TV? In pregnancy? Image: Daniel Lobo The question of who we prioritise, mother or foetus, is a sensitive and enduring one. Those who are anti-choice say they are saving lives. Those who are pro-choice...say they are saving lives. If you want to read about pro-choice arguments then Bustle has a list of them here. The habits and life choices of a pregnant woman are examined and criticised in huge detail, whether or not she intends to keep the foetus and have a child. It is acceptable to tut at a woman with a swollen belly should she take a drag on a cigarette or sip a glass of wine, or eat a piece of cheese, or lick a shellfish, diet, not diet, go swimming, or fail to exercise, or say she hasn't got any ideas for a name. This is because we are showing our concern for the baby she will (if she wants to) have. It is natural to want to give a child every opportunity to succeed in life. It's why we still have private schools and why our MPs send their kids to them rather than just making all schools good enough for their spawn. And because society loves the idea of a baby (though not the actual baby with the care taking and the crying in restaurants etc) it likes to have a nose at the vessel the baby develops in.
Of course you know where I am going with this. Last week a local authority in the north west of England claimed that severe damage inflicted on a foetus by her mother's heavy alcohol consumption during pregnancy was equivalent to manslaughter. The claim for compensation was opened on behalf of the child, now seven, by lawyers who argue that she is entitled to payments from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. The compensation would mean the council, who currently have the child in their care, would have a financial burden lifted.
John Foy QC, for the authority, told the court of appeal: "It's not disputed that the mother administered a noxious thing, it could be described as a destructive thing, to her daughter and it inflicted grievous bodily harm on her. The child was born with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder... We say it's on all fours with manslaughter."
This is not a question of whether or not the mother has harmed her child, she has - even if it was unintentional. But does this constitute a criminal act and can the child be counted a legal individual in the eyes of the law when the injury was sustained.
John Foy QC, for the authority, told the court of appeal: "It's not disputed that the mother administered a noxious thing, it could be described as a destructive thing, to her daughter and it inflicted grievous bodily harm on her. The child was born with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder... We say it's on all fours with manslaughter."
This is not a question of whether or not the mother has harmed her child, she has - even if it was unintentional. But does this constitute a criminal act and can the child be counted a legal individual in the eyes of the law when the injury was sustained.
| In this particular case it is vital to take into account that by the time the mother in this case became pregnant she was addicted to alcohol. According to John Foy QC: "She explicitly discussed with her social worker on two occasions the dangers of drinking excessively." | Discussing your high alcohol intake with your social worker twice hardly constitutes undergoing a 12 step programme. |
Discussing your high alcohol intake with your social worker twice hardly constitutes undergoing a 12 step programme. It means that this woman had a social worker who was aware of her addiction. It is unsurprising that the woman continued to feed her addiction and it is curious that Foy QC does not question the seemingly limited guidance and support she received.
Neil Sugarman who represents the local council alarming said that the case is: "simply about proving that if there was recklessness and it has resulted in damage, the child is then entitled to an award which will improve their lives"
There is little mention of whether the mother received the care and support that might have enabled her to cope with her addiction. The case is not about why this woman was failed by the maternity system. Rather it is more in favour of framing her alcoholism as a malicious act.
As Beverly Turner wrote in the Telegraph: "The failure lies with an under-funded maternity system which offers patchy support for women. One-to-one midwifery is globally accepted as the best way to care for pregnant women but is almost non-existent on the NHS. If this woman had one dedicated midwife, she would at least have been somebody's responsibility...
I'm not absolving her of responsibilty. But we simply cannot leave women like this to struggle-on alone and then turn on them when the outcome becomes problematic."
We should be concentrating on how we support pregnant women, not criminalising them and hoping for a positive outcome.
Squeamish Kate
Neil Sugarman who represents the local council alarming said that the case is: "simply about proving that if there was recklessness and it has resulted in damage, the child is then entitled to an award which will improve their lives"
There is little mention of whether the mother received the care and support that might have enabled her to cope with her addiction. The case is not about why this woman was failed by the maternity system. Rather it is more in favour of framing her alcoholism as a malicious act.
As Beverly Turner wrote in the Telegraph: "The failure lies with an under-funded maternity system which offers patchy support for women. One-to-one midwifery is globally accepted as the best way to care for pregnant women but is almost non-existent on the NHS. If this woman had one dedicated midwife, she would at least have been somebody's responsibility...
I'm not absolving her of responsibilty. But we simply cannot leave women like this to struggle-on alone and then turn on them when the outcome becomes problematic."
We should be concentrating on how we support pregnant women, not criminalising them and hoping for a positive outcome.
Squeamish Kate
RSS Feed
