having an abortion and he did this it would still be a crime against the mother, but not murder since the fetus wasn't a person according to her.
He's in prison for the same thing thousands of people are doing legally every day.
His only crime was doing it through deception.
Hmm, I hadn't thought about removing it from the realm of homicide law all together. I could get behind this.The problem I have with that is that it makes personhood even more arbitary than it needs to be, which will make the abortion debate even more of a mess.
I simpler solution would be to just make a seperate charge for putting a woman through an unwanted abortion, that can be as severe as it needs to be because it is afterall a horrible crime.
That wouldn't require treating the fetus as a schrödinger's person.
No- medical abortions are done with the consent of the women. This women did not give her consent and was purposely give a different drug to harm to her body.
I'll give you the manslaughter charge (cause honestly I always get the fine line between manslaughter and murder confused).
I don't agree with "non consented medical procedure" cause it was not performed by a doctor or hospital. It was a dude who switched labels and gave the drug to women. Unless your referring to the doctor is diagnosed the bacteria infection. Did he go along with his son's plan, or was he duped by the son too ( I know the son falsified the prescription)?
I was going to respond to this but Cat Party's quote below says exactly what I wanted to say.Yeah that's a rough one. He's in prison for the same thing thousands of people are doing legally every day.
His only crime was doing it through deception.
Exactly. Abortion is about a woman's right to choose. It isn't contingent on the fetus/baby (as much as that upsets many). There is no equivalence where the father/male is concerned either simply because of biology. Try as you might, there is no way to give the sexes parity in this one situation.I think a lot of you guys are over thinking this in a way that actually undervalues human life. You don't need to strip a fetus of any concept of personhood in order to justify your belief in the right to choose. Trying to come up with a rigid definition of human life while still being pro-choice forces you to devalue the fetus, which is wrong. Criminal law does not require such rigidity, so don't try to impose it. A fetus can be a victim in some circumstances but not in others. I am pro-choice but I feel that has nothing to do with this case.
What if we switch the role in this case. Women doesn't want to have kids, the man desires to sire a child one day. She slips him a drug that destroys the sperm making part of his testicle. He goes to the emergency room cause there is blood in his urine and finds out what really happened. How would she be charge?
Someone would already charged with murder or manslaughter for causing a miscarriage that is not your own.So women are allowed to murder their unborn babies, but men aren't?
The reason abortions aren't "murder" is because the embryo is not deemed to be a human. It's why abortions are legal.
One of the arguments you hear frequently by pro-choice people is that it's not murder to have an abortion because the fetus is not yet a human.
Not really murder, but I have no problem with the punishment being about the same. I'm guessing a miscarriage is probably up there with rape as one of the more traumatizing things that can happen to you, so intentionally causing one should carry an equivalent punishment.
How you gonna put this dude in jail for 14 years? For real?
As someone who was told their baby was aborted without my consent, I can relate. Both parties signatures and/or presence should be required to abort a child.
Yeah it should be like 30 at least.
You guess its probably the same, so it should be? Solid reasoning.
For one-third to one-half of the (rape) victims, these symptoms continue beyond the first few months and meet the conditions for the diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder.
A questionnaire (GHQ-12 General Health Questionnaire) study following women having miscarried showed that more than half (55%) of them presented with significant psychological distress immediately, while 25% did at 3 months; 18% showed psychological symptoms at 6 months, and 11% at 1 year after miscarriage.
i think he committed a crime here, although i agree it wasn't murder or a crime against the fetus. what he did to her should probably be a crime, although I'm not sure what american law it would fall under. reckless endangerment maybe? There'd probably be more than one applicable charge.
Thousand of people falsely give another human being a mislabeled drug legally?
It is absolutely disgusting that because a fetus was involved so many ignore this was a crime against a women- a living breathing person who is suppose to have equal protection under the law. She was poisoned. It was a premeditated act. He's a monster.
I'm glad the he got 14 years.
Read above and you'll see that I agree with most of your points.I was going to respond to this but Cat Party's quote below says exactly what I wanted to say.
Read above and you'll see that I agree with most of your points.
Monster or not, I can see his side of it as well though. Being in a situation that will effect the rest of your life and the person that holds that key to his future is about to choose a door and break it off in the lock. Not excusing his actions but that's scary too.
How far along was she? If she was still in the legal realm of abortion how could it possibly be murder? 14 years seems extremely harsh.
> ib4 "its her bodylol"
Why is it so hard to believe? It's basically like this:
Abortion before X weeks = Legal Killing
Abortion after X weeks = Illegal (in other words doctors won't do it)
Forced abortion at any time = Illegal Murder
Just because the mother can choose to do something doesn't mean that the father has any say. He basically killed a child she wanted and deserves the time.
As someone who was told their baby was aborted without my consent, I can relate. Both parties signatures and/or presence should be required to abort a child.
^ Why does she get off scott free?
> ib4 "its her bodylol"
A problem like this would be solved if the father could rid himself of any responsibility for the kid.
> ib4 "its her bodylol"
I was talking about the forced parenthoodThis makes no sense. how would that solve the problem of her boyfriend being mad at her?
The HuffPo article said she was 6 weeks and 5 days.
The personhood, or lack thereof, of a fetus is not central to the Roe v Wade decision. The bodily autonomy of an individual (specifically, a pregnant woman) is.
Well he still endangered and tricked her so I guess he should get something. Other than that, I agree.So 14 years for something that wasn't murder? I'm glad I missed this thread.
If bodily autonomy were the sole concern, a woman would be allowed to terminate the foetus at any stage.
That means not charging this man with murder. That doesn't mean not giving him just punishment, or absolving him of guilt. It simply means defining this crime such that we can punish an act we consider immoral without opening ourselves up to difficulty elsewhere.
Not really, they can put stipulations and common sense into the rulings.
For example carrying a pregnancy late into gestation puts a limit where you can only terminate for certain reasons. The idea behind it is the fetus is capable of surviving outside the womb with or without medical help and by carrying it so late she made a decision to carry it to term. Which is what Roe v Wade did and little to no pro-choicers disagreed with it.
Pro-lifers constantly trying to lower the limit since they cannot outright ban it is another topic however.
The precedent already exists. If someone pushes a pregnant woman on the floor or crashes his car into her car and causes a miscarriage they get charged with murder. If she dies he gets done for double murder/homicide.
Yeah that's a rough one. He's in prison for the same thing thousands of people are doing legally every day.
His only crime was doing it through deception.