GOP Renews Push for Fetal Homicide Law

[Nambe]

Associated Press

Pointing to the deaths of Laci Peterson and her unborn son, Republicans on Tuesday renewed a push for a federal homicide law that would allow attackers to be punished for harming both a pregnant woman and her fetus.

"Under this law, an unborn child is recognized as a legal crime victim, just like any other member of the human race," said Tracy Marciniak of Mosinee, Wis., whose husband attacked her and killed her fetus five days before the delivery date in 1992.

"Please don't tell me that my son was not a real victim of a real crime," said Marciniak, who was attacked before Wisconsin enacted its fetal homicide law. "We were both victims, but only I survived."

But Democrats on a House Judiciary subcommittee and their supporters called the legislation a backdoor attack on abortion rights, despite written assurances inside the legislation saying that it can't be used that way. The bill says it would not permit prosecution for any abortion to which a woman consented, or for any act by an expectant mother -- even an illegal act such as drug abuse -- that harmed her fetus. ---

Privatize bush It’s a Good Thing

[prolesunited]

1. And what will be the difference between fetal homicide and abortion

Oh, there won't be one. But then again, that's the whole point, isn't it?

[Hobarticus]

3. Backlash?

Do you think that at some point, the people will say, "enough's enough, we know what you're up to"?

[slackmaster]

6. It can be done without affecting legal abortions - See CA law

Look at California's statute, Penal Code Section 174 for an example of how unlawful killing of a fetus can be written into a statute:

187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.
(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law.

I think the nation could live with a federal version as long as it clearly distinguishes between criminal acts and lawful elective medical abortions.

[Hobarticus]

7. I agree

That's pretty clear-cut.

[soupkitchen]

11. Actually, I think its more complicated than that.

The questions are whether a fetus is going to be given the rights of any other citizen and at what stage of development are those rights going to be bestowed. If the Federal Courts, or Congress, give an embryo the full rights of citizenship, which seems to be the long term political strategy here, an exception cannot be made for abortions, at least not one that would be found Constitutional. Embroys would then be entitled to Equal Protection under the law, a right that cannot be legislated away.

[slackmaster]

22. Again, look at the way California did it

My state's law allows someone who kills a fetus unlawfully to be charged with murder, yet it doesn't even elevate a fetus to the status of "human being". You have to be a human being to be a citizen.

You may be right about the long-term political strategy of the religious right, but don't you agree that when someone kills a pregnant woman and the fetus dies, the assailant should be charged with two murders rather than one? I do.

:hippie:

[soupkitchen]

2. Wouldn't miscarriages have to be investigated as potential homicides

It seems to me that if that if an unborn child is recognized a legal crime victim that every miscarriage would have to be investigated as a potential homicide, or an instance of involuntary manslaughter
At least, the law would be compelled to interview the mother and the doctors to make sure the miscarriage was natural and not the result of foolish or callous behavior by the mother.
So instead of being comforted by their families at a moment of great grief, they would be viewed as potential criminals.
I'm not taking any side here. I'm just wondering about the legal ramifications of the Republicans push to give fetuses "rights" Like most things Republicans do it sounds as if it hasn't really been thought through.

[Hobarticus]

4. Exactly

Sounds like small government to me!

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[goobergunch]

24. I love deleted messages in DU2 (n/t)

[sweetladybug]

9. "brwnthndr" Well I believe in the the RIGHT TO CHOOSE

You have a right to your opinion and I have a right to mine. This probably would be a good law if I trusted Republicans but I don't it wil be a cold day in hell when someone else decides what I can do with my body. I have never had an abortion, but if I was raped NO ONE will tell me that I have to carry a child if I became pregnant from this rape. If I became pregnant and I already had several children and I could hardly feed, afford clothes and a home for them and financially could not afford another child, NO ONE is going to tell me I have to carry that child, that should be MY CHOICE. If I became pregnant right now and the Dr told me that this could kill me if I carried the child, NO ONE is going to tell me I have to carry this child. That should be my choice, it's my body and I can make my own decisions. Perhaps if I were put in one of the above situations I might choose to carry the child, but NO ONE is going to tell me that I can't make my own decisions. What might be right for one person may not be right for another. I don't try and forcing my beliefs on others and I don't want others forcing their beliefs on me.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[enkidu2]

13. wow

brwnie, do not forget how brutual and life-negating a crime rape is: it is no small thing to be pregnant for 9mths due to a vicious assault, some people never recover emotionally from rape, and enforcing the continued pregnancy is GRAVE insult to injury. But more subtly, unwanted children suffer their whole lives, and giving away a child for adoption is not an easy thing to do. As you sneer at people who get abortions for "lifestyle" reasons (a bugaboo i suspect to be as epidemiologically valid as bush srs willy horton and b movie rons (black) welfare queen) i would ask you will this child enjoy their "precious lifestyle" parenting (assuming they continue to follow their lifestyle)? or perhaps we ought to force these precious lifestyle parents to give up their children for adoption?

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sweetladybug]

14. There you go again brwnthndr trying to force your beliefs on

others. You still don't get it. The decision that you choose might not be the decision that someone else chooses. That is why a women should have the right to choose and make her own decision. Are you and most all Repubicans going to support and take care of all of the unwanted children, even if they aren't white or are handicap. Hell no, you all would be condemning the mother becasue had sex and had these children. I would love to take care of all of the unwanted children in the world but I know I can't, so I'm being realistic and think the mother should have the right to make her own decision. As far as a mother giving her child up for adaption, well that again should be the mother's choice. The mother has to live with herself and the decisions she makes, but others should not take choices away from her and make decision for her because they don't agree with the options that the mother has to choose from. I personally think women should have more access to birth control in order to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, this would help stop the need for some abortions.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rocketdem]

19. why is this a federal issue?

This should be a state issue. Homocide is a matter of statutory law that's traditionally left to the states to determine.

I do believe that there's a way to right this into law without affecting legal abortions, but I just cannot comprehend why this is a matter before the U.S. Congress.

Unless, of course, it's just a matter of grandstanding.

I do believe that the GOP spends a good 90% of its time grandstanding rather than actually working. But then what should we expect from a bunch of trust fund dorks who never worked a hard day in their lives?

[loyalsister]

21. For a very "logical" reason

in the minds of those chipping away at the right to choose. If this one is federally imposed, states can be sneaky and point to this to make moves to manuveur around the constraints that protect abortion rights.
This is one very LARGE step for women out of their shoes and back into the kitchen. I picture a pregnant woman being led away in handcuffs on charges of child abuse after getting caught with a glass of wine or a cigarette in her hand. As deplorable as either may be, it's certainly not worthy of that kind of absurdity.
And as mentioned, there is no doubt that a woman may very well be "culpable" in any instance of a miscarriage. Surely those with morally superior sensibilities can take the bull by the horns and ensure that all possibilities are explored each time there is a miscarriage.
The result. Women die not only from illegal abortions, but also from complications arising from unreported miscarriages.

[scipan]

23. It defines a fetus as a human being

`(d) As used in this section, the term `unborn child' means a child in utero, and the term `child in utero' or `child, who is in utero' means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.'.

[goobergunch]

25. yep...

and they call it :puke: "Laci and Conner's Law". I call it H.R. 1997.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_bills&docid=f:h1997ih.txt.pdf