header-logo header-logo

17 January 2019 / Dr Karen Brennan , Dr Emma Milne
Issue: 7824 / Categories: Features , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Infanticide: guarding against harshness

Dr Karen Brennan & Dr Emma Milne examine the socio-historical context behind the infanticide law

 
  • For the offence/defence of infanticide to apply, the mental disturbance suffered by the accused does not need to be solely due to the consequence of giving birth. Providing birth was an operating or substantial cause, there may also be other contributing factors, such as pre-existing mental health conditions.
  • Infanticide operates as a mechanism for lenience in instances where a woman kills her infant while experiencing a disturbance of the balance of the mind.
  • Cases of newborn child killing involve vulnerable women. This has been recognised historically in the disposal of women who kill newborn children and the Infanticide Act is still needed today to facilitate leniency in such cases.

In July 2018, the Court of Appeal ruled that a woman could rely on the Infanticide Act 1938 even in situations where the disturbance of the balance of her mind was not caused ‘solely’ by reason of the effect of childbirth (R v Tunstill

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll