Running Head: INFANTICIDE ACT

Infanticide Act 1922
[Name of the Writer]
[Name of the Institution]

Infanticide Act 1922

Introduction:
The term infanticide means murdering of a child under a year by his own mother. Infanticide covers a history longer than expected from human race which is understood as killing of unwanted children of different age groups by fathers and mothers, earlier than it was ever reported in front of legal authorities. It is advocated by the historians that killing of children known as infanticide was practiced more often before modernization and early social life. These periods were the one in parts of the world where social conditions of the world included women to be employed as servants, shame attached to the unwed mothers, no control over fertility and high infant mortality. After the 50s of the 16th century, the criminal activities performed by the poor, the sexual activities of women and the burden of financial support for illegal children all combined moved to prosecution for bastard acts, adultery and crimes of such charge to royal courts from churches. Several studies were conducted regarding the causes of deaths convicted by the mother till 1922, when it was medically observed as to how the psychology affects the mind of the mother to perform such crime. The first medically proved model was adopted in the Infanticide Act 1922 which states that the mother which gave birth to the child is not recovered fully from the psychological conditions of the mother was found to be disturbed due because of the pains of delivering the child. In such condition, the mother is said to be charged of infanticide which is other than murder. Soon, it was observed that this act of restricting infanticide to newly born lead towards unjust results. In 1938, this act was extended from newly born to 12 months and it was added that the disturbance of the mind of the mother is due to Lactation, the secretion of milk from mammary glands. The death penalty of a new born child for a woman who is medically unfit as the psychological conditions of the mother was found to be disturbed due because of the pains of delivering the child, is effectively eliminated by The Infanticide Act 1922 by providing a limited defense to murder which was overruled by Infanticide Act 1938 Section 2(3). This Act remains in the law in England till today which numerously is adopted by jurisdictions of common laws over the world.

Historical Background:
Till the late 17th century, infanticide was called as murder by the law. In 1624, infanticide was firstly introduce vividly in response to the reporting of difficulties proving that the children had been born alive which was called dead which was a concealment of the death of unlawful children while cases proven to be infanticide was considered as murder. In 1803, the 1624 Act was repealed. During the mid of 19th century, expressions regarding the acuteness of mothers charged by the murders of their infants were considered. One evening in West London, as history reports this happening in Sept, 1856, the unfortunate horrid case was reported in which two newborns were discovered to be wrapped, dead in blooded slip and chemise in front of a back alley of a home at Pentridge Villas, Notting Hill. The reason of their death as reported by the surgeon named Guazzaroni was that the children died on suffocation and intentional exposure. Incidents like this again reported with the victims found but the murderer of these twins was never seen. In Victorian Britain in 19th century, infanticide was unfortunately common. It was estimated by Lionel Rose that 113,000 children were reported dead under one year of age in 1864, 1730 deaths were due to violence and only 192 were reported as homicides. Since early 1840s, regarding infanticides, questions were asked in House of Commons in front of T. Wakley, the coroner and surgeons shocked the people by declaring that the infanticide was increasing to a frightful extent. This was taken as one of the greatest pests slowly destroying the society along with drunkenness and gambling in late 1860s. Then, it was not possible for the observers to look at infants’ corpses which were found in places ranging from bedrooms to compartments, from interiors to exteriors. One of the observers who experienced the events with his own eyes commented that there were bundles of infants’ bodies which were left in the streets, the boats tracked down a numerous amount of drowned infants. Dr. Lankester said that one in every 13 women in London is said to be a murderess as there are 12,000 women which can be attributed for this crime.
The Times newspaper subjected this occurrences that ‘in London, infant children have nothing more than helping themselves to be creeping into lives between enemies’. In 1870, 276 infants were found murdered in the streets of London while the figure as noted in 1895 was reported to be 231.
It was one of the hardest decisions made were of the professional baby farmers, who were found guilty of the infanticide. The first case as seen in the history of London was of Margaret Waters, 1870, who was found out to be charged of fraud by obtaining hard cash from the parents and the murder of the baby. Margaret Waters was then executed in the middle of press coverage. The same case was observed in 1879 by the charged person, Annie Took was charged as she was found to be the murderess of a handicap child for which she was paid to take care for £12, and she was executed as well. Other prominent child ranchers, for example, the Edinburgh murderess Jessie King, 1887 and also Amelia Dyerendured a comparable destiny. Yet not these convicts were sentenced to death and distinctive cases that got front-page scope, for instance, Catherine Barnes and Charlotte Winsor were sentenced for life.
Evidences grow by the 1870s that such crimes as infanticide grew vigorously by women primarily more often by mothers of the infants themselves. It was found in the late 1870s that there was a significant amount of cases being the evidence that infanticide was such a crime being convicted by women of London unfortunately which were not from the outside but the mothers of the children themselves. It was no doubt seen that the amount of satisfaction which is given by the two classifications mentioned lastly, that these wrongdoings were the work of debased, deceitful ladies with no maternal senses at all and enjoyed a business exchange with life itself inside a calling referred to prominently as ‘baby farming’. The term “baby farming” was first noted down in The Times in 1860s which was mentioned by one of the practitioners as the kind of occupation for people, especially women who receive infants to look after for payment in terms of either weekly, monthly payment or lump sum. However, it became extensively popular in the era of London when illegal children were denounced and unwed mothers made themselves ruled out for the responsibility of supporting their child.
Later in 18th century, baby farming was well established. Baby farmer was generally a lady with lower class financial background who might offer either to take care of the undesired infant or guarantee that the child would be given to some suitable new parents. This transaction of the infants differed on accordance with the distinction of the contract being placed between two parties, but on average, the cost was between £7 and £30.

Infanticide Act 1938:
The Infanticide Act 1922 states that the mother which gave birth to the child is not fully recouped from the effect of delivery of her baby which in result disturbs the balance of her mind. In such condition, the mother is said to be charged of infanticide which is not referred to as murder. It was soon observed that this act of restricting infanticide to newly born lead towards unjust results. In 1938, this act was extended from newly born to 12 months and it was added that the psychological ubalance of the mother is due to Lactation, secretion of milk from mammary glands. The Infanticide Act 1938 stated as follows:
Section 1: 1. A lady, where by any intentional demonstration or oversight causes the demise of her kid being a under twelve years of age, yet at the season of the demonstration or oversight the parity of her psyche was disturbed by rationale of her not having completely recouped from impact of bringing forth the youngster or by rationale of the impact of lactation subsequent upon the conception of the child, then, despite that the conditions were such that however for this Act the offense would have added up to murder, she should be blameworthy of crime, to mind of child murder, and might for such offense be managed and rebuffed as though she had been liable of the offense of homicide of the child. 2. Where upon the trial of a woman for the crime of her child, being a child under twelve years of age, the members of jury are of supposition that she by any determined exhibition or oversight realized its passing, yet that at the season of the show or rejection the equality of her brain was chafed by reason of her not having totally recovered from the effect of delivering the tyke or by reason of the effect of lactation consequent upon the origination of the child, then the jury may, in spite of the conditions yet for the procurements of this Act they might have given back a choice of manslaughter, return in instead thereof a choice of child homicide. 3. Nothing in this Act should influence the force of the jury upon an prosecution for the homicide of a child to give back a decision of murder, or a decision of blameworthy yet insane, or a decision of camouflage of conception, in compatibility of segment sixty, of the Offenses against the Person Act, 1861, aside from that for the motivations behind the stipulation to that area a child might be considered to have as of late been conceived on the off chance that it had been conceived inside of twelve months before its demise. 4. The said section 60 will be applied in the case of absolution of a woman upon prosecution for child murder because it applies upon the absolution of a woman on her charge of murder.
Section 2: 1. This Act might be sighted as Infanticide Act 1938 2. This Act will not extend to Northern Ireland and Scotland. 3. The Infanticide Act 1922 is hereby repealed.

Cases related to Infanticide Act 1938:
Following are the cases as reviewed and dealt under The Infanticide Act 1938 which repeals the firstly introduced Infanticide Act 1922.

Regina vs. Lisa Therese Gore(Diseased):
Lisa Therese Gore appeared to the Preston Crown Court on 8th November, 1996 as an appellant charged with two offenses, infanticide and an attempt regarding concealing of the birth of her child. The details of the offense of the infanticide are:
Lisa Therese Gore, on 24th April 1996, when she was disturbed as she was not recovered fully from the psychological effects of child birth, or from the effects of lactation resulting oversight to be specific to take care of the infant or look for medicinal consideration during a period of the child birth brought on the passing of a kid being a child less than 12 years old months. The Criminal Cases Review Commission referred the case as an appeal as her judgment against the murder of infant child. The baby lived for a few minutes. The Bill which turned into the Infanticide Act 1922 experienced a few drafts, over the span of which qualifying expressions, for example, "unlawfully by any immediate means deliberately" were expelled from the expression "causes the demise of her child”. The other intriguing truth to rise up out of the Commission's examination is that at the board of trustees phase of the Infanticide Act 1922 the then Lord Chancellor educated the House that it was not the Bill's aim to place infanticide "in a lower evaluation of homicide", however to regard it as a "lower evaluation criminal offense". The main noteworthy distinction between the offense of child murder under the 1922 Act and under the 1938 Act, which supplanted it, was that in the previous Act the offense was kept to a recently conceived kid. It ought to be recollected that at the time both Infanticide Acts were gone there was no protection of reduced obligation accessible to somebody accused of homicide and the punishment for homicide was passing. She was claimed to be guilty at the trial. A probation order was sentenced to her but she died in 2003 because of cancer.

