Aa
Aa
A
A
A
Close
Avatar universal

New Indiana law

On the local news last night there was a woman that was pregnant and was in an accident caused by a drunk driver and her baby was killed. This guy got off on a technicality and was not charged with more than going left of center and causing an accident. Personally I think the guy should be put under the jail, but that is not the point of this Thread, here is the point.

Indiana is now working on a law that if you cause the death of a fetus you can be charged with felony murder. While I believe that life is sacred and there are only a very few justifiable reasons that a pregnancy could be terminated, this law makes me wonder if it is opening a can of worms with the courts.

Here is a scenario that can see happening. A woman is pregnant and has decided to have her baby sucked into a sink because she doesn’t want it. She is on the way to the abortion clinic when the driver in another car goes left of center because he is talking on his cell phone and not paying attention to his driving. They collide and she wakes up in the hospital and her baby was killed because of the accident. She now has regret that she even had thoughts of killing her baby and testifies at the trail about what a loss the life of her child was, the man goes to prison for life.

If a fetus is not a baby for the sake of sucking it down a sink because the woman doesn’t want it, is it a baby if its death is caused by someone else as in this case?
12 Responses
Sort by: Helpful Oldest Newest
599170 tn?1300973893
swampy said it the woman has the legal and moral right to decide what to do with her pregnancy the drunk driver does not,,,,,,also agree with Jolly in the end we wil all answer to a higher power.
Helpful - 0
585414 tn?1288941302
I've helped people with public benefits, where eligible, but also helped people with disabilities return to work. Myself aside, it does apply because if someone is "pro-life" what happens to the fetus after they are born should be equally important even if the mother was irresponsible. Its the same life you are saving after all. As for how to prevent it to begin with I do support the use of contraception and promoting it. However, I believe people should be monogamous. But that's another issue. I think what people are interesting in is valuing the life of an unborn child and protecting their legal rights. I agree. But why should that stop when they are born? Shouldn't that same concern carry over? The parents could be wildly irresponsible people and you might not care about them but if you suggested to them not to have an abortion you have to value the life you saved once that becomes a new born baby. Certainly promoting adoption is a good idea and pre-natal care is a right of all babies. The parents themselves are another issue.
Helpful - 0
495284 tn?1333894042
Good points you made.........Seems the norm around here is have more babies and we will give you more assistance.......Doesnt anyone know about BIRTH CONTROL???  I will be more than happy to teach classes!!!!!  We hand out public assistance right and left but never deal with the root of the problem and the rest of us are responsible for it.  Something is very wrong with this picture!!!

Sorry Vicuser.......I got off the subject!!!!  Im going to look at Snoopy now!!!!!!!!!!!!
Helpful - 0
649848 tn?1534633700
I'm sure it's a complicated subject, but I'm NOT a complicated person.  I've never taken a stance on abortion because I, personally, could not do that and I'm beyond those days.  Aside from that, I think there are circumstances in which abortion is appropriate/justified and it's a very personal decision.  

I don't know exactly what you do for a living, but judging from previous posts, I gather that you help people obtain public assistance of various types.  

All that said, I don't understand why a decrease in abortion should automatically require a need for more "supportive services" (am I to translate that into additional public assistance?).  Whatever happened to plain old self restraint (translated into "keep your pants on") and taking responsibility for your own actions (oops, you didn't listen, so you didn't keep your pants on)??  As a tax paying citizen, I don't see why I should have to pay more because some irresponsible people couldn't/wouldn't keep their pants on!!  

I also believe that if someone goes out and drives drunk, they need to pay the consequences of anything that happens while they are under the influence.  Additionally, if someone gets pregnant when they don't want to - shame on them - and they likewise need to accept the consequences - abortion is NOT a form of birth control, but how many people are really going to admit that they were on the way to the abortion clinic??  I don't think there will be too may takers for that one.  
Helpful - 0
611067 tn?1458591483
Good point Vic!  I'm a pro-life person and so for me I'm thankful that the courts are charging offenders with murder of the unborn infant.  Utah has had that law for a long time and has used it a couple times already.  

