Criminalising Pregnant Mothers who Drink

[killer b]

I'd call it wanton myself.

 

[Blagsta]

isn't it wilfull?

Not if she was suffering from an addiction or was self medicating for her mental health, no.

 

[Thora]

Do you want to make the case that the child cannot have any rights whatsoever, that all rights are those of the adult who does her harm?

Yes, that is exactly the case. A foetus has no rights before birth. You can abort a foetus - infanticide is illegal.

 

[maomao]

isn't it wilfull?

Addictive behaviour generally isn't wilful. That's what distinguishes it as addictive.

 

[Blagsta]

How would you recommend I get that understanding?

Do some reading. Use Google. The usual way people educate themselves.

 

[newbie]

Maybe suing the government for reducing funding to addiction services might be a more fruitful line to take.

Is there any evidence that the reduction in funding to addiction services has resulted in more children being born to alcohol addicts?

 

[Awesome Wells]

Do some reading. Use Google. The usual way people educate themselves.

You still havemt explained how my understanding is flawed.

 

[krtek a houby]

Pregnant and drinking? Of course not. Criminalising them, though? Maybe a series of classes to teach them about pregnancy, I guess.

 

[Pickman's model]

You still havemt explained how my understanding is flawed.

it isn't flawed

it just isn't understanding

next

 

[Louis MacNeice]

the problem is that the welfare state is clearly failing in this circumstance. It should be improved. Of course, though we have to face the realities.

However, there is the issue of agency which is rather ignored when using common social factors to explain why some individuals choose to behave harmfully while most don't



because I can't and won't put the same arguments as the lawyers. I think I can put the case for the rights of the child without being constrained by what they say.

Precisely; the welfare state needs improvement not recourse to the criminal justice system.

The issue of agency isn't being ignored; it is being placed in the context of addiction

In this instance you have been supportive of the test case which is being brought on the grounds I have outlined; the test case if won will assert the rights of the foetus over those of the mother. Do you support this?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Thora]

Ok i once saw a documentary about a family that carried a gene for a very painful, debilitating condition with high risk of deformity and other associated infection risks and also carried high risk for a shortened lifespan.........they made the decision to have another child fully knowing the high risk of having another baby with this condition...which they did and the child did have the condition.......should that woman be prosecuted ?

Women should be held criminally responsible for harming foetuses. No, no - not all women. Not those nice ladies with faulty genes and medical conditions. Just those nasty alcoholics and drug addicts.

 

[Thora]

Pregnant and drinking? Of course not. Criminalising them, though? Maybe a series of classes to teach them about pregnancy, I guess.

Teach them what about pregnancy?

 

[mentalchik]

would it do any good? well probably not because there are very few people in that position, so far as I know now in 2014. But that may change in the future as research continues.

The problem with debates about medical ethics is that they're necessarily temporary, because the science is forever changing. Thus a few years ago there was much less science to attribute direct responsibility for a childs developmental issues. Now it can be pinpointed to alcohol. Other conditions will be better understood in future.

Do you want to make the case that the child cannot have any rights whatsoever, that all rights are those of the adult who does her harm?

And we aren't dealing in absolutes......we're dealing in 'maybes', 'possibles'.........can you not see the slippery slope that this will lead to ? Or would you like a pregnant woman to be little more than an incubator who does nothing that might have a possible risk to the foetus ?

 

[krtek a houby]

Teach them what about pregnancy?

What healthy foods to eat/drink, what not to eat/drink, the proteins/vitamins you need, how much sleep and/or excercise to take. That sort of thing.

 

[newbie]

Not if she was suffering from an addiction or was self medicating for her mental health, no.

so her addiction absolves her from responsibility for her actions? You appear to be wandering close to saying she is not capable of making rational decisions, that her mental health is in question. Is that really your position? because if it is, does society at large not have a duty to make decisions int he interest of the child she will bear?

I keep coming back to the fact that the child has rights. The child has been harmed yet it appears that there is more sympathy towards the person who caused the harm than there is to the (entirely innocent and utterly defenceless) victim. Who or what protects the child if not the law?

 

[mentalchik]

Would should be held criminally responsible for harming foetuses. No, no - not all women. Not those nice ladies with faulty genes and medical conditions. Just those nasty alcoholics and drug addicts.

Oh yes and going back to the sanctimony i heard on that phone in there was of course just an ickle trickle of "people from not very nice backgrounds" creeping in as well.............because obviously women from nice, well educated affluent backgrounds wouldn't do such a thing

 

[Thora]

What healthy foods to eat/drink, what not to eat/drink, the proteins/vitamins you need, how much sleep and/or excercise to take. That sort of thing.

Do you not think women already know that stuff?

 

[mentalchik]

What healthy foods to eat/drink, what not to eat/drink, the proteins/vitamins you need, how much sleep and/or excercise to take. That sort of thing.

You do realise that those things are not absolutes, change from professional to professional, go in trends and generally change all the time ?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

No. Prosecution as such is rather unlikely except in the most extreme cases. However, legal clarity may be desirable, but in my view not in cases "related to the mother's age, health or medical conditions" but in cases directly related to her willful behaviour.

Can you make a case that the child born to someone who behaves in a way known to cause developmental harm should have no rights whatsoever? If the child should not have rights what makes them different from any other person who has been deliberately harmed? If the child should have rights what are they and how should they be exercised?

Why does a mother have to be a criminal for her child to have rights? This is frankly bizarre; the rights are inherent in the child - in all children - not contingent on the behaviour of the mother.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[newbie]

Yes, that is exactly the case. A foetus has no rights before birth. You can abort a foetus - infanticide is illegal.

the child is a person. She has been damaged. She will grow up (I hope) to be able to put her own arguments on a thread like this. Will you the continue to say she has no rights?

 

[Thora]

the child is a person. She has been damaged. She will grow up (I hope) to be able to put her own arguments on a thread like this. Will you the continue to say she has no rights?

I sincerely hope she will grow up to have rights to bodily autonomy too, and her rights won't have been eroded by then.

Of course the child has rights though, so I'm not sure what you mean by that. She didn't have rights before she was a person though.

 

[newbie]

Precisely; the welfare state needs improvement not recourse to the criminal justice system.

The issue of agency isn't being ignored; it is being placed in the context of addiction

In this instance you have been supportive of the test case which is being brought on the grounds I have outlined; the test case if won will assert the rights of the foetus over those of the mother. Do you support this?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

I'll tell you when I've read it. As a general approach, I'll support it if it asserts the rights of a living child but not if it relies entirely upon abstract rights for an unborn foetus. But until it's published and we can all think it through that's a bit previous.

 

[Thora]

I keep coming back to the fact that the child has rights. The child has been harmed yet it appears that there is more sympathy towards the person who caused the harm than there is to the (entirely innocent and utterly defenceless) victim. Who or what protects the child if not the law?

But you think children only have rights not to be damaged by alcohol - any who are born with other preventable problems don't have rights

 

[mentalchik]

the child is a person. She has been damaged. She will grow up (I hope) to be able to put her own arguments on a thread like this. Will you the continue to say she has no rights?

I refer you back to the case in that documentary i posted about......following your logic that child would have a case to say her mother willfully did harm......would she have a case to sue then ?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

so her addiction absolves her from responsibility for her actions? You appear to be wandering close to saying she is not capable of making rational decisions, that her mental health is in question. Is that really your position? because if it is, does society at large not have a duty to make decisions int he interest of the child she will bear?

I keep coming back to the fact that the child has rights. The child has been harmed yet it appears that there is more sympathy towards the person who caused the harm than there is to the (entirely innocent and utterly defenceless) victim. Who or what protects the child if not the law?

Don't you bloody dare! Sympathy and care are not zero sum games. Both mother and daughter are damaged. Both mother and daughter need care and support.

Louis MacNeice

 

[Blagsta]

Is there any evidence that the reduction in funding to addiction services has resulted in more children being born to alcohol addicts?

I think its probably too soon for any academic studies to have been conducted. However, reduce the availability of services and what do you think the likely outcome might be?

 

[Pickman's model]

What healthy foods to eat/drink, what not to eat/drink, the proteins/vitamins you need, how much sleep and/or excercise to take. That sort of thing.

you patronising twat.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Just shut the fuck up, likesfish.

G-d hates thread cops.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Is there any evidence that the reduction in funding to addiction services has resulted in more children being born to alcohol addicts?

Wow. Now he asks for evidence. How about you look at evidence of where criminalising addiction leads us?

 

[newbie]

And we aren't dealing in absolutes......we're dealing in 'maybes', 'possibles'.........can you not see the slippery slope that this will lead to ? Or would you like a pregnant woman to be little more than an incubator who does nothing that might have a possible risk to the foetus ?

the slippery slope between the deliberate harm I've been talking about and the possible risk you want to discuss? No.

I