Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To just be appalled a pregnant woman has been jailed over this ?

153 replies

Sootyandsweep2019 · 18/09/2019 20:38

Yes, ammend the certificate to be factually accurate. But I am genuinely scared and appalled the CPS felt this was in the public interest to prosecute here. I mean, are they going to knock on the door of all Jeremy Kyle guests in a similar situation ? And there are many other cases where I'm just aghast a prosecution was thought to be in the public interest.

There are also women, who will protect a child by having someone else register as the father to keep a domestic abuser out if a child's life, I think we have a real, real authoratitive problem in this country as I could not trust any authorities that thought this was okay ( Daily mail story about mother jailed for naming the wrong man on birth certificate , trying to link but struggling on phone)

OP posts:
ShatnersWig · 19/09/2019 07:56

Both did the crime, both doing the time, so what's your problem? You saying he should have been jailed but not her simply because she's female and pregnant?

Fuck that shit. And you know it. Have a biscuit.

Cheeserton · 19/09/2019 07:58

It's a really serious offence and she sounds like a scumbag. What the hell has being pregnancy got to do with it? Doubting it's her first offence either.

I'm 'appalled' that you don't take this sort of thing more seriously.

Ringdonna · 19/09/2019 07:59

You break the law you get punished.

iwantluxury · 19/09/2019 08:02

It's wrong and as others have said, against the law.
It's sickening that so many rapists, wife beaters and paedophiles get off Scott free or with very lenient sentences though and this woman goes to jail.

YouLikeTheBadOnesToo · 19/09/2019 08:02

The lawyer defending her acknowledged she ‘acted out of spite’ and a ‘desire’ for the child to be her new boyfriend’s. This is not a child protection issue. This is two people wilfully and intentionally denying a child half of their family. The two of them did this for their own selfish wants, it wasn’t about what was best for the child. The lie only came to light when social services became involved, implying the child’s home life wasn’t overly stable anyway. Perhaps the actual father and his family can be beneficial to the child.

She also had the option of leaving it blank. That still would have prevented her ex from having parental responsibility. The pair of them chose to lie. Actions have consequences. (I agree that sentences for certain crimes are far too lenient, but that doesn’t mean we should stop punishing other crimes!)

Saying ‘what if it was rape’ isn’t comparable. It wasn’t. Some people shoplift because they literally can’t afford to feed their families, that is beyond tragic. It doesn’t mean that those who steal for frivolous reasons shouldn’t be punished, just in case another person has an actual need to do so.

I’m not sure why this is a feminist issue either. Man and woman commits crime, man and woman receives custodial sentence. The only what this relates to women is that the nature of the crime makes it easier for women to lie than men (not sure how a man could lie about who the mother was when registering the birth).

CarolDanvers · 19/09/2019 08:06

I don't believe this was a jail-able offence either OP. I think she must have a significant record already for this sentence to have been deemed appropriate.

RavenLG · 19/09/2019 08:10

She might not be a physical threat to society but she has proven she is willing to fraudulently sign official government documents for the sake of spite. That to me says it all.

Conflating prison sentences with each other does nothing though. Yes be annoyed that some cases don’t get the justice they should. But just because case B only got a suspended sentence for assault doesn’t mean case A shouldn’t get any jail time. They both broke the law, it is the system / judicial system that needs a shake up.

Spingtrolls · 19/09/2019 08:19

Even IF there was DV involved and she wanted to protect the child. Falsifying the BC would not stop the actual father from contact. If he had an inkling the child was his paternity test could be ordered and he gets contact.

And of course it’s in the publics interest to know you mess with legal documents and this is what could happen.

Spingtrolls · 19/09/2019 08:22

Fraud is a jailable offence. And that’s the thing when you commit a crime you don’t know the punishment if caught.

@CarolDanvers are you suggesting that all those doing time for tv license evasion also have previous history? Because not all do.

Orangecake123 · 19/09/2019 08:23

It could have been left blank....

DontLookBackIntoTheSun · 19/09/2019 08:33

@CarolDanvers are you suggesting that all those doing time for tv license evasion also have previous history? Because not all do

No one is doing time for tv licence evasion, it is not an imprisonable offence

WellButterMyArse · 19/09/2019 08:59

I disagree with the OP, but it's interesting how many people on MN think a birth certificate is a register of a child's biological parents, on other threads as well as this. It really isn't. Legally, this is quite different from a married woman's husband being named on a birth certificate when it wasn't his sperm. No doubt there, despite what OP said. But ethically if you have a problem with one because it's lying to the child (as opposed to the state) you should really have a problem with the other. The fact is that British law already allows multiple ways for someone who isn't a biological parent to be listed as a parent on a birth certificate. This just wasn't one of them.

Fwiw I think the point about the severity of the sentence for lying to the state as opposed to violence against fellow human beings is a reasonable one, and I'm a solicitor. That being said, the court doesn't have the power to decide they're going to change the way in which offences are punished, they work within parameters decided by the state.

Awwlookatmybabyspider · 19/09/2019 09:05

I know someone, who met someone when she was pregnant. The child calls him dad and has brought him up from birth. I assume he’s named as the child dad. After all he’s doing all the hard work. Compared to love nurture and care biology is neither here nor there.

x2boys · 19/09/2019 09:08

You don't think.a child has the right to know who their biological parent is than Awwlook?

57Varieties · 19/09/2019 09:21

I am really surprised that mumsnet, which is meant to be feminist, approves this

Firstly, “mumsnet” is not a single entity, or homogenous mass. It’s full of individual free thinkers with their own views and opinions.

Secondly, it is not a “feminist” issue. You’re the one being anti feminist if you think women should be excused their part in crimes purely because of their sex.

Thirdly, if the CPS found it was in the public interest to prosecute the case, on what basis do you think it isn’t? I’m struggling to see why it wouldn’t be in the public interest to prosecute someone using official government records to commit fraud.

And yet men who download some of the most vile abuse of children are routinely spared jail.

this is whataboutery and not relevant to the point in discussion.

I have no sympathy for the woman involved or her boyfriend. It’s only a few months, hardly like she’s being left to languish for years.

LaVieilleHarpie · 19/09/2019 09:39

Woman does this and goes to jail.
Men rape women and are routinely spared jail.

Fuckinell.

ShatnersWig · 19/09/2019 09:41

LaVie Separate issues. Apples and oranges.

Oh, and for accuracy, your first line should read "Woman and man does this and both go to jail". HTH.

Aridane · 19/09/2019 10:07

Woman does this and goes to jail.
Men rape women and are routinely spared jail.

And your point is? Jail no women? Abandon prison sentences for anything other than rape?

Campaign for tougher sentencing and approach on rape but don’t fuck with sentencing on fraud

CarolDanvers · 19/09/2019 10:18

A child will be born in jail because their Mum did a stupid, selfish thing. No one was physically hurt. No ones life was ruined. She was caught and it was prevented. Meanwhile thousands of men in this country abandon and refuse to financially support multiple children - an act that no man in the U.K. will be imprisoned or even receive a criminal conviction for. Others routinely attack and beat their wives and are let off with cautions and warnings and understanding from the police who deal with them. Rapists seldom revive sentences commensurate with their crimes.

If you can't see the disparity here then I don't what to say. A jail term is not an appropriate punishment for this woman and what she did and nothing anyone says will make me think it is.

ShatnersWig · 19/09/2019 10:21

Carol, should all pregnant women all have a get out of jail free card for committing criminal offences? Two people were involved in this crime, a man and a woman. Are you saying neither should have been jailed or that he should and she shouldn't?

WellButterMyArse · 19/09/2019 10:27

I'm of the view that short prison sentences tend to be an expensive luxury, in that they cost us a lot and don't work very well on a societal level. People still reoffend and there are also knock on costs when jobs are lost and children go into care. So personally I'd be quite happy to see custodial sentences in situations like this scrapped (and more consideration of the idea that some repeat violent offenders are just an ongoing danger to the public, but that's a separate matter). The judge however cannot just decide to do that.

x2boys · 19/09/2019 10:29

So woman should never be jailed Carol, because men also commit crimes that you don't think they get appropriate punishment for ? This isn't about Crimes that men commit,committing a crime being found guilty and sentencing are all complex issues, just because some men don't either get found guilty or get a long enough sentence for their crime has no bearing on this case .

57Varieties · 19/09/2019 10:30

A jail term is not an appropriate punishment for this woman and what she did and nothing anyone says will make me think it is

She’ll be out in a few months. It’s hardly like the child will remember where it was born. The shit parenting it’s likely to receive off its deadbeat parents is bound to have a bigger impact on its life than where it was born.

You’re entitled to your opinion but thankfully it has no relevance and she’s in prison where she rightfully belongs.

57Varieties · 19/09/2019 10:34

Probably only got pregnant to try and avoid the jail in the first place.

Tilltheendoftheline · 19/09/2019 10:36

She committed a crime. Thats why a child wi be born in prison. Because the mother cared more about fucking her ex over than about the child she falsely registered.

And you are working on the assumption that this is her offence. It might not be.

The comparison to other crimes or moral and financial failings makes no sense. Do we only jail people for the worst crimes? Cause you know, lots of people are in prison ans their crimes werenr as bad as someone elses?

Swipe left for the next trending thread