Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter

    Started a legal blog, will be posting weekly. Areas regarding interesting and contentious areas of the law for law students and non-law students. Would appreciate if you would take the time to read.
    Follow on twitter - @lawWrites99

    Had a quick look. Just some thoughts:

    If you allow an unborn foetus to be capable of being 'murdered' then you give credence to the pro-life position that all abortion is murder which is incredibly politically volatile.

    The morality question depends largely on how you view the purpose of sentencing/punishment through the criminal justice system. If the purpose of punishment is seeing that justice is done e.g. attaching the word 'murderer' to the baby killer, then the manslaughter/GBH/1929 Act route is unsatisfactory. If the purpose isn't to label someone, then the law as it stands can achieve a very similar effect and still recognise that a baby has been killed.

    As you say, the 1929 Act provides similar offences namely section 1 child destruction i.e. any person who with intent to destroy the life of a child capable of being born alive, by any wilful act causes a child to die before it has an existence independent of its mother, shall be guilty of child destruction. Life imprisonment is available here too.

    I guess the question remaining is 'why does the label of murderer matter?' The person convicted would be guilty of 'child destruction' which is arguably equally as abhorrent a label to receive and would be equally sentenced.
Who do you think it's more helpful to talk about mental health with?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.