|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 2:18 pm
Hello. I am new to this guild. I am in a debate with a friend over abortions. I got a quick question before I bring this fact up. Isn't it illegal if a women abuses the fetus, drinks excessive alcohol, does drugs, or anything of the sort to indanger the fetus?
Thanks biggrin
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:29 pm
It depends on the situation. It is strongly advised that women do not do those things, and if she does and a child is born with a problem, I think it might matter, but Toxic knows much more about law than I do. I do know that women have opted to abort before to hide the fact that they were doing drugs, but erm...hmm. I"ll go look more stuff up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 6:57 pm
lymelady It depends on the situation. It is strongly advised that women do not do those things, and if she does and a child is born with a problem, I think it might matter, but Toxic knows much more about law than I do. I do know that women have opted to abort before to hide the fact that they were doing drugs, but erm...hmm. I"ll go look more stuff up. Thanks biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:14 pm
Two cases in Canada over this sort of thing have been "Dobson (Litigation guardian of) v. Dobson." Or " Cynthia Dobson v. Ryan Leigh MacLean Dobson by his litigation guardian, Gerald M. Price."
Another case was "Winnipeg Child and Family Services (Northwest Area) v. D.F.G"
The second case was lost, stating that the unborn child had no legal rights. There was no right to sue, whether for injunction or damages, until the child was born alive.
However the first case that I stated the verdict was, and I quote;
"Declaration that the infant Respondant has the legal capacity to sue the Applicant in negligence."
So basically if the person is born messed up because of whatever the mother was doing, they can sue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:20 pm
There we go, I got to be lazy xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:25 pm
toxic_lollipop Two cases in Canada over this sort of thing have been "Dobson (Litigation guardian of) v. Dobson." Or " Cynthia Dobson v. Ryan Leigh MacLean Dobson by his litigation guardian, Gerald M. Price."
Another case was "Winnipeg Child and Family Services (Northwest Area) v. D.F.G"
The second case was lost, stating that the unborn child had no legal rights. There was no right to sue, whether for injunction or damages, until the child was born alive.
However the first case that I stated the verdict was, and I quote;
"Declaration that the infant Respondant has the legal capacity to sue the Applicant in negligence."
So basically if the person is born messed up because of whatever the mother was doing, they can sue. That sounds like a really touchy issue. Women could be persuaded to prevent the child from being born instead of allowing it to gain the right to sue them. That is, it could be argued that denying them the "right to be born" is better than granting them the right to sue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:25 am
Joy-ish That sounds like a really touchy issue. Women could be persuaded to prevent the child from being born instead of allowing it to gain the right to sue them. That is, it could be argued that denying them the "right to be born" is better than granting them the right to sue.
Anyway, this doesn't mean the child could win, I've never heard of a court case where a child has sued at all, let alone sued and won. The father just basically took the mother to court to see if the child could sue.
And that case the mother caused injuries through negligence in a motor vehicle. So it's not limited to drugs either.
If you want anymore information than that, like why the judge reached that verdict, just let me know and I'll get ahold of the case transcript.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 9:31 am
toxic_lollipop Two cases in Canada over this sort of thing have been "Dobson (Litigation guardian of) v. Dobson." Or " Cynthia Dobson v. Ryan Leigh MacLean Dobson by his litigation guardian, Gerald M. Price."
Another case was "Winnipeg Child and Family Services (Northwest Area) v. D.F.G"
The second case was lost, stating that the unborn child had no legal rights. There was no right to sue, whether for injunction or damages, until the child was born alive.
However the first case that I stated the verdict was, and I quote;
"Declaration that the infant Respondant has the legal capacity to sue the Applicant in negligence."
So basically if the person is born messed up because of whatever the mother was doing, they can sue. OOooo, thanks. If the mother is caught doing heroin or weed, couldn't she be charged for indangering the fetuses life? biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
