It will never happen in my view, because logistically it's a nightmare of a law. That's why I can't get excited about it. I bet this case goes nowhere too.
Foetal alcohol syndrome
- Thread starter purves grundy
- Start date
tbtommyb
Well-Known Member
There would be no mens rea in such a case
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
Making an educated assumption, I doubt most of those women are just drinking too much in pregnancy because they're feckless. They might not know, or be in denial, which can be pretty complex psychologically. Or they may have drinking issues, perhaps even exacerbated by the stress of pregnancy. I've known a lot of heavyish drinkers who have become pregnant and then cut back to the 1-2 units 1-2x per week or none at all, I don't think when women can't it's as simple as them being outright "selfish".
Obviously I would prefer it if these women were able to stop drinking, but yer know, the reasons why people drink can be complicated. Should they really then be criminalized for that? Indeed, I think it would stop some of these women seeking help.
Isn't that what some suggest in the USA, that any women of childbearing age shouldn't drink just in case?
I also do remember a GP in this country completely guilting me when I told him I was trying to get pregnant but still drinking moderately.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Severe FAS tends to be concomitant to alcohol addiction, though, which is a different proposition to irresponsibly "drinking heavily while knowingly pregnant", most addicts not having the degree of self-control to suspend their addiction while pregnant. While addicts using their substance of choice might be seen as reprehensible under such circumstances, irresponsibility doesn't really enter into it - addiction isn't a two-way street.
I do see your point, but luckily it is sometimes.
toggle
wobbly
I agree. I don't particularly like some of Sasaferrato 's attitudes or opinions, but what is the key factor here is that he does not want to, or think he has a right to enforce his views on others. and I wish a lot more people who share his opinion on abortion also shared his attitudes on legality and access.
toggle
wobbly
unfortunately, cases that are an extreme tend to provoke a moral reaction that creates rules that have unintended consequences.
When people get better.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Surely it's of equal importance? If you contend (as I do with regard to abortion) that "personhood" requires you to be born and start to assimilate environmental information that will eventually help you determine who/what you are, then the ramifications of saying "personhood begins in the womb" with regard to FAS can be seen to have horrific anti-choice implications with regard to aabortion, because the issues will be conflated - "if personhood begins in the womb with reagrd to FAS,, then surely it must begin in the womb with regard to everything?"
David Alton will come in his boxers.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Frankly, if women circumscribed their behaviour in the way that's being suggested, I'm not convinced there'd be any benefit to the child, and certainly not to the mother, who'd effectively become a human brood mare.
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
Tbf some addicts can recover and come out the other side. It's just bloody hard work.
I didn't say it begins in the womb? I wanted a concept of future person?Surely it's of equal importance? If you contend (as I do with regard to abortion) that "personhood" requires you to be born and start to assimilate environmental information that will eventually help you determine who/what you are, then the ramifications of saying "personhood begins in the womb" with regard to FAS can be seen to have horrific anti-choice implications with regard to aabortion, because the issues will be conflated - "if personhood begins in the womb with reagrd to FAS,, then surely it must begin in the womb with regard to everything?"
David Alton will come in his boxers.
I'm not going to go through the whole same thing with you as I've just been through with someone else. I'll end up with RSI for a start.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
True. You don't get better/recover from an addiction.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It's massively rare that an addict can gain true freedom from their addiction without there being masses of containment factors or avoidance behaviours in place to help them along, even simple stuff like not walking through the part of town where you could most likely score.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Then why the fuck did you serve in the army? Even as a nurse you knew there was the possibility you'd have to fire on an enemy!
You're either not very self-aware, or you're being massively hypocritical.
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
I think we're interpreting recovery a bit differently here. I guess I was talking about the basic outward addictive symptoms, i.e. whilst it's a continual battle, there are definitely previous addicts who are now abstinent. And it's definitely possible for a prior addict to not have their substance abuse symptoms but also to live a worthwhile and satisfying life, as according to the recovery model.
That's not incompatible with what you say, and I agree with you.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I'm of the opinion that we can escape our addictions only with strong wills and good help, but from experience I know it's easy to "fall into bad habits", and to the extent that most of us have to guard ourselves from "falling back into bad habits" then yes, I do believe that once you're an addict, you'll always be an addict.
I don't mean this in the perjorative social sense of "worthless junkie". I'm just acknowledging that as an addict (currently "reformed") I have certain weaknesses that I can never allow myself to forget.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Yes.
tbtommyb
Well-Known Member
Dunno, that expended my legal knowledge
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I can, purely because the anti-choice crowd with regard to the abortion debate have been using issues such as FAS as a backdoor into the attribution of personhood for years, and they're helped along by some religious types who may not ve a stance per se on abortion, but do have a stance on the purported souls those aborted foetuses carry - "if they've got a soul, then surely they must be a person?" - regardless of the fact that the existence of the soul can't be proven (except perhaps by phildwyer).
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I'm not a 12-stepper.
I'm just speaking from monitoring my own behaviour over the last 20 years, since I got clean.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I suspect that he's not okay with "undamaged" foetuses being aborted, full-stop.
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
People can and do recover.
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
Yes you can.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
The main one being Kyle himself, the two-bob cunt.
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
rubbish
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
You've seen the argument from one side, mate, I've seen it from the other. Obviously our mileage is going to vary.
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
Yes. Personal and professional.
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
You've seen the argument from one side, mate, I've seen it from the other. Obviously our mileage is going to vary.
You're making some silly assumptions.
Similar threads
