- Published on
R v. Poulton (1832) - Study Guide: Defining "Human Being" in Homicide
I. Case Summary:
I. Case Summary:
- Facts: The defendant (D) gave birth to a child. The child's body was later discovered with a ligature around its neck. Evidence indicated the child had breathed, but it was unclear whether this occurred during or after the birth process.
- Holding: The court held that D was not guilty of murder.
- Definition of "Birth" for Homicide: Littledale J. stated that "being born must mean that the whole body is brought into the world, and it is not sufficient that the child respires in the progress of the birth."
- Implication: For the purposes of homicide law, a child is not considered a "human being" until it is fully born (i.e., entirely outside the mother's body). Breathing during the birthing process is insufficient.
- Foetus Not a Human Being: This case underscores the principle that a foetus is not considered a human being under homicide law.
- Abortion Act 1967: While Poulton establishes the status of a foetus, the Abortion Act 1967 provides a legal framework for abortions under specific circumstances.
- Violation: Intentionally procuring a miscarriage that contravenes the Abortion Act 1967 may result in criminal liability under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
- Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929: Addresses situations involving foetuses capable of being born alive.
- Violation: Terminating a foetus that is capable of being born alive may incur liability under the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929.
- Poulton provides a foundational definition of "birth" concerning homicide.
- The case highlights the distinction between a foetus and a "human being" in law.
- The legal landscape surrounding abortion and foetal viability is complex and governed by multiple statutes (Abortion Act 1967, Offences Against the Person Act 1861, and Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929).
0 Comments