Advertisement

Should Child Abuse Laws be Extended to Include Fetal Abuse?

  • Margery W. Shaw

Abstract

Before we address the issue of fetal abuse, let us first ask whether the fetus deserves the protection of the state, and if the answer is in the affirmative, then we must delineate the legal duties of the mother not to harm her fetus and the legal remedies of the fetus if it is threatened or abused.

Keywords

Child Abuse Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Appellate Court Legal Duty Family Affair 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Roev. Wade ,410 U.S. 113(1973).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    For a discussion of cases, see Hartye, F. J., Tort recovery for the unborn child, J. Fam. L. 15:276 (1976–77).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Bremmer, ed. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, (1970)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thomas, M. P., Jr., Child abuse and neglect. Part I: Historical overview, legal matrix, and social perspectives, 50 N.C.L. Rev. 293 (1972).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johnson v. State ,21 Tenn. 282 (1840).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    See Thomas, supra note 3 at 307–310.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Silverman, F. N. The Roentgen manifestations of unrecognized skeletal trauma in infants, Am. /. Roentgenology 69:413 (1953).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kempe, C. H., Silverman, F. N., Steele, B. F., Droegemueller, W., and Silver, H. K., The battered child syndrome, JAMA 181:17 (1962).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Note, The federal and state response to the problem of child maltreatment in America: A survey of the reporting statutes, Nova L.J. 2:13 (1978).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Curlender v. Bioscience Laboratories ,106 Cal. App.3d 811, 165 Cal. Rptr. 477 (1980).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cal Civ. Code $43.6 (West 1982).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meyer v. Nebraska ,262 U.S. 390 (1923);Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pierce v. Society of Sisters ,268 U.S. 510 (1925)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Skinner v. Okla. ,316 U.S. 535 (1942)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Prince v. Mass. ,321 U.S. 158 (1944)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Loving v. Va. ,388 U.S. 1 (1967)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eisenstadt v. Baird ,405 U.S. 438 (1972)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wisconsin v. Yoder ,406 U.S. 205 (1972).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    In re Custody of a Minor ,375 Mass. 733, 379 N.E.2d 1053 (1978).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    American Bar Association, Model Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Law (1975).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Santosky v. Kramer ,455 U.S. 745 (1982).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    U.N. Declaration of the Rights of the Child, preamble, G.A. Res. 1386, 14 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 19, U.N. Doc. A14249 (1959).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reyes v. State ,75 Cal. App.3d 214, 141 Cal. Rptr. 912 (1977).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    In re Baby X, 97 Mich. App. 1ll, 293 N.W.2d 736 (1980).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    New York Times (Apr. 27, 1983) at 11, col. 4.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Robertson, J. A., Procreative liberty and the control of conception, pregnancy and childbirth, Va. L. Rev. 69:405 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jefferson v. Griffin Spalding County Hospital Authority ,247 Ga. 86, 274 S.E.2d 457 (1981).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bowes, W. A., Jr., and Selgestad, B., Fetal vs. maternal rights: Medical and legal perspectives, 58 Obstet-Gynecol 209 (1981).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dillon, W. P., Lee, R. V., Tronolone, M. J., Buckwald, K., and Foote, R. J., Life supoortand maternal brain death during pregnancy, JAMA 248:1089 (1982)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Siegler, M., and Wikler, D., Brain death and live birth, JAMA 248:1101 (1982).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Taft v. Taft ,338 Mass. 331, 446 N.E.2d 395 (1983).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    State v. Pointer ,Calif. Ct. App. 1st Dist., Family Law R. 10:1270 (March 20, 1984).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shaw, M. W., Conditional prospective rights of the fetus, /. Legal Med. 5:63 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gibson v. Gibson ,3 Cal.3d 914, 479 P.2d 648, 92 Cal. Rptr. 288 (1971).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Aubrey Milunsky and George J. Annas 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margery W. Shaw
    • 1
  1. 1.Health Law ProgramUniversity of Texas Health Science CenterHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations