Previous  1  2  3  Next

Sorry, absolutely wrong. THis law only applies to women. Men are deemed murderers.

   

"Infanticide" should be repealed from the Criminal Code.

The lives of children are not of any less worth than those of adults.

   

Nonsense. Infanticide is the homicide of an infant. Regardless of the murderer. Isn't even necessary to be related to the infant.

   

From the Criminal Code of Canada:

"A female person commits infanticide when, by a willful act or omission she causes the death of her newly born child, if at the time of the act or omission she is not fully recovered from the effects of giving birth to the chil and by reason thereof or of the effect of lactation consequent on the birth of the child her mind is then disturbed".

Infanticide applies to mothers only. It must be your child and there is no defined "cut-off" age (ie, 1 year of age). If the kid is still on the tit at age 5, an infanticide charge is possible.

   

That "only in Canada" then. Change it.

   

Being able to use 'hormones' as an excuse is out and out lame.

   

This is a tricky one. Personally I think they should be charged with murder and then go for a court ordered psychiatric assessment on whether that should be dropped to manslaughter or murder 2.

If men can bring forward defences that relate to their state of mind at the time of the offence, then so should women.

Only women can give birth and suffer post-natal depression.

As far as I’m concerned the mens rea of the offence should be scrutinised by expert witnesses, i.e. doctors not judges or a jury.

If there is a doubt that mens rea has been impacted on by mental illness, then the courts should convict the accused of manslaughter.

I’m not a fan of ‘infanticide’ as it sends a wrong message. I also think that the ‘ a child under one year of age’ is rather arbitrary. Plenty of women go through serious psychiatric issues past 12 months of giving birth.

   

Thank you EB. I totally agree with you.

   

Do you have a link to this quote? Including typo?

   

You kinda read that a bit wrong Lemmy. Case law expands on the various definitions and points to prove.

The lactation part comes in as a defence within the CC section. The definition of a new-born child remains the same (12 months). After 12 months and a day the offender will be charged with either murder or manslaughter, milk or no milk.

The real points to prove are;

The victim is a 'newly born child'

And the offender is 'not fully recovered from the effects of giving birth, and as a result of either those effects or lactation following the birth, her mind is disturbed.'

It's famous case law ( Regina Vs Smith 1976, CCC, Nfld Dist).

   

I believe in equal application of the law Brenda.

   

So do I.

   

Brenda , have you watched Mad Men? It amazes me that women were ever treated that bad.

   

Nope. Is it worth watching?

   

I copied it from my hard copy of the Criminal Code of Canada. But it's available online at: http://www.efc.ca/pages/law/cc/cc.html



Thanks for the clarification and reference. I read this morning that there have been 86 women in Canada charged with Infanticide since 1977. That's about 3 cases per year. I was very surprised to learn that infanticide charges were laid that frequently.

   

Previous  1  2  3  Next