Baseball Bat Abortion

A 16 year-old boy repeatedly took a baseball bat to his 16 year-old girlfriend's abdomen, with her consent, in order to force a miscarriage. They did not want obtain a parent's or judge's permission for a legal abortion. He is being charged with the felony crime of "intentional conduct against a pregnant individual resulting in miscarriage or still birth" and could face 15 years in jail. The girl will not be charged. Neither would a doctor who hypothetically performed an abortion via "traditional" methods.

This case brings up many ethical questions -

Why does the prosecution not recognize a pregnant woman's ability to consent to an assault?
Why can a woman terminate her fetus but a man cannot even with her permission?
Why can a doctor terminate a fetus with her permission? (Sure his methods are safer, but the charge is not safety/licensing related.)

Share this

Um, because the purpose of

Um, because the purpose of all medical regs is to enforce a professional monopoly for doctors. Perfectly ordinarly industrial-policy socialism. The issue isn't even remotely to do with abortion, it's just job protectionism with an abortion headline.

Souvenier minibat, if i

Souvenier minibat, if i understood the facts. Still unpleasant.
Who is the crime against? Her parents apparently. Not against the dead kid; he can be killed legally. I'm unclear on how far along the pregnancy was. Not against the mother, she was a willing participant.
So maybe it's her parents, who as her guardians have a right to be consulted.
He can raise a defense that the statute is unconstitutional either pure or as applied to him, although it's a flip of the coin to see how that will come out, and that's only if he can afford a lawyer.
Bad statute, bad prosecutor. Happens every day. Just gruesome enough facts to make the paper. He can hold out for a jury trial, but 9 times out of 10 will be offered and will take a plea. Juvenile, first offense, mitigating circumstances, should be able to cut a deal. The deal he gets will be different based on whether he has a public defender, private counsel, or, unlikely, some abortion-rights group makes it clear they will fund appeals. He might be able to find pro bono counsel based on the notoriety of the case.

(The child was at 6 months.

(The child was at 6 months. The father faces a max of 5 years, perhaps less if appeals drag on a few years.)

"Why does the prosecution

"Why does the prosecution not recognize a pregnant woman’s ability to consent to an assault?"

For pretty much the same reason that the prosecution wouldn't recognize your right to fire up a joint on your front lawn.

The answer to all of this is

The answer to all of this is that this was an abortion but the powers that be don't want it treated like other abortions because it so clearly demonstrates the nature of the act.

well abortion is pretty

well abortion is pretty disgusting by nature but so is heart surgery. so i'm not sure what your point is.

What's disgusting about

What's disgusting about heart surgery?

Um, because the purpose of

Um, because the purpose of all medical regs is to enforce a professional monopoly for doctors. Perfectly ordinarly industrial-policy socialism. The issue isn’t even remotely to do with abortion, it’s just job protectionism with an abortion headline.

I would be the first to point to special interests in such a case, but there are no doctors involved here. The better explanation is what JTK says - nobody wants to admit what this actually was. Another explanation is that what took place was so disturbing, the prosecution believes something has to be done. From another article:

"This crime is shocking and reprehensible," Prosecutor Eric Smith said in a news release. "I will not entertain any plea bargaining on it."

Reminds me of the consensual

Reminds me of the consensual cannibalism case a while back. This case violates the strong taboo against deliberately harming a pregnant woman.

Have feminists stood up for

Have feminists stood up for this woman's right to her own body?

Have feminists stood up for

Have feminists stood up for this woman’s right to her own body?

The result of feminists' work over the years has absolved her of any responsibility in the case; she won't be charged. It's the dude who might be going to jail. I don't expect any feminists to come to his defense.

--What’s disgusting about

--What’s disgusting about heart surgery?--

i don't know about you, but i don't find the inside of the human body very appealing to look at.

Where are the the

Where are the the abortionists on this? Why are they not defending the 16-year-old boy, claiming that he was merely "practicing medicine without a license?"

:no:If a woman does drugs

:no:If a woman does drugs while pregnant, she is charged with child endangerment, because the child may be born sick, or may be born alive and then die. This child may have been born badly injured, or may have been born dying. Both parents can be charged under our current laws.:idea:

:juggle:Also, six-monthers can make it with the propper medical care. My thirty-two year old sister did! (Yes, her, not her baby.) Can an autopsy show weather the baby was born alive?

That must be a hard way to die. You can already hear your mother's voice...:cry2: