# Pro-choicers: should killing the fetus of a pregant woman, against her will, be murder? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 10, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371 "2009-06-10T19:01:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371/61 "2009-06-11T14:59:34Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > I was thinking more of Jack SpermSpewer, actually. A few months ago he took hsi girlfriend, Jill BadJudgeofCharacter, up a hill to fetch a pail of water, and she came down both a pail in her hand and a bunin the over. Jack does not intend to marry Jill because he still has wild oats to sow and giants to slay. When she informs him that he’ll still have to pay child support, he cold-cocks her and and kicks her in the belly, hoping to cause a miscarriage. Jill survives; the fetus does not. > > Or it could be Jim Crackhead. He lives in the alternate universe in which Jack is not a jackass and stands by the pregnant Jill. One day, J & J are grocery shopping when Jim, who needs money for a fix, comes across them and mugs them; he’s jittery and shoots Jill in the stomach. She survives but the fetus does not. For a moment, I had to double-check to see if Sampiro wrote this. Bravo, Sir! ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371/62 "2009-06-11T15:10:44Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > I was thinking more of Jack SpermSpewer, actually. A few months ago he took hsi girlfriend, Jill BadJudgeofCharacter, up a hill to fetch a pail of water, and she came down both a pail in her hand and a bunin the over. Jack does not intend to marry Jill because he still has wild oats to sow and giants to slay. When she informs him that he’ll still have to pay child support, he cold-cocks her and and kicks her in the belly, hoping to cause a miscarriage. Jill survives; the fetus does not. > > Or it could be Jim Crackhead. He lives in the alternate universe in which Jack is not a jackass and stands by the pregnant Jill. One day, J & J are grocery shopping when Jim, who needs money for a fix, comes across them and mugs them; he’s jittery and shoots Jill in the stomach. She survives but the fetus does not. To my mind the answer would depend on how far along the pregnancy is - same as my answer for when abortion should be allowable. If the fetus was far enough along to have the capacity for conciousness (sometime in the 3rd trimester) you are in murder territory: before that, the most you could do is use it as an aggrivating factor in the assualt charge on Jill, since a fetus of that age isn’t a “person” yet. In particular, the intent on the part of Jim Crackhead in the first scenario (assuming you could prove it) would I think cause any judge here to sentence at the top of the allowable range for aggrivated assault on Jill, whether the pregancy was one week or nine months. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371/63 "2009-06-11T16:09:26Z")
It seems to me that someone killing a fetus should not be charged with murder at any stage of the pregnancy. The law treats the fetus as if it were nothing but an organ during the first two trimesters. Even the child’s father cannot choose to terminate the pregnancy without the mother’s consent. Therefore the crime should be an aggravated assault or destruction of property. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Fight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/90ced4/32.png) [@Cat\_Fight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Fight)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371/64 "2009-06-11T16:29:08Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Again using the rape analogy, there’s no crime if a person voluntarily chooses to have sex, but an assault which includes involuntary sex is regarded as a different and worse crime than an otherwise-similar assault which did not include sex. Likewise, it’s legal for a woman to voluntarily have an abortion, but an assault which includes an involuntary abortion should be regarded as a worse crime than an otherwise-similar assault without the abortion. I don’t think that that crime should necessarily be called “murder”, and we don’t have a simple one-word term for it like we do with rape and murder, but that just means that we have to coin a new term in the law. Fetuside? I agree with you entirely. It’s not murder, but then neither is slicing out someone’s kidney, which would not be looked upon too kindly by the courts. ---
**Author:** ![sweeteviljesus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@sweeteviljesus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweeteviljesus)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371/65 "2009-06-11T16:49:38Z")
It seems to me that the charge of murder ought to be limited to a viable fetus. Here is another wrinkle that this thread made me think of: Suppose the pregnant woman attacks you and in the course of defending yourself, you cause the death of the unborn child. Would you be guilty of a crime? It is not considered justifiable if I injure or kill an innocent bystander in the course of defending myself. Is the pregnant woman guilty of a crime? Thanks, Rob ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371/66 "2009-06-11T19:52:09Z")
> [@](#): > > Suppose the pregnant woman attacks you and in the course of defending yourself, you cause the death of the unborn child. Would you be guilty of a crime? It is not considered justifiable if I injure or kill an innocent bystander in the course of defending myself. Is the pregnant woman guilty of a crime? It’s certainly not justifiable to _deliberately_ kill a third party in self defense. What would the law say if I’m attacked with lethal force, shoot back at my attacker, and one of my bullets accidentally goes astray and hits an innocent bystander? That looks like the closest analogous situation, to me. (that’s a real question, by the way, not rhetorical: I don’t know the answer) ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371/67 "2009-06-11T19:54:19Z")
> [@sweeteviljesus](#): > > Suppose the pregnant woman attacks you and in the course of defending yourself, you cause the death of the unborn child. Would you be guilty of a crime? It is not considered justifiable if I injure or kill an innocent bystander in the course of defending myself. Is the pregnant woman guilty of a crime? > > Thanks, > Rob I’d probably be dead n such a circumstance, unless the pregant woman were also threatening Kim or my stepdaughter. I would have a very hard time making myself do violence to her. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371/68 "2009-06-11T22:47:40Z")
> [@sweeteviljesus](#): > > It is not considered justifiable if I injure or kill an innocent bystander in the course of defending myself. Is the pregnant woman guilty of a crime? I’d say she’s about as guilty as anyone who uses a hostage/human shield. Consider a person standing behind a hostage who alternates between pointing a gun at the hostage and at police/bystanders. The police are justified in killing or injuring the hostage-taker and while they’ll do their best to avoid injuring or killing the hostage, it might be necessary if the hostage-taker starts shooting at bystanders, endangering _their_ lives. ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2009, 9:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371/69 "2009-06-14T09:30:25Z")
Murder no. It’s a fairly unique crime. Maybe a step above regular assault, but not murder. ---
**Author:** ![Baal\_Houtham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baal_houtham/32/13604_2.png) [@Baal\_Houtham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baal_Houtham)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2009, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371/70 "2009-06-14T12:58:13Z")
That’s such a tough question that in practice I’m willing to not make a decision, and let the politicians and the passionate activists hash it out. ## I feel the same way access to late term abortion. But for purposes of this thread, I’ll go with not calling it murder, and have the penalties normally be a smidgen less than murder. I’m okay --in theory-- with the death penalty for certain types of murder, and at first I was thinking that I couldn’t support the death penalty for “fetal murder”…so that would make them different crimes. But, then I envisioned a Charles Manson type invading a party of pregnant women with a 7" knife, and not actually killing any of the women. I could support the death penalty there. Still, I generally rank it with the worst types of assault, rather than murder. Things like blinding, castration, facial mutilation. To sum up: not murder but if you want to have it called murder I won’t quibble unless you’re doing so as part of an anti-abortion strategy. In which case you can go sniff your own ass. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-should-killing-the-fetus-of-a-pregant-woman-against-her-will-be-murder/499371.md?page=3)