Mum sentenced to 28 months in prison for abortion pills

[mumoftwobarnyboys]

Used after the cut off point of 10 weeks.

Regardless of how far gone she was, surely this isn't right?

It is her body, despite me morally really thinking what she did was very wrong.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/12/woman-in-uk-jailed-for-28-months-over-taking-abortion-pills-after-legal-time-limit?CMP=twtgu&utmmsource=Twitter&utmmedium=&s=08#Echobox=1686577294

@thimbbwebelr153 that's not why the two doctors sign off was required. If that's a major concern then the same could be said about the prescription of any medication.

@NBLarsen that charge was dropped and the conviction was under the abortion act.
The law on child destruction is very old and the terminology used is not what would be written now. Just because that law refers to a child, it doesn't mean that the unborn baby is deemed to be legally the same as a born child.

I'm not sure this is correct.

I had to terminate at 21 weeks. I had to consent to ending the life of my daughter by signing a form which contained the word "infanticide".

2 days later I went back to hospital to deliver. That delivery took longer than that of my full term surviving daughter 4 years earlier.

The reason (I now understand) they needed me to consent to this is that my baby could have been born alive. She wouldn't have survived for long but this is the way the NHS thought would be the least traumatic for everyone involved.

For clarity my baby was very poorly and would not have survived for long outside of my body even at full term.

I never said that. I was replying to someone who said a it only matter when they're born. Before that we should do what we like to them. That's why I'm asking what's the point of neonatal care if the thing isnt even a baby? If it's doesn't even matter. I never even said I'm against full term abortions.

I'm sorry for the loss of your daughter.

The hospital would have needed your consent to administer medication that would have ended the life of your baby before it was born. That's what was being referred to in the paperwork. That's not the same as a criminal charge of infanticide, which doesn't exist in the UK as a separate crime.

until born a baby / foetus has no legal identity and rights of their own.
that’s a fact.

whilst this is a tragic case the abrogation of that above point of Law has not occurred and so it remains the case.

this debate is very revealing about what people think they stand in terms of choice and for many there is clearly a line in the sand that causes conflict in their stance. Myself included; in this specific instance.

Neonatal care is for after birth. So a baby by anyones definition.

I know. I said prenatal and neonatal care. If a 34 week old baby is nothing because it's not been born, what's the point in investing millions in neonatal and prenatal care?

Infanticide does exist as an offence under English law:https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/1-2/36/section/1

I cannot see that this would apply to the tragic circumstances described by @mellongoose ir if it did, how signing any form would deal with the matter.

I am sorry for what happened to you @mellongoose.

You're mistaken and spreading incorrect information @RoseBucket

The woman who was sentenced today had not previously had an abortion just before 24 weeks and another child in care.

The judge was referencing a previous similar case R v Catt 2013 where Ms Catt had 2 young children, had previously had an abortion before 24 weeks and put another child up for adoption and then had another abortion at full term.

Paragraph 12 and 13 of the judges notes here crimeline.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/R-v.-Foster-sentencing-remarks-12.6.23-1.pdf

Prison is wrong in this case. The judge has deprived three other children of their mother when a non custodial sentence would have been appropriate.

I think the sentence is just. I feel bad for her having an unwanted pregnancy but she purposely took the tablets knowing she was further along. Too far along imho.

My reaction exactly.

The judge didn't get a choice of giving a non custodial sentence

One of the children with special needs who the judge says is "particularly reliant on her love and support". Poor children :(

Same here! Horrified when I heard the age of the unborn baby. That's murder

The judge said if she had pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity in Magistrate's court the sentence could've been suspended

The tragedy is that Lily Foster died because her mother lied in a premeditated and well researched way .
The tragedy is that children will be raised without a mother for some months and will have the knowledge that is because a sibling died.
The tragedy is that the mother would have been given legal advice which if she had followed and plead guilty earlier there would have been no custodial sentence .
The tragedy is that the partner will have to live with the trauma of his failed attempts to resuscitate a new born baby and with being a single parent for now and then try to rebuild some sort of parenting relationship with someone who broke trust in such a way.

There is a law , made like many , to try to protect those who are powerless. As a society we have decided abortion after 24 weeks is not acceptable, except in very rare circumstances .

If you break the law , there are , rightly ,consequences.

This offence would not , automatically , warrant a custodial sentence. However the actions of the defendant in not pleading guilty until far along the process meant a custodial sentence was unavoidable.

If you are hoping that this would not be repeated you would hope there would be remorse, insight , contrition . A big part of this would be an early guilty plea , which a lawyer would have pointed out the advantages of given the evidence .
We have a legal system which has changed the law so that eg a man stabbing a pregnant woman , killing the baby ,can be tried for murder/manslaughter , we also have a system that has nuance over infanticide recognising for over a hundred years post partum psychosis .

We have to ask ourselves at what point a woman has to take the consequences of decisions made before, during and after a case like this . Because you are a woman with children does that mean you are judged by a different standard in a blanket fashion?

I'm not getting involved in the debate, just came on to share this petition for anyone interested:

Nope - she became pregnant in October 2019, knew she was pregnant in December 2019, and passed the cut-off for legal abortion in March 2020. Lockdown started April 2020.

Thank you @RoseslnTheHospital and @AgathaSpencerGregson. 🙏

The clarification is helpful x

32 weeks!!

I don't understand the bit about "the body had never been recovered". Which body?

At 32 weeks, the baby can survive. So I think it's nothing different from baby be born and killed. It's murder.

Someone I knew gave birth at 23 weeks quite a long time ago. They told her they would not intervene because the baby was too young to survive. The priest arrived to baptise the baby, who cried. They then decided to intervene and the child survived.

I also knew someone whose third baby was so disabled that he was unlikely to live very long after birth, she had a pretty late abortion, after 18 weeks, it was hugely harrowing but the right decision for her and her family.

32 weeks plus is so late for an abortion. I’m sure the case is complex and very sad, but it is a very serious matter. In another court a healthcare professional is currently accused of the murder of neonates. I imagine some of those babies would have been born before 32 weeks.