# Man who put abortion-inducing drug in girlfriend's drink gets 22 years in prison -attempted homicide **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 14, 2018, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932 "2018-10-14T13:15:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/61 "2018-10-15T14:27:56Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Think about this a second… > > If we accept what happened in the OP then the law recognizes the unborn’s right to life. It is alive in the same sense you are alive because it can be murdered. > > You just made a laundry list of things we cannot compel people to do because of their right to autonomy as a living human. > > Given all that you then have to accept that a woman can choose to justifiably kill (as the law implies) her unborn child because her rights supersede those of the child’s right to life despite the care we give to protect all the things we can’t make people do as you listed. > > I am pro choice, I firmly support a woman’s right to abort in the first trimester. My point here is if we accept that a person can be put in jail for 22 years for attempting to murder an unborn person in the first trimester of gestation then the implications for the mother doing the same thing, legally, change dramatically. We DON’T protect life in the case of organ donation. We don’t protect it in the case of blood or marrow donation. When a bunch of kids laughed and filmed a drowning man instead of calling 911, their right to spend their time as they pleased was put ahead of his right to life. Just focus on organ donation: when we let people die because the corpse that contains the organ they need to survive belongs to someone who wants to bury it instead, how is that putting protecting life ahead of all other rights? ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/62 "2018-10-15T14:33:26Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > I was going to post that analogy as well so I don’t think it’s that much of a stretch. I think the analogy breaks down because _nobody_ thinks the crime would be against the kidney. It would always be against the person. However, in the case mentioned in the OP, the crime is against the fetus, not the woman. The point of this thread is (I believe), should the crime be against the woman or the fetus? And, if you think it should be against the fetus, how do you square that with abortion rights? As I mention upthread, I think this law is terrible and puts us on the path to fetal personhood laws, which would be a serious challenge to abortion rights. I think the appropriate law would be some sort of aggravated assault against the woman, and, if she’s pregnant, I could see further punishment because of that. However, the crime should be against the woman since she’s a person and the fetus isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Eonwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eonwe/32/240_2.png) [@Eonwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eonwe)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/63 "2018-10-15T15:04:22Z")
If I’ve got to have a label, I’m “pro-choice”. I think that there’s always going to be some mess/confusion with language, emotion, and real-world application when it comes to laws around fetuses. Much like age of consent; of course in real-world terms there is no practical difference between a person the day before they turn 18 [or whatever the age of consent is in your jurisdiction] and the day after, but we have to draw a line in order to have predictable, dependable and repeatable enforcement. Of course the fetus and the woman both were targets here. If that kid grows up and hears this story, they’ll likely say “that guy tried to kill me,” and they’d be right. The way I think about this stuff, and really the only way that doesn’t end up with bizarre and arbitrary definitions of “personhood” is that the moment when a fetus becomes a person is a philosophical question, not a medical question, and as such there is no one right answer. With that in mind, the important question for society is not “when does a fetus become a person” but rather “what ‘rights’ do we choose to give a fetus, and when, and for what purpose?” Honestly, I kind of see this the way **octopus** does in post 51. As long as expectant mothers treat their gestating children like little growing humans, there will always be an element of “personhood” in a fetus. So, is this “attempted manslaughter”? It may not be exactly the right charge, but attempting to kill a fetus seems obviously fundamentally different than attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the mother. Attempted assault does not fully describe the crime. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/64 "2018-10-15T15:47:26Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > I was under the impression that the pro-choice side relied on the belief that the unborn child was not a life, at least one that was incapable of being “murdered.” Isn’t that why they insist on the term fetus instead of unborn child? We hear in these threads all of the time that it is just a clump of cells, not much different that removing a cancer from your body. It is at many times not referred to as abortion, but as “women’s health care” or some other euphemism. > > I think that just a distinction is necessary for the pro-choice side. If we hold that the unborn child is a life capable of being murdered, then any balancing test would clearly be against legal abortion. The right not to be murdered on one side would clearly outweigh nearly any inconvenience the woman suffers as a result of pregnancy. This is not how I, a pro choice person, look at it. I recognize that I’m not typical in most of my beliefs, however. But a fetus can be a person, an unborn child, an embryo, and a “clumps of cells” all at the same time. It just so happens that _one_ person, and one person only, has the right to say “you can’t live inside my body anymore” and that’s the person whose body is being lived in. Nobody else gets to tell her what can and can’t live inside of her. That includes pissed off dads who wish she had made a different choice. If the person whose body a fetus is living in _wants_ that fetus to continue living there and to be born and become a full fledged child, it’s absolutely murder for anyone else to kill it. I wouldn’t even have a significant problem calling abortion murder as long as you recognize that the mother has the right to murder that particular individual at that particular time, because the alternative is that she doesn’t have any autonomy or control over her own body. That doesn’t make abortion a good thing, but it is a necessary thing sometimes, and thus should stay legal. And “murder” is an illegal killing. That’s the main argument I have against calling abortion “murder”. “Homicide” however, works. ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/65 "2018-10-15T16:19:36Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > > [@AHunter3](#): > > > > The question of whether or not this life is precious or disposable is _hers_ > > Is your life dependent on how much someone else values it? Not since I was born, no. I’ve _known_ some moms whose attitude was “Look here son, I done brung you into this world and if you don’t straighten up I’m gonna take you right back out of it, you hear me?” But I think the moment of birth should end their authority to do that. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/66 "2018-10-15T16:44:30Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > We DON’T protect life in the case of organ donation. We don’t protect it in the case of blood or marrow donation. When a bunch of kids laughed and filmed a drowning man instead of calling 911, their right to spend their time as they pleased was put ahead of his right to life. > > Just focus on organ donation: when we let people die because the corpse that contains the organ they need to survive belongs to someone who wants to bury it instead, how is that putting protecting life ahead of all other rights? I do not think this analogy really works. In this case the passersby had nothing to do with the situation. They just happened to be there and had no legal obligation to intervene. In the case of a woman’s unborn child she put the unborn in that position. It would be more akin to hanging someone out an apartment window. If you did that, and let go the rope, claiming you are under no obligation to save the person is wrong. You put them in that position and if you let go and they die you murdered them. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/67 "2018-10-15T16:45:22Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > I think the analogy breaks down because _nobody_ thinks the crime would be against the kidney. It would always be against the person. However, in the case mentioned in the OP, the crime is against the fetus, not the woman. > > The point of this thread is (I believe), should the crime be against the woman or the fetus? And, if you think it should be against the fetus, how do you square that with abortion rights? > > As I mention upthread, I think this law is terrible and puts us on the path to fetal personhood laws, which would be a serious challenge to abortion rights. I think the appropriate law would be some sort of aggravated assault against the woman, and, if she’s pregnant, I could see further punishment because of that. However, the crime should be against the woman since she’s a person and the fetus isn’t. I hate to just post “agree” but this is the point very well made. Here let’s take it just one step farther. A couple had been trying to get pregnant and have a bunch of fertilized embryo stored. They divorce and the father breaks into the storage facility and destroys the embryos against the woman’s wishes. Besides breaking and entering what crime has he committed? The logic of calling the crime of the op attempted “homicide” would justify call this one homicide too, rather than destruction of property. Is it? Are you comfortable calling it that? Why or why not? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/68 "2018-10-15T17:46:09Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Here let’s take it just one step farther. A couple had been trying to get pregnant and have a bunch of fertilized embryo stored. They divorce and the father breaks into the storage facility and destroys the embryos against the woman’s wishes. Besides breaking and entering what crime has he committed? > > The logic of calling the crime of the op attempted “homicide” would justify call this one homicide too, rather than destruction of property. Is it? Are you comfortable calling it that? Why or why not? Interestingly there is an effort to have those frozen embryos deemed persons with all the legal rights that entails. If they succeed then we would have to deem the accidents below a much greater tragedy than 9/11 (which is just weird). > [@](#): > > Over a single weekend in March, an unprecedented disaster hit fertility clinics—twice. > > First came the news that the University Hospitals Fertility Center in Ohio, lost more than 4,000 eggs and embryos in a malfunctioning cryogenic tank. Then, in an unrelated incident, Pacific Fertility Center in California reported that liquid-nitrogen levels had fallen too low in a tank holding “several thousand” eggs and embryos, affecting an unconfirmed number. > > \ > > On Friday, as first reported by Courthouse News, Penniman’s lawyer, Bruce Taubman, filed a complaint asking the court to consider an embryo a person. The filing—which comes in addition to a class-action lawsuit already filed March 12 on behalf of Penniman and her husband, Rick—asks for a declaratory judgment that “the life of a person begins at the moment of conception” and “the legal status of an embryo is that of a person.” > > SOURCE: [Can Lost Embryos Give Rise to a Wrongful-Death Suit?](https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/04/fertility-clinic-embryos/557258/) ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/69 "2018-10-15T17:51:02Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > **On the other hand, every single person ever born has been in their mother’s womb.** To hold such a thing as “justifiable homicide” means that every person ever born has committed an act which they could legally be killed for. The exception becomes the rule. Bolding mine. Define “mother”. There have been plenty of fertilized eggs introduced into the uterus of a woman acting as a surrogate, with zero genetic relationship to that fertilized egg. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/70 "2018-10-15T19:23:02Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I do not think this analogy really works. In this case the passersby had nothing to do with the situation. They just happened to be there and had no legal obligation to intervene. > > In the case of a woman’s unborn child she put the unborn in that position. It would be more akin to hanging someone out an apartment window. If you did that, and let go the rope, claiming you are under no obligation to save the person is wrong. You put them in that position and if you let go and they die you murdered them. One, a lot of women get pregnant through no choice of their own. Two, how long do you have to hold that rope? Pregnancy is life-threatening. We don’t compel parents to donate blood or bone marrow to their kids. We don’t compel anyone to donate organs. Why do those rights trump the right of another to live? ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/71 "2018-10-15T20:09:30Z")
[Davis v. Davis](https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/davis-v-davis-1992) To sum it up: A divorcing couple with frozen embryos. She wanted to carry them to term, he wanted them destroyed. The final court battle ended up with them being destroyed. ---
**Author:** ![Filbert](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/filbert/32/3433_2.png) [@Filbert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Filbert)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/72 "2018-10-15T20:33:27Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I do not think this analogy really works. In this case the passersby had nothing to do with the situation. They just happened to be there and had no legal obligation to intervene. > > In the case of a woman’s unborn child she put the unborn in that position. It would be more akin to hanging someone out an apartment window. If you did that, and let go the rope, claiming you are under no obligation to save the person is wrong. You put them in that position and if you let go and they die you murdered them. That’s a terrible analogy; ‘She put the unborn in that position?’ No, they came into being in that position, and that is the only position they can survive in. It’s not like fetuses are just chilling out somewhere and women grab 'em, shove 'em in their uteri, then claim the right to choose. If that happened, then you might claim that she put them in that position. A fetus’ only chance of survival is through using its mother’s body and organs, and in every other situation, people can decide not to allow others the use of their body or organs, even if the person in need of an organ is a minor child of the potential donor, who had made exactly the same choice to bring them into being as the hypothetical pregnant woman. We even allow people to decide that a dead person’s right to their organs is greater than a live one’s, even in that situation. Why should an unborn person be different? Why should their right to use another’s body be greater than that of an unarguable person, who’s born, breathing, and needs a kidney from a dead person to live? ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/73 "2018-10-15T20:37:33Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > The strict pro life position seems to be straightforward. The consistent position would logically be: > mother gets an abortion = murder of the child > OP crime = murder of the child and assault on the mother > > From a pro choice position, at first glance then the consistent position seems to be: > mother gets an abortion = no crime > OP crime = assault on the mother > > But that’s wrong. The pro choice position does not stem from a belief that a fetus should _not_ have rights, but from a belief that the right of the mother to bodily autonomy supersedes the any rights that the fetus might have. In general, the pro choice position does not explore what rights the fetus should have absent a mother, since the situation doesn’t arise. But that’s really what we’re asking in the OP scenario. In a sense, it’s similar to the need for the pro choice position to explore the rights of an early-stage fetus when we have the technology to grow a baby in a synthetic womb. … From the personal autonomy point of view the analogy might be mother gets an abortion = Mother kills intruder in her apartment (not guilty by castle doctrine) OP crime = Father kills guest that mother has welcomed into her apartment (Murder) ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/74 "2018-10-15T21:08:21Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > One, a lot of women get pregnant through no choice of their own. Of all the parties involved only one has zero control of its circumstances (both in how it got there and its ultimate fate). ---
**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:** [October 15, 2018, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/75 "2018-10-15T21:12:55Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > From the personal autonomy point of view the analogy might be > > mother gets an abortion = Mother kills intruder in her apartment (not guilty by castle doctrine) If you’re going to pursue this analogy, keep in mind that it takes more than someone just being in your home before you’re legally and morally allowed to kill them. (If you don’t agree, remind me never to come to any parties at your house.) ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/76 "2018-10-15T22:05:09Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Of all the parties involved only one has zero control of its circumstances (both in how it got there and its ultimate fate). So? Do you support forcing parents to donate blood or bone marrow to their kids? If I agree to donate a kidney to you,but at the last minute, I change my mind, I haven’t done anything illegal. Even if you die as a result–because you were taken off the anonymous donor list–I haven’t done anything illegal. If I agree to donate a life-saving kidney to you in the event of my death, die, and then my husband decides he’s uncomfortable with the situation, it’s not a crime for him to stop the donation–it’s his absolute right. This is true even if you are my kid. If I’ve agreed to give you a kidney and then change my mind, are you comfortable with the state having me strapped to a table and forcibly cutting it out? Because forcing me to have a baby would be exactly that. ---
**Author:** ![DigitalC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ebca7d/32.png) [@DigitalC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DigitalC)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/77 "2018-10-15T23:09:10Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Yet, in an absurd way, the law also recognizes that the woman may have an abortion, which is an attempt to kill the child, yet she has a constitutional right to do so. An abortion is denying another person the use of your body, in no other circumstance do we consider this murder. Someone trying to kill you is murder, someone refusing to give you a kidney to save your life is not. I don’t see the disconnect. ---
**Author:** ![cmkeller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmkeller/32/118_2.png) [@cmkeller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmkeller)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/78 "2018-10-15T23:23:16Z")
Manda Jo: > [@](#): > > If I’ve agreed to give you a kidney and then change my mind, are you comfortable with the state having me strapped to a table and forcibly cutting it out? Because forcing me to have a baby would be exactly that. What if the other person already has your kidney, and then afterward you regret it and say you want it back? Because in the case of the fetus, it’s not being denied your body in the first place, it’s already in there and you’re looking to revoke the access it already gained. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2018, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/79 "2018-10-15T23:23:36Z")
If you murder a person that is sentenced to be executed you have committed murder, even if the state would have legally ordered someone to kill him at a later time. Same thing here, the woman has a legal right to kill (or ordered killed by a person with proper medical training), however if you go and do something to kill her unborn child you have committed murder. Morally killing does not equate to murder which has a legal and a separate but semi-related moral definition. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2018, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932/80 "2018-10-16T00:46:58Z")
> [@cmkeller](#): > > What if the other person already has your kidney, and then afterward you regret it and say you want it back? If you’re still using and depending on the kidney that the other person now also has access to, I’d say that would considerably affect the question of whether you should be forced to allow the other person to continue using it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/man-who-put-abortion-inducing-drug-in-girlfriends-drink-gets-22-years-in-prison-attempted-homicide/822932.md?page=5)