# Fetal Murder Charges **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 21, 2003, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965 "2003-04-21T03:34:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![RexDart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b77776/32.png) [@RexDart](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RexDart)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/21 "2003-04-22T02:01:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Evil Captor \* > \*\*Oh, lets’ get down to brass tacks. If fetal murder is a crime for someone other than the mother, how is it not a crime in the case of the mother who undergoes an abortion? > > I think this is just another ploy by the anti-abortion crew to get at a woman’s right to control her own body. \*\* Hey, it wasn’t our side that made this an issue wrt Laci Peterson, AKAIK. It was the abortionists who made an issue over it, per the remarks from NOW this morning. Of course, I understand your concern. If I advocated a position so morally unjustifiable as late-term abortions, I wouldn’t want a national discussion on it either. And I certainly wouldn’t want one that actually focused on the issue of whether a fetus was a life. Yes, if I were an abortionist I’d much rather ignore that issue entirely, invent a federal “right” _ex nihilo_, and then concoct a rhetoric in defense of that invented right that casts my position as a defense of liberty. Boy oh boy, this sure could blow up in the abortionists’ faces. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/22 "2003-04-22T02:06:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RexDart \* > \*\*Of course, I understand your concern. If I advocated a position so morally unjustifiable as late-term abortions, I wouldn’t want a national discussion on it either. \*\* As inflammatory as this post strikes me, it brings a question to mind (apologies for the slight veering off main topic here): do anti-abortion advocates mainly want to delegitimize _late-term_ abortions, as **RexDart** puts it, or all abortions? Put the question in reverse for the pro-choice side. My assumption has always been that each side sticks to the all-or-nothing side of their viewpoint, for fear of the slippery slope. But I’d like to know how fair it really is to say that pro-choice advocates “advocate late-term abortions” (in the sense of keeping it legal, NOT advocating it as in encouraging it, of course)… ---
**Author:** ![Mandelstam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Mandelstam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mandelstam)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/23 "2003-04-22T02:13:08Z")
I haven’t been following this case or, for that matter, closely following this issue, so please update me. Isn’t the limit on late-term abortions something like 25 weeks–i.e. a 23 week old fetus? (If there are any exceptions to that aren’t they only where it will save the life of the mother?) And wasn’t Peterson 8 months’ pregnant-- i.e., 34 weeks? If my facts are correct, aren’t these issues quite distinct? ---
**Author:** ![Yeticus\_Rex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/a698b9/32.png) [@Yeticus\_Rex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yeticus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/24 "2003-04-22T02:13:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zenster \* > \*\*Thudlow Boink, thank you for bringing up this salient and essential point. This is what I am trying to address here. Is there some way to legally deter and punish the assault or killing of a fetus without according that same fetus any legal rights? It is why I mention callous disregard for human life. Unpermitted termination of a woman’s obvious (or known) pregnancy certainly represents such callous disregard for the quality of _her_ life. I find this to be a worthwhile starting point. \*\* As much as you are dancing around the notion that a fetus **is** life, and “killing a fetus” is just that, you might as well acknowledge that it is murder inutero. To somehow not give the fetus rights (to live) and yet call the “termination of the pregnancy” a callous disregard for the quality of _her_ life, but not to the obvious detriment to the baby, seems highly conflictual at best. A house of cards it is… > [@](#): > > ## **Robb** , from another thread: I think that this is the law that Peterson is charged with offending: quote: > > ## [187](http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199) . (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or **a fetus** , with malice aforethought. (b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply: (1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2 (commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 106 of the Health and Safety Code. (2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician’s and surgeon’s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth, although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or more likely than not. (3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the mother of the fetus. © Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the prosecution of any person under any other provision of law. > > Other states have laws similar to this, but I don’t know if anyone has ever been prosecuted under them. Does that help either side at all? ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/25 "2003-04-22T03:17:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zenster \* > **Is there some way to legally deter and punish the assault or killing of a fetus without according that same fetus any legal rights?