Assault Causing Pregnancy Loss

  • Thread starter Thread starter D.Erasmus.R
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

D.Erasmus.R

Guest
Is physical assault causing pregnancy loss the same sin/crime as abortion? What has the Church officially said about this issue?

I think this issue is important for pro-lifers. This issue should put protecting pre-born children in a different light. This particular crime/sin has little to do with chastity, has everything to do with violence against women, & disproves the idea that abortion is solely a ‘woman’s issue/sin’.

Now, I lament that laws addressing this issue in the USA have been disastrous, leading to the ‘criminalisation of pregnancy’ and not punishing those who’ve caused pregnancy loss by assault.
 
I guess it would depend on if the person assaulting the woman meant to try and cause her to lose her baby or not. Either way I imagine the sin would be more grave than assaulting a non-pregnant woman, but it’s tricky. An example: what if she’s not even a month pregnant and thus the assailant and possibly the woman herself had no way of knowing?
 
Here’s a list of fetal homicide/fetal assault laws, state-by-state. I don’t know how up-to-date it is, or if things have been challenged and had to be rewritten, but it’s a good starting point for a five-second overview.

So, for example, Texas’ law sez–
Texas: Under a law signed June 20, 2003, and effective September 1, 2003, the protections of the entire criminal code extend to “an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth.” The law does not apply to “conduct committed by the mother of the unborn child” or to “a lawful medical procedure performed by a physician or other licensed health care provider with the requisite consent.” (SB 319, Prenatal Protection Act)
Click to expand...
 
Are you speaking from he point of view of the attacker? If he knew the woman was pregnant then yes he would be held responsible in eyes of God for the death of the child. Even civil law says that. In that sense it would be akin to an abortion in its severity.

The woman of course would be an innocent victim.
 
no, how can it be. The woman is being acted against in a very violent way. It is a crime upon the woman. And should be a crime upon the baby too
 
Last edited:
here, the law is going to be looked at and changed so people accused of causing car crashes where there is loss of life of an unborn baby, are actually charged with that loss of life too, as well as that of the mother’s
 
If it’s intentional, yes.

In fact, in the US when someone murders a pregnant woman he is often charged with two murders rather than just one.
 
It definitely depends on the attacker’s intentions & whether they knew their victim was pregnant. If they only intended to injure but not kill or cause grievous bodily harm, then it could be ‘pre-natal manslaughter’. If they intended to course the pregnant mother death or grievous bodily harm but only caused pre-natal death, I think it would be ‘pre-natal murder’. If the attacker, indifferent to their victim’s life, acted certain they would course pre-natal death, I think it would be ‘pre-natal murder’.
Punishing pre-natal deaths caused by ‘negligence’ is an extremely slippery slope & is what has made America’s foeticide laws disastrous.
 
I know of those laws in the USA. That’s why I said:
D.Erasmus.R said:
Now, I lament that laws addressing this issue in the USA have been disastrous, leading to the ‘criminalisation of pregnancy’ and not punishing those who’ve caused pregnancy loss by assault.
Click to expand...
I’m asking if people think that assault causing pregnancy loss is the same as abortion & if the Church thinks assault causing pregnancy loss is the same as abortion.
 
And in other countries, the baby has to be born and take one breath to be counted as a human being in cases like this. I find it very hard that there is a difference according to law in some countries.
  1. A pregnant woman was murdered.
  2. A woman and her unborn child were murdered.
  3. A pregnant woman was murdered. Doctors tried to save the life of her child by performing an emergency c-section. The child died due to injuries suffered in the attack.
 
It can be the asame thing as murder depending on the circumstances.
 
Well, what does the Catechism say?
Since the first century, the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the law:

“You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.” (Didache, etc)

“God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.” (GS 51 section 3, whatever that is)

Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attached the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae” (CIC, can. 1398) “by the very commission of the offense” (CIC, can 1314) and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. (more citations) The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society… etc, etc, etc.
Click to expand...
So, all of the emphasis here is on the parent’s actions: “affirming the moral evil of procured abortion”, “formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense”, etc.

So, if it’s not your baby you’re killing— it looks like the word would shift from “abortion” to just “murder”. There’s not a whole separate section for doctors or nurses or pharmaceutical industries; all of the words are directed to the parent.

So my guess would be a woman cooperates with the intention of causing a miscarriage, it would be abortion. If someone assaults her with the intention of causing a miscarriage, it would be fetal homicide or murder. If someone assaults her without the intention of causing a miscarriage, but the miscarriage still occurs, it will be fetal homicide or manslaughter. (Does fetal homicide require intent, or does it turn into something else?)
 
There is a case out of the USA tonight where a man murdered his pregnant wife and two kids. He is being charged for the murder of the unborn infant too.
 
I know of those laws in the USA. That’s why I said:

d8688ecb262cbca4321ed07dcfdbf081b8dd4944.png
D.Erasmus.R:
Now, I lament that laws addressing this issue in the USA have been disastrous, leading to the ‘criminalisation of pregnancy’ and not punishing those who’ve caused pregnancy loss by assault.
Click to expand...
I’m asking if people think that assault causing pregnancy loss is the same as abortion & if the Church thinks assault causing pregnancy loss is the same as abortion.
 
I was fearing that the church taught that females who terminate their pregnancies were murders but those who cause pre-natal death by act of violence weren’t.
 
I’ve read the catechism.
midori said:
Does fetal homicide require intent, or does it turn into something else?
Click to expand...
Unintended killing is not imputable unless it’s through violence or negligence (see my reply to Fauken). Killings are generally considered intentional if done by carrying out acts that are certain to be lethal. It may be best to see assault causing pregnancy loss the same as killing a baby by attacking a mother while she’s nursing that baby.
 
I think it would certainly depend on the attackers intentions & if they knew their victims were pregnant.
Assault causing pregnancy loss can be seen as the same as killing a baby by a attacking a mother while she’s nursing that baby. If the attacker intended for both to live without grievous injury then it would be manslaughter. If the attacker specifically intended death or grievous injury on one or both, or, indifferent to their victims’ lives, acted certain their actions would be fatal for one or both then it would be murder. If the murder is born yet, then I suppose it’s abortion.
Punishing miscarriages caused by negligence is impossible without punishing the innocent.
 
D.Erasmus.R said:
If the attacker specifically intended death or grievous injury on one or both, or, indifferent to their victims’ lives, acted certain their actions would be fatal for one or both then it would be murder
Click to expand...
Obliquely intending death.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top