Carla Foster being released

[JustMint]

Court of appeal have reduced her sentence!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-65581850

@AuntieJune - isn’t it funny that the whole parenthood for foetuses only applies when punishing the mother but not when supporting the mother. Not a person for the purposes of child support, life insurance, benefits etc, but a person when it means the mother can be punished for using drugs or for obtaining an abortion (I mean more generally like in the US rather than specifically to this case). It’s all very one way isn’t it.

Quite right!

As early as possible, as late as necessary, for whatever reason

Yes, and why stop there? Why not make the limit 3 years old or something, eh, or maybe up to 12yrs old like in the Philip.K.Dick story There’s something really disturbing about women who are prepared to kill a baby that old (excepting risk to their life, etc). It’s not normal. More than that, it’s messing up abortion rights for other women because it’s so abhorrent it puts people off the whole abortion idea and risks removing choice.

And whoever said she called an ambulance, yes she did, but she lied:

“Paramedics attended at 4.25pm in response to a report that you might be having a miscarriage. You gave the paramedics false information and, not realising that you were pregnant, they left. The second call was made at 6.39pm, shortly before your daughter, Lily, was stillborn. Paramedics attended at 7pm but all attempts at resuscitation failed and Lily was pronounced dead at 7.45pm.”

I'm also against this decision.

24 weeks is more than enough time to make up your mind about the pregnancy. There are very good reasons why this cut off is there, firstly viability threshold and secondly, it's long enough after the 20-week scan.

It's not like she couldn't have accessed these pills earlier.

I only feel sorry for her children, they three alive ones and the one she unlawfully killed.

'There is very little public support for late term abortion except on medical grounds and even less demand so why even try to make the argument for it?

The women who find themselves having late term abortions are usually devastated they have had to make that decision either to protect their own health or because of foetal abnormalities incompatible with life. It's essential we protect their right to access that care and not undermine it by making unnecessary arguments for no limits/any reason access.'

This.

On a practical level I do understand this point of view. But I do feel angry at the idea that women should keep quiet to protect what flimsy rights we have.

The point is, very few women would choose to have a late term abortion. Unless she thought it was necessary.

Most abortions happen in the first 12 weeks, a smaller number happen up to 20 weeks. Abortion between 20 and 24 are a very small percentage. However the politics of controlling abortions and what counts as a “good” abortion impacts on all women and the policing of their bodies.

so yes, I believe abortion is a woman’s right to choose, and in the unlikely case that a woman chooses one at 39 weeks, then a trust her choice. It’s hardly an easy choice to make.

Perhaps if this woman hadn’t felt shame and had been able to talk openly to professionals about having an abortion (at any stage) she may have received support that would have avoided this.

A lot of people are saying yes it's bad but 'she must have been in a desperate position' and therefore doesn't deserve jail time. If she had murdered say her autistic child out of desperation during the lockdown would she deserve jail time then? It's the same reasoning. Aren't a lot of people who commit murder in a desperate position/struggling with mental health/ have a bad life etc?

Absolutely! Let’s make sure the other children pay the price for the crime committed by their mother!

I hear you and keeping quiet isn't my forte but in this instance it's making an argument on a point of principle or just for the sake of it to gain rights we don't actually need and could threaten the security of the rights we do need.

Women can have an abortion for any reason (practically if not technically) up to 24 weeks, no one has to give birth to a child they don't want and it's necessary to permit abortion beyond 24 weeks in some cases. I think the UK has it about right.

Prison isn’t the answer to everything you know.

If a parent murdered their autistic child out of desperation my first thought would be to consider what went so terribly wrong that drove her to do this. Assuming she didn’t display psychopathic tendencies up that point, something went very very wrong somewhere. I still wouldn’t think that mother is a callous evil bitch who deserves to rot in prison. Very few people are “evil”.

I am rather horrified by this case and I do not believe that her actions should be considered legal or justified (based on what I know).

but you’re comparing apples to oranges. Foster didn’t murder anyone.

My mistake, she just destroyed a ball of cells. That's how they phrase it isn't it?

Why does she need to be “punished”. She will know it’s wrong and have to live with it for the rest of her life. What lesson can be taught by being locked in a cell, it’s not like she will murder them again is it. I’m not a psychiatrist but I would assume mandated intense therapy and medication? Sorting out the social care system would be a great start but can’t see that happening any time soon. Prison should be for people who are a danger to wider society. Go around killing random kids, yeah prison. A woman killing her child out of desperation is not a threat to anyone else are they.

Totally agree,

I’m pleased this decision has been made and she’s back home with her Dc.

I’m pro choice but this is unbelievable and she deserves to be held to account for what she did, not this aww poor woman crap. It’s yet another case of a woman putting a man before her children with tragic consequences.

My nephew was born unexpectedly at 31 weeks and aside from the risk of infection due to being small, he was in perfect health and has grown into a healthy child. I hope she spends her life reflecting on what she did.

You aren’t pro choice.

She is being made accountable, she has a criminal record her sentence will now be probation. What good does a prison sentence do in this circumstance?

Should every parent of dependent children be exempt from prison?

Should a man who murders a particular person for a specific reason be spared prison on the grounds that he’s unlikely to kill anyone else?

Should women who commit controversial crimes be spared prison on the grounds that any woman who does something awful is clearly not thinking straight?

I’m not saying abortion is murder, but I think there’s a lot of flawed logic on this thread.

This came up in a few threads when she was convicted.

She was well past the 24 week cut off when lockdown started. She conceived in September, she ran out of time for a legal abortion in Feb.

you seem to be equating not actually sitting in a cell with not being punished. That is not the case here, and it shouldn't automatically be the case that your hypothetical woman goes to jail too, either.

Each case has nuance. One of the purposes of jail is to prevent re-offending. In most (not all) cases of infanticide or induced very late term abortion, the chances of reoffending are small (but not zero - which is why therapy is also needed)

Good decision. Her conviction has not been overturned (rightly) but this is a more appropriate sentence. Hope this case will lead to a review of the safeguards around the prescribing of abortion pills.

Women can have an abortion for any reason (practically if not technically) up to 24 weeks, no one has to give birth to a child they don't want and it's necessary to permit abortion beyond 24 weeks in some cases. I think the UK has it about right.

You are woefully underinformed. Some women only find out after 24 weeks that their foetus has conditions that are not compatible with life. Forcing them to "carry to term" and then force them to birth a child is inhumane. Which is why: as early as possible and as late as necessary is my mantra. (not to mention free)

I’m pro choice but this is unbelievable and she deserves to be held to account for what she did, not this aww poor woman crap. It’s yet another case of a woman putting a man before her children with tragic consequences.

you'll be glad to know she has been held to account, and has been subject to the law and justice of the land

Should a man who murders a particular person for a specific reason be spared prison on the grounds that he’s unlikely to kill anyone else?

no because murder is subject to the law. And the law usually prescribes a lengthly jail term for people found guilty of actual murder. As with every other case mitigating circumstances can be taken into account.