** Sure - the fetus is part of the mother’s body, so treat it like any other assault. Killing the fetus is equivalent to removing the mother’s hand or liver. I don’t think there’s a basis to punish the killer of a fetus _as a murderer_ without according the fetus legal rights, so I would question why the goal is to punish him as a murderer in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Zenster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/cdc98d/32.png) [@Zenster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zenster)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/26 "2003-04-22T03:54:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Evil Captor \* > … I think this is just another ploy by the anti-abortion crew to get at a woman’s right to control her own body. This is one of my most grave concerns. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Leaper \* > As inflammatory as this post strikes me, it brings a question to mind (apologies for the slight veering off main topic here): do anti-abortion advocates mainly want to delegitimize _late-term_ abortions, as **RexDart** puts it, or all abortions? Put the question in reverse for the pro-choice side. > > My assumption has always been that each side sticks to the all-or-nothing side of their viewpoint, for fear of the slippery slope. But I’d like to know how fair it really is to say that pro-choice advocates “advocate late-term abortions” (in the sense of keeping it legal, NOT advocating it as in encouraging it, of course)… Well put. I don’t think you could find even one woman whose preferred method of contraception is abortion. It is often a last resort and nearly as often a very difficult choice for any woman to make. Christianity has such a poor track record on their treatment of women (she’s a witch!), that it’s difficult to accept all their moralizing now. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Yeticus Rex \* > As much as you are dancing around the notion that a fetus **is** life, and “killing a fetus” is just that, you might as well acknowledge that it is murder inutero. To somehow not give the fetus rights (to live) and yet call the “termination of the pregnancy” a callous disregard for the quality of _her_ life, but not to the obvious detriment to the baby, seems highly conflictual at best. > > A house of cards it is… While the fetus is most _definitely_ a living organism, it is not in any way _sentient_ or _viable outside the womb_ for many weeks after conception. I think abortion is the _worst_ possible form of birth control short of forced sterilization. I also think that after millennia of repression women must have **absolute right over their bodies** for once in history. Until such a time where there is socioeconomic gender parity or the artificial womb is invented, women must retain that control over their body. Paternity rights will not be pertinent until these two other deficiencies are met first. I think late term abortion is hideous and in most cases totally avoidable. The suppression of sex education in public schools merely increases what I’m sure is one of the largest populations of those who use abortion (and late term abortion) services, namely teenagers. So please stop your sneering and resume participation in the debate at hand. Thank you for posting the California legal code pertaining to this. As you see, it gives the mother absolute control and legal indemnity in her choice. Outlawing partial birth abortions perfectly sets the stage for further erosion of when or even _if_ a pregnancy can or may be terminated. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr2001 \* > Sure - the fetus is part of the mother’s body, so treat it like any other assault. Killing the fetus is equivalent to removing the mother’s hand or liver. > > I don’t think there’s a basis to punish the killer of a fetus _as a murderer_ without according the fetus legal rights, so I would question why the goal is to punish him as a murderer in the first place. And this was the point that I was trying to make. The offense is a crime against the pregnant woman and no other person. I further maintain that voluntarily assaulting a visibly pregnant woman and causing her unpermitted miscarriage is sufficiently heinous to justify a felony conviction with substantial hard time in prison. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/27 "2003-04-22T04:04:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Evil Captor \* > \*\*Oh, lets’ get down to brass tacks. If fetal murder is a crime for someone other than the mother, how is it not a crime in the case of the mother who undergoes an abortion? > > I think this is just another ploy by the anti-abortion crew to get at a woman’s right to control her own body. \*\* It’s not fair to call it a “ploy,” as though all anti-abortionists were motivated solely by a desire to minimize women’s rights. If you think of the fetus as a baby, a person, it’s natural and consistent to consider killing the fetus murder and to think it should be a punishable crime no matter who does it. Personally, I believe that killing a baby after it’s born is wrong, it’s murder, and it should be punishable as such. But I don’t know where the wrongness kicks in: at birth? conception? somewhere in between? And I’m not sure how to decide it, legally or morally. RexDart’s suggestion [“at the earliest point in gestation at which the baby could reasonably live outside the womb with the aid of medical technolocy is where the line should be set”] has the advantage that whether the baby/fetus is considered a person or not is not solely determined by its physical location (ie. inside vs. outside its mother’s body). ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/28 "2003-04-22T04:40:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zenster \* > \*\*I further maintain that voluntarily assaulting a visibly pregnant woman and causing her unpermitted miscarriage is sufficiently heinous to justify a felony conviction with substantial hard time in prison. \*\* Heinous, yes, but so is cutting off someone’s hand. That might even be considered worse, because there’s no chance of growing another hand. ---
**Author:** ![Zenster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/cdc98d/32.png) [@Zenster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zenster)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/29 "2003-04-22T06:43:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr2001 \* > \*\*Heinous, yes, but so is cutting off someone’s hand. That might even be considered worse, because there’s no chance of growing another hand. \*\* Agreed, and that’s what a felony mayhem charge (as in Tyson lunching on Holyfield’s ear) is all about. Felony mayhem should be sufficient to drive a finding of special circumstances when a pregnant woman is killed. It might also be a suitable charge to bring whether the woman or only the unborn succumbed due to the assault. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/30 "2003-04-22T07:16:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mandelstam \* > \*\*I haven’t been following this case or, for that matter, closely following this issue, so please update me. Isn’t the limit on late-term abortions something like 25 weeks–i.e. a 23 week old fetus? \*\* No. Abortion is allowed up until the moment of birth – or even partial-birth. > [@](#): > > \*\* > (If there are any exceptions to that aren’t they only where it will save the life of the mother?) \*\* Again, no. [Doe v. Bolton](http://www.all.org/issues/ab10.htm) established that third-trimester abortions are allowed if a physician deems it beneficial to the mother’s health – where “health” is defined so broadly as to encompass even her emotional, psychological and familial(!) state. This definition was so ridiculously broad that [the Senate Judiciary Committee was forced to conclude](http://www.fortunecity.com/millenium/rollingacres/533/doeroe.html): > [@](#): > > “The Senate Judiciary Committee observes that no significant legal barrier of any kind whatsoever exists today in the United States for a woman to obtain an abortion during any stage of her pregnancy.” ---
**Author:** ![Yeticus\_Rex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/a698b9/32.png) [@Yeticus\_Rex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yeticus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 8:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/31 "2003-04-22T08:09:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zenster \* > \*\*Agreed, and that’s what a felony mayhem charge (as in Tyson lunching on Holyfield’s ear) is all about. > > Felony mayhem should be sufficient to drive a finding of special circumstances when a pregnant woman is killed. It might also be a suitable charge to bring whether the woman or only the unborn succumbed due to the assault. \*\* It might be sufficient, but that’s not California law. 187(a) states it quite clearly if there is no consent by the mother to kill the fetus, then it is murder, and 187(b) covers the proper medical doctors if she does consent to the death of a fetus through abortion (so Stark is freaking out over nothing and looks quite foolish in doing so). 187 does not mention the word ‘mayhem’ or ‘manslaughter’, just the crime of murder. Don’t expect the prosecutors to go after one murder charge and one ‘mayhem’ charge unless they want Laci’s family in an uproar. They’ll go for the double, since this case was quoted as “a slam dunk” by the prosecution (Locklyer). California can distinguish between a fetus, and a hand, liver or ear. So do most pregnant mothers. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 11:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/32 "2003-04-22T11:54:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RexDart \* > \*\*Hey, it wasn’t our side that made this an issue wrt Laci Peterson, AKAIK. It was the abortionists who made an issue over it, per the remarks from NOW this morning. \*\* I’m all for an open, public, dialogue on the issue. I think it’s an issue which reasonable people should think about and come to fair conclusions about. Judging from the tone of your rhetoric, you’re not one of the reasonable people. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 12:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/33 "2003-04-22T12:01:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Thudlow Boink \* > \*\*So Zenster, if someone were to kill a pregnant women’s fetus without (otherwise) harming the woman, what (if anything) would/should they be considered guilty of, from a legal and/or a moral standpoint? \*\* Your point SEEMS reasonable. But what you’re really talking about is a late-term abortion against the woman’s will. I’ve never heard of such a thing. It seems to me you are saying something along the lines of, “We really need to think about the possibility that blue-skinned aliens may be forcing us all to become Elvis imitators someday … shouldn’t there be a law to prevent this from happening?” Well, actually, no, because it’s unlikely to happen. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 12:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/34 "2003-04-22T12:16:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Thudlow Boink \* > **It’s not fair to call it a “ploy,” as though all anti-abortionists were motivated solely by a desire to minimize women’s rights. If you think of the fetus as a baby, a person, it’s natural and consistent to consider killing the fetus murder and to think it should be a punishable crime no matter who does it.** Sure, it’s fair to call it a ploy, if it in fact is one. A ploy is a sneaky plan to get soemthing over on an opponent. However, I am given to understand now that California has some weird legal standard that you should get more punishment if you kill two people than if you kill just one. So it may not have originated as a ploy, but as an honest attempt by the DAs office to get the max penalty on the perpetrator. That said, I honestly think the attitude of most anti-choice folks toward a woman’s right to control her own body ranges from indifference to outright hostility. **Personally, I believe that killing a baby after it’s born is wrong, it’s murder, and it should be punishable as such. But I don’t know where the wrongness kicks in: at birth? conception? somewhere in between? And I’m not sure how to decide it, legally or morally.** The first question you should ask is what gives you the right to decide versus the person carrying the fetus. **RexDart’s suggestion [“at the earliest point in gestation at which the baby could reasonably live outside the womb with the aid of medical technolocy is where the line should be set”] has the advantage that whether the baby/fetus is considered a person or not is not solely determined by its physical location (ie. inside vs. outside its mother’s body).** It’s very likely that as medical technology advances, we will be able to fetilize human eggs outside the womb and bring them fully to term. Fact is, most preemies don’t do well without medical help, especially the very early ones. Rex is leading you down the garden path… ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/35 "2003-04-22T13:09:32Z")
> [@](#): > > _by Yeticus Rex_ > > ## quote: > > ## Originally posted by SuaSponte Re-read Roe. The state has an interest in the protection of a fetus, which is what allows for laws restricting the right to abortion under certain circumstances, including in the later portions of a pregnancy. The fetus itself doesn’t have any rights. > > Is protection not a right? No. The state is not required to grant fetuses any protection; instead it has the option to do so. If your boss could pay you an additional $100,000 beyond your normal salary, do you have a “right” to that $100,000? No. Your boss has the right to give you $100,000 or not; you have no rights in the situation. Sua ---
**Author:** ![Mandelstam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Mandelstam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mandelstam)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/36 "2003-04-22T14:41:20Z")
\*\*JThunder \*\* _“No. Abortion is allowed up until the moment of birth – or even partial-birth.”_ “Allowed” because of the mother’s health exception, though. I mean, some of the posters in this thread have made it seem as though it would be casually easy or common for a woman at 34 weeks to stroll into a doctor’s office and demand an abortion simply because she’d changed her mind. In practice, I’ve read that it’s quite difficult for women in many areas to get a mid-second trimester abortion (c. 22 weeks)–when there is no question of fetal viability. I submit that at 34-36 weeks (which is what I take Peterson to have been) a woman would have to have a serious medical reason to justify an abortion: either something to do with her health, or the fetus’s (e.g., a fetus that is found to be non-viable because of missing organs). Do you disagree with this statement? If so do you have information as to the number of healthy women whose doctors consented to aborting healthy fetuses after 30 weeks? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/37 "2003-04-22T14:42:20Z")
Yeticus Rex: Lockyear isn’t the prosecution. He’s not involved in the case AFACT. The prosecution is the DA of Stanislaw County. IIRC, Brazelton’s the DA of said county and Lockyear’s the AG of California. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/38 "2003-04-22T14:51:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr2001 \* > **Sure - the fetus is part of the mother’s body, so treat it like any other assault. Killing the fetus is equivalent to removing the mother’s hand or liver.** The fetus is part of the mother’s body? So the mother actually has two sets of chromosomes? She has two hearts? Two brains? Four hands and four feet? Two sets of kidneys? Heck, if the fetus is male, then she has a penis as well? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/39 "2003-04-22T14:56:38Z")
Mr2001: The mother may be able to “grow another” baby; however, there is no way at all for her to grow the same baby again. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965/40 "2003-04-22T14:57:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mandelstam \* > \*\*\*\*JThunder \*\* > _“No. Abortion is allowed up until the moment of birth – or even partial-birth.”_ > > “Allowed” because of the mother’s health exception, though. \*\* Again, where “health” was defined in a ridiculously broad manner. Even the Senate Judiciary Committee drew attention to how ludicruously broad it is, and even concluded that this clause poses no effective barrier to having a late-term abortion. Moreover, I was responding to **Mandelstam** ’s question about whether late-term abortions were only allowed to save the mother’s life. Quite clearly, they are not. > [@](#): > > \*\* > I mean, some of the posters in this thread have made it seem as though it would be casually easy or common for a woman at 34 weeks to stroll into a doctor’s office and demand an abortion simply because she’d changed her mind. In practice, I’ve read that it’s quite difficult for women in many areas to get a mid-second trimester abortion (c. 22 weeks)–when there is no question of fetal viability. \*\* That’s because many abortionists are unwilling to perform abortions after 22 weeks. In other words, they are uncommon, but they are still available, and they are most certainly allowed by law. Besides, I don’t think any of the posters here said – or even remotely implied – that such abortions are “casually easy” to procure. Why should they? Such details are irrelevant to the question of fetal rights _per se_. It’s not “casually easy” to murder a stay-at-home mother of six, yet nobody dispute the fact that such actions are immoral, illegal and unspeakably reprehensible. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fetal-murder-charges/169965.md?page=3)