But, I agree that why is it okay to have the abortion and that's not considered murder, but if someone murders the mother and the baby dies it is?  It's hyprocritical if you ask me.  

Our laws are so strange sometimes because their counter each other out.

Hugs,
Janet
Helpful - 0
389974 tn?1331015242
A comment on this specific type of law, a comment on felony murder, and a comment on fetal rights.

Comment on this law:

The reasoning behind this law is that the pregnant woman has the right to an abortion, but the drunk driver does not. At the time of the accident, you must assume that the woman wanted the child and to her, it was a baby.

Okay, but there are some subtleties. What if the pregnant woman has the accident while she is driving to the clinic to have an abortion? What if she is 3 weeks pregnant and hasn't been tested, doesn't know? What if the woman herself, 3 weeks pregnant, thus not knowing it, gets drunk, wraps her car around a tree and causes the death of her own child?

Comment on felony murder.

The US is one of the very few nations where this is a crime. A few years ago, this was tested when someone set a fire in a building (arson), then fled to Brazil. He was returned to the US by extradition treaty, however, the US authorities wanted to try him for murder because several fireman died fighting the blaze. They were not permitted to because when you are returned from a country to face charges in the US you can only be charged with something that is a crime in both countries, and Brazil does not have felony murder.

Swampy's POV is that the crime under discussion more qualifies as a vehicular homicide or voluntary manslaughter charge, not felony murder. However, Indiana law may set the precedent for this.

Comment on fetal rights.

A few years ago, there was a case in Illinois where a pregnant woman was put in jail for shoplifting. At the time Illinois had a legal doctrine that said life began at conception, so the lawyer went to court representing the unborn baby. He filed a writ of habeus corpus, saying that the baby had committed no crime and demanding immediate release for jail. The case was dismissed prior to the argument being litigated but it raised legal eyebrows.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
I am not sure it is a complex issue. If it is a baby and it is murder in one case how can it not be in the other?
Helpful - 0
585414 tn?1288941302
Look its a complex issue. I support a woman's right to have an abortion but I don't encourage it. I have never taken a public stance on the issue but I have helped women who were pregnant obtain WIC and other benefits for their children who may have otherwise thought of an abortion. I do think that along with any laws that decrease abortions there should in an increase in supportive services for pre-natal care and adoption. One goes along with the other. As for this law, it depends on the motive of the law. If its to discourage abortion and find technicalities that were than apply to planned abortions best to come right out and say so. On that other hand this is an eggregious crime and I do think the law should apply in this regard so I would say I support it.
Helpful - 0
518031 tn?1295575374
well one way or the other we all have to answere the the Lord...
Helpful - 0
203342 tn?1328737207
It just shows you how messed up our justice system is. They talk out of both sides of their mouths. In one instance it's not a baby and it's ok to abort, but yet if the pregnant mother is attacked and the baby dies then they can be charged with murder. I do like that law because I'm pro-life but they need to make up their minds what they believe. Either they believe it's a baby or not. Why would it be a baby sometimes but not sometimes? That's just crazy.
Helpful - 0
495284 tn?1333894042
Oh Vicuser.......you did open up a can of worms!!!!  This law is being passed all over.  I know in Minnesota if you murder someone and the girl is pg you will be charged for a double murder.  Dont know if the woman has to be so many months along or what.  sara
Helpful - 0
637356 tn?1301924822
Wow, what an excellent point you made. I hope they do pass this law so that maybe they will pass another one to stop abortions.

My brother-in-laws new gf aborted her baby because it belonged to her ex and she didn't want another baby by him. I think that is sad and wrong. She should have thought about that. I have never respected her since. My sister had a baby born from marital rape and carried that baby to term and adopted it out. Why can't more women do that. Ok sorry I went of subject.

I do see where the courts have not thought this one completely through yet. You will see it won't happen.
Helpful - 0

You are reading content posted in the MedHelp Social Community

Popular Resources
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.