Criminalising Pregnant Mothers who Drink

[littlebabyjesus]

if perpetrator is not the right word for someone whose deliberate actions cause harm to someone much more vulnerable than themselves, what is?

Are you saying she deliberately drank too much while pregnant because she wanted to damage her baby?

You really believe that? If not, then the right word is 'mother'.

Perpetrator is a vile word. A dehumanising word - reducing a whole human being to one act. I hope this girl does not grow up thinking of her mother as a 'perpetrator', no matter how fucked up she might be.

 

[newbie]

how would I know what she wanted?

but it's plain that what she did was to bear a child that she harmed. The word 'mother' does not accurately convey that behaviour, perpetrator does.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Oh fuck off.

 

[toggle]

Oh fuck off.

there's a few situations where such a response is called for, and this isn't one of them. the appropriate response requires the usage of at least creatively compounded words containing 4 letter profanities, and at least 2 references to the subjects own mother. my current favorite to describe those with such edifying,glorious and unashamed fuckwittery is shitwank (useless).

 

[newbie]

yeah, yeah if that's how you want to approach a discussion about a little girl who has had harm done to her then carry on, but it doesn't seem appropriate to me.

maybe 'perpetrator' isn't the right word, but the simple, all encompassing term 'mother' is somewhat dismissive of all the women who curb their own recreational excesses in order to avoid causing harm.

It's clear the right word for the child is 'victim', so what is the right word for the adult who took decision after decision, day after day, she knew would cause harm?

 

[andysays]

yeah, yeah if that's how you want to approach a discussion about a little girl who has had harm done to her then carry on, but it doesn't seem appropriate to me.

maybe 'perpetrator' isn't the right word, but the simple, all encompassing term 'mother' is somewhat dismissive of all the women who curb their own recreational excesses in order to avoid causing harm.

It's clear the right word for the child is 'victim', so what is the right word for the adult who took decision after decision, day after day, she knew would cause harm?

Either you have some special insider knowledge in this case which isn't available to the rest of us, or you are making a series of baseless and, I'm afraid, misogynist assumptions as you dig yourself ever deeper with every post you make.

I wonder which it is...

 

[newbie]

what assumptions?

 

[innit]

yeah, yeah if that's how you want to approach a discussion about a little girl who has had harm done to her then carry on, but it doesn't seem appropriate to me.

maybe 'perpetrator' isn't the right word, but the simple, all encompassing term 'mother' is somewhat dismissive of all the women who curb their own recreational excesses in order to avoid causing harm.

It's clear the right word for the child is 'victim', so what is the right word for the adult who took decision after decision, day after day, she knew would cause harm?

We're probably never going to know her story, but as an educated guess I'd say 'victim' too.

I used to work in a rehab (not a counsellor or anything) and every mother I met there, without exception, was the victim / survivor of physical or sexual violence, either in childhood or from a male partner. I can't say it ever occurred to me to see them as perpetrators.

 

[Blagsta]

if perpetrator is not the right word for someone whose deliberate actions cause harm to someone much more vulnerable than themselves, what is?

Deliberate actions? Addiction is a deliberate action?

 

[andysays]

what assumptions?

Why don't you have a little think about what you've written and see if you can work it out for yourself

 

[newbie]

We're probably never going to know her story, but as an educated guess I'd say 'victim' too.

I used to work in a rehab (not a counsellor or anything) and every mother I met there, without exception, was the victim / survivor of physical or sexual violence, either in childhood or from a male partner. I can't say it ever occurred to me to see them as perpetrators.

she may well be a victim in her own past, but that can't be used to excuse her actions, any more than it can in other sorts of case where cycles of harm are perpetuated.

I presume the vast majority of the mothers you met took every step to avoid causing harm to their children?

 

[newbie]

Deliberate actions? Addiction is a deliberate action?

causing harm is a deliberate action

 

[andysays]

causing harm is a deliberate action

Nonsense - it can also be the result of a negligent action (I'm not saying it was even that in this case because, unlike you, I'm not interested in pronouncing or even speculating about situations where I don't have sufficient detail).

 

[cesare]

causing harm is a deliberate action

So if she'd aborted instead of "causing harm" that would have been preferable? Or is abortion the ultimate harm in your eyes?

 

[Blagsta]

causing harm is a deliberate action

Is it?

 

[newbie]

Nonsense - it can also be the result of a negligent action (I'm not saying it was even that in this case because, unlike you, I'm not interested in pronouncing or even speculating about situations where I don't have sufficient detail).

yes that's correct, and one of the possible, and more positive, outcomes of this case may be that the duty of care on the professionals involved will be spelt out much more clearly. The evidence given was that she "ignored warnings from social workers and antenatal medical staff". I also don't want to speculate about the number or strength of those warnings, but this is a test case, with another 80 or so waiting on its outcome, so presumably it's been chosen as a very clear example.

So on that basis, if clear and unambiguous warnings were given to her, her actions were not negligent, they were deliberate.

