Replies

However today the Court of Appeal ruled that she could not be awarded compensation for the damage done to her during pregnancy because she was not a legal ‘person’ while in the womb, but rather she was an ‘organism’. So a crime could not have been committed against her, as a fetus is not a ‘person.

I don't even see the point of taking the case against the girl. What are the chances that the girl will ever be able to pay the judgement; slim to none.

On a more serious note the foolish judges may have done dealt a much more serious blow to human rights than they know.

Now that it is carved in judicial stone that a fetus is not a person it can be treated as a cancer or other disease.

A severely damaged fetus such as this girl was could be considered an unviable fetus and there by a potential unwarranted burden on the state. Such a burden on the state may be determined to be a catastrophic disease requiring immediate and aggressive treatment.

There is already court rulings that minor children can be treated for serious disease against the consent of the parents. It is but a small step for the state to decide that an abortions could be ordered by the state once the personhood of the fetus is no longer an obstacle.

Your comment seems to be based on the assumption that a criminal case had to be brought against the mother, and/or that the mother would have to pay the damages. The article did not make clear "who" would be paying, so I looked up the law.

In the UK, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority pays the benefit to the victim of crime. A criminal conviction does not need to be secured to award Criminal Injuries Compensation.

So it';s not a question of dragging the mother to court, just a matter of the CICA admitting that the little girl was injured by someone else's act. Under UK law, she absolutely qualifies for it right now, except that the Abortion Lobby (BPAS) is blocking this precisely on the ground that the little girl, when injured, was not a "person."

I think this puts a different light on things.

And I think you're quite right that this paves the way for forced abortions. No part of the British "system" wants to be burdened with the healthcare needs of a little girl they knew was going to be born with disabilities.