As for reasons to abort prior to birth, I'll defer to your medical judgment. I'm just flagging the fact that the reasonableness requirement would likely be hiked in those circumstances.
As I understand the criminal provisions of this legislation (I cheated on this bit and am relying heavily on the second amendment speech), the crime of child destruction is being removed. That law was directed to the beating up of pregnant women example.
To cover this gap this creates, they're adding a section to the causing serious injury offence so that it includes the destruction of the foetus of a pregnant woman outside abortions performed in compliance with the new law.
As I understand it, the practical effect is pretty minimal. The phrasing of the child destruction offence was somewhat vague and I'm not certain if it's been successfully prosecuted. At first glance the old law doesn't seem to cover unintentional child destruction, so an assault upon a pregnant woman without the intention to cause a miscarriage might not be covered.
The change ups the penalty in intentional cases from 15 years to 20 years, while unintentional offences of child-destruction/serious injury have a 15 year max penalty. The change does have the advantage of allowing the court to refer to pre-existing serious injury law, meaning that prosecutions are less likely to run into interpretative difficulties.
I'll do some more poking around and let you know what I turn up. Keep in mind that there are a half a dozen proposed amendments which might modify this law's application, as well as the Law Reform Commission Report that I really must get round to reading.
As I understand the criminal provisions of this legislation (I cheated on this bit and am relying heavily on the second amendment speech), the crime of child destruction is being removed. That law was directed to the beating up of pregnant women example.
To cover this gap this creates, they're adding a section to the causing serious injury offence so that it includes the destruction of the foetus of a pregnant woman outside abortions performed in compliance with the new law.
As I understand it, the practical effect is pretty minimal. The phrasing of the child destruction offence was somewhat vague and I'm not certain if it's been successfully prosecuted. At first glance the old law doesn't seem to cover unintentional child destruction, so an assault upon a pregnant woman without the intention to cause a miscarriage might not be covered.
The change ups the penalty in intentional cases from 15 years to 20 years, while unintentional offences of child-destruction/serious injury have a 15 year max penalty. The change does have the advantage of allowing the court to refer to pre-existing serious injury law, meaning that prosecutions are less likely to run into interpretative difficulties.
I'll do some more poking around and let you know what I turn up. Keep in mind that there are a half a dozen proposed amendments which might modify this law's application, as well as the Law Reform Commission Report that I really must get round to reading.
Previous Child Destruction Offence - http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/ca195882/s10.html
Reply
Leave a comment