woman sentenced to 8 years for 38-week home abortion

[WokingOnSunshine]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-19621675
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2204471/Mother-Sarah-Catt-terminated-baby-week-date-using-medication.html

i'm guessing that baby was born alive too.
and thats why she dosen't want anyone to find the babies body as they [police etc] will know he/she was born alive.

but i can't help but wonder, maybe she didn't even bury the baby, maybe she did something else with the body.

this is quite a harrowing case really.
i think i might have to step away from this thread

i just really hope she gave the bay away or even sold him or her, but i guess there would be google searches if she did that, unless she have him/her to someone she knows

As much as it would be nicer to think the baby is living happily in a loving home I really doubt it, I think she gave birth to a live baby after inducing labour with the drug she bought off the internet. What happened next, who knows, not even the Police.....it would be straightforward I assume for it to be established how the baby died, through natural causes or not, therefore she would face a more serious charge if it was shown to be not natural causes.

Paranoid about what?

I don't agree that some people are just bad - everyone is a product of their circumstances. That in no way means that people are not responsible for their actions. But to assume that people are evil in some biblical sense is a rather over simplified way of thinking which doesn't help anyone in the context of society generally and how we are to deal with various crimes now and in the future.

I think people struggle particularly with the concept that any woman could harm their own child in such a way and so it's just easier to assume they're evil and totally removed from anyone else.

Yes Frances but her actions caused death to another person. You can't use the 'it's her own body' line!

im very very prochoice and would seriously defend anybodys ability to have a legal termination. i also compleatly agree with very late legal terminations in cases where it will save a baby from actual pain/harm as a result of being born where it would be cruel to do so,and if continueing risks the mothers life due to a medical not social issue.

but i do think she should be in prison and for a decent ammount of time but im now extreamly pissed off about the ammount of violent abusers who beat/stab or what ever there dw/dp ex's who are pregnant with the sole intention of killing the baby who tend to get much lower sentances.

for the poster earlyer who asked when infanticide wasnt murder, in about 1922 infanticide kinda became simmerler to manslaughter i.e slightly less of a punishment than murder, in later years it has been very rare for a infanticide case to result in actual inprisonment on conviction and recently is only done where the case has been perticularly nasty.

perception we will just have to agree to disagree, as I do believe some people are just bad, I am not saying circumstances dont play a part in some people but to say that people are mentally ill instead of just bad is a cop out for me and a diservice to the mentally ill.

You say I think people struggle particularly with the concept that any woman could harm their own child in such a way and so it's just easier to assume they're evil and totally removed from anyone else and I said something very similar further up the thread - because people do struggle with how a Mother could harm her child but where I differ from you is I see mental illness being used as an explanation instead of just accpeting that some people are just rotten and would do anythign to satisy their own needs. I dont think its easier to assume people are "evil" at all, far from it - which is why so many people come out with "oh she must be mentally ill" line in cases where a woman has harmed her child, yes she may well be - but not necessarliy so - and if she isnt mentally unwell then she is responsible for her actions, no matter how incomprehensible they sem to others. This woman is not mentally ill and therefore has did this crime of sound mind and is in prison where she belongs.

shesariver very well worded post there. I think you are right as I when I cannot fathom why someone would do such awful things I look for reasons, such as me task health. But I agree sometimes the person a person who deliberately hurts others. Mental illness usually would mean something that could be treated and helped, I think it is unfair on the millions who struggle with mental health issues to automatically band criminals with them.

I wouldn't say she was mentally ill - I just don't know, none of us do. This was my point - that none of us know all of the circumstances and so it's certainly wrong to make a judgement that she's 'just bad'.

She had a psychiatric assesment, and she was found to be of sane mind. She is NOT mentally ill, which is why she is in prison rather that a psychiatric hospital.

I'm right behind shesariver. The mad/bad debate still is large out there. I'm with your logic. Not all patients coming through the doors are genuinely classed as 'mad'...

You do just get 'bad' people, I'm afraid. There is not always a rhyme or reason to why they do bad things. They just do. No point over analysing it.

I'm not entirely sure of my views on this, and I'll admit I've only read about half of the thread so far, but...

1. Someone suggested the baby could be mixed race and that was why it would obviously not be her husbands. If a disabled baby can be aborted to term, why not a mixed race baby? To use the often used comparison of race and disability (please dont see this as me suggesting mixed race babies should be murdered!!) she may think it would affect her babies quality of life, just as a disability might? Hopefully someone a bit more eloquent than me will understand my point here!!
2. If she had overdosed, survived and killed her baby, would she still be prosecuted? Jumped down the stairs? Got very very drunk? What is the difference...?

And joona (sorry it's just too early to be on the vino!)

beyond

Your mixed race/disability comparibility doesnt even deserve to be answered. I really dont see how a mixed race child can be compared wiith a child who is severely disabled. And to even suggest this is completely ridiculas.

The difference is, this baby was more than likley born alive. And she killed it. She made an active choice to end the life of a new born baby. Which is murder.

buntcadger I do agree with you that its only human nature to search for a "reason", an explanation to help us understand why someone would do something so abhorrent because its outwith the realms of our own personal understanding isnt it. Sometimes there isnt one.

It's murder isn't it?

No solid proof you are right hope.. but it seems pretty obvious to me.

She is being perceived as a child killing monster by many, yet she could quite easily turn the situation around and gain sympathy & compassion, if she were to reveal where the baby is buried & that it was stillborn as she claimed.

But she refuses to do that, why? .. because an autopsy will reveal that the baby was born alive, in which case she will then face a murder charge & a much longer sentence.

joona I agree

Sorry joona, should have made it clearer with the race comment that i was talking about late abortions actually available for disability! (mentioned waaay upthread) And the fact that posters above have said that this is possibly lessening a life if it is that of a disabled person. A lot of people are against late abortions for any reason, but they can still legally be carried out for disability.

I'm just comparing her possible speculating widely thoughts if the mixed race scenario does even apply to her with those that are legal.

Most late abortions may be for conditions incompatable with life, (I have no idea of the stats) but this is not the law.
It is up to the mother whether they think they can cope with a disability and they can abort to term for it.
I hope you can see what I mean now, and as I said earlier, hopefully someone who does might explain it better

Btw if someone had an affair and was pregnant, do they not consider the "quality of life" of that baby if they choose an abortion. I know that for a lot of people I know who have had abortions, the babys quality of life has always been why they say they did it.

As I said though, this is all based on some rather wide speculation!!

I am a mother myself, and a human being. Obviously I think that inducing yourself with the aim of killing the baby at term is wrong. But when does it become about the baby rather than about her?

If she'd done it at 35 weeks, would it be as bad? 30? 25? Before the legal, "abortion for any reason" 24 weeks?

And again, obviously, if she has given birth to a live baby and then killed it, that is murder.

I'm still not explaining it very well...

Try again, in one sentence...

If a baby is disabled they can be aborted to term, based on their perceived lack of quality of life, so if the baby were mixed race and obviously from an affair, she may percieve that they would have diminished quality of life (breakdown of marriage, adopted) and are better off not being born.