 

[Blagsta]

yes that's correct, and one of the possible, and more positive, outcomes of this case may be that the duty of care on the professionals involved will be spelt out much more clearly. The evidence given was that she "ignored warnings from social workers and antenatal medical staff". I also don't want to speculate about the number or strength of those warnings, but this is a test case, with another 80 or so waiting on its outcome, so presumably it's been chosen as a very clear example.

So on that basis, if clear and unambiguous warnings were given to her, her actions were not negligent, they were deliberate.

Addiction is deliberate is it?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

How does a chronic alcoholic effectively deliberate?

Rather than ignoring warnings it might be more accurate to say that she was unable to act on them.

This is a story about a mother who harmed herself and her unborn child; it is not a story about a criminal and a victim, but of two people needing care and support.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[innit]

she may well be a victim in her own past, but that can't be used to excuse her actions, any more than it can in other sorts of case where cycles of harm are perpetuated.

I presume the vast majority of the mothers you met took every step to avoid causing harm to their children?

At the rehab? I'm sure the staff did, but the residents all used heroin or crack (I'm sure with alcohol) during their pregnancies. Because they were addicted.

I don't think of their past as excusing their actions - it explains their actions. With that understanding and some empathy, an excuse is not not needed. Nobody would choose to do these things - nobody with a choice does them.

As it happens I am pregnant and totally happy to keep to the rules. To go back to your earlier post, I don't feel 'dismissed' by this woman being described as a mother. Or my colleague who has taken a considered decision to drink alcohol in moderation and eat runny eggs. Why would I?

 

[newbie]

So if she'd aborted instead of "causing harm" that would have been preferable? Or is abortion the ultimate harm in your eyes?

she's an adult, she had that choice and yes, if she felt she couldn't stop drinking she could have had an abortion. Having taken the decision to not have an abortion then she had a clear duty to stop drinking, and failing to do that was a deliberate act of harm.

'preferable' is a judgement call and it's not mine to make... but I would not think badly of her if she had had an abortion. (and ftr I'm pro choice)

 

[trashpony]

Gruesome abortion pics t-2 days.

Eh?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Newbie how do you think addiction and deliberate choice fit together?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Blagsta]

she's an adult, she had that choice and yes, if she felt she couldn't stop drinking she could have had an abortion. Having taken the decision to not have an abortion then she had a clear duty to stop drinking, and failing to do that was a deliberate act of harm.

'preferable' is a judgement call and it's not mine to make... but I would not think badly of her if she had had an abortion. (and ftr I'm pro choice)

Maybe she found out too late to have an abortion? Maybe she thought she would be able to stop. Maybe she did stop but relapsed. Maybe she is morally opposed to abortion.

 

[weepiper]

It's perfectly possible to not realise you're pregnant until past the legal limit for abortion. Even if you're not alcoholic and chaotic.

 

[newbie]

At the rehab? I'm sure the staff did, but the residents all used heroin or crack (I'm sure with alcohol) during their pregnancies. Because they were addicted.

I don't think of their past as excusing their actions - it explains their actions. With that understanding and some empathy, an excuse is not not needed. Nobody would choose to do these things - nobody with a choice does them.

As it happens I am pregnant and totally happy to keep to the rules. To go back to your earlier post, I don't feel 'dismissed' by this woman being described as a mother. Or my colleague who has taken a considered decision to drink alcohol in moderation and eat runny eggs. Why would I?

explaining their actions is surely part of a professional approach to harm reduction. But it doesn't prevent harm occurring and I don't agree she had no choice.

 

[newbie]

Maybe she found out too late to have an abortion? Maybe she thought she would be able to stop. Maybe she did stop but relapsed. Maybe she is morally opposed to abortion.

maybe, but maybe not. are you seeking to show she has no agency in this? If not then can we presume that a test case wouldn't have been chosen if it revolved around a maybe?

 

[Blagsta]

maybe, but maybe not. are you seeking to show she has no agency in this? If not then can we presume that a test case wouldn't have been chosen if it revolved around a maybe?

She was suffering from addiction.

 

[trashpony]

I always wonder on these threads at what point a victim becomes a perpetrator. Do they magically change from damaged to potential abuser when they reach 18? Or are they a victim until they repeat a pattern from their childhood, and then become a perpetrator? So if they are somehow completely unharmed by a chaotic and horrible life, they're a better person.

 

[trashpony]

And the point of this case is that a council is trying to wiggle out of its responsibility to support a disabled child. That's all. They don't care about the morality or otherwise. And yet some people are so desperate for 'bad' women to be punished for bad decisions that they would rather see responsibilities for supporting disabled children and rights of women to have bodily autonomy badly eroded.

 

[newbie]

Maybe she is morally opposed to abortion.

actually, that maybe is a bit different, because it works on the presumption that her moral code places harm to another lower than opposition to abortion. That's surely much greater evidence of deliberate harm.