Regina vs. Angela Cannings:
One of the important cases reported at Crown Court at Winchester in front of Lord Justice Mrs Justice Rafferty and Mr Justice Pitchers of Angela Cannings who was charged of homicide of her two children, Jason who was 7 weeks old in 1991 and Matthew who was 18 weeks old in 1999 cancelled as it was not safe. Ms Cannings, age 40, who used to work as a shop assistant, lost 3 children due to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), or cot death. This syndrome called out the death of her first child, Gemma who died 13 weeks after she was born in 1989. The Chronology was clear. Gemma expired on 14th November 1989. Jason was found suffering from ALTE when he was 6 weeks old, but he died after approximately a week or more after he got discharged from the hospital dated 13th June 1991. Jade was suffering from ALTE from 1st April 1996, when she was 11 weeks old. She was recovered fully. On 3rd November 1999 Matthew, aging 17 weeks, suffered from his ALTE. Matthew got discharged from the hospital but he died after 9 days afterwards. Angela has one daughter who was alive at the time of the hearing born in 1996. The Appeal answered to the case of Ms Canning’s that the burden of the proof and evidence concluding that the death of the child was caused by the mother under the Infanticide Act 1938, hardy fell on the crown which made them to prove that the mother could not disprove it that she did not convicted the murder, so she was found guilty of the murder of the child.

Conclusion:
Child murder in UK has been an issue of integrity since 17th century. In the battle between the legislature and public opinion in 1922, the Infanticide Act 1922 was formed in which there ought to be no winners, the compromise which was done by the court was not the objective of the legislature neither it was seen in public opinion’s instincts. The Infanticide Act 1922 states that the mother which gave birth to the kid ceases to recover from the effect of giving birth as a result of which disturbs the balance of her mind. In such condition, the mother is said to be guilty of infanticide which is other than murder. Further, it was soon observed that this act of restricting infanticide to newly born lead towards unjust results. In 1938, this act was extended from newly born to 12 months and it was added that the psychological disturbance of the mother is due to Lactation, the secretion of milk from mammary glands.
The Infanticide Act 1922 now repealed in 1938, is considered to be both in favor of general humanity and not as on one side, it puts an ease towards a woman suffering from psychological disorders during birth, and can be of an unpleasant and unethical act by not considering about the birth of a child as a part of human evolution. Infanticide is considered to be a response to an unwanted birth, which can be prevented by improved sex education and unwanted pregnancies can be prevented by increased contraceptive access which thus results in prevention of infanticide. Legal abortions by using contraceptives increasingly have greatly reduced neonaticide in many developed nations. By thorough observations of psychiatric issues and giving proper clinical help might avert infanticide to those who are in need of it. Neonaticides are reviewed to be happening with such females who deny pregnancies and often go out of contacts in order to restrict human interaction. In a few territories infant portals or safe surrender locales, safe spots to leave a child secretly for a female, are served partially diminishing infanticide. In different spots, similar to the United States, place of refuge laws permit moms to secretly offer newborn children to assigned authorities; they are often situated at healing centers and police and fire stations. Ordinarily such children are set up for selection, or nurtured in halfway houses. Allowing ladies business elevates their standard and self-rule. Possessing a profitable livelihood can lift the apparent standard of females, which can prompt an expansion in the quantity of ladies getting training and lessening in the quantity of female infanticide. Thus, the baby death rate will diminish and financial advancement will increase.

References

Articles and Journals:
Friedman SH, Resnick PJ "Neonaticide: Phenomenology and considerations for prevention". Int J Law Psychiatry 32 (1): (2009).43–7.
Friedman SH, Resnick PJ "Postpartum depression: an update". Women's Health (Lond Engl) 5 (3): (May 2009).287–295.
Maureen Marks "Infanticide" Psychiatry 8 (1): (2009). 10–12.
Maureen Paul. Management of unintended and abnormal pregnancy: comprehensive abortion care. Wiley-Blackwell. (2009) pp. 33–34.

Statues & Acts: * Offences Against the Person Act 1861 CHAPTER 100 24 and 25 Vict * The Infanticide Act 1938 * Infanticide Act 1938, s 1(1) * Australian states of Victoria (Crimes Act 1958,s 6), New South Wales (Crimes Act 1900, s 22A) and Tasmania (Criminal Code Act 1924, s 165A). * An Act to Prevent the Destroying and Murthering of Bastard Children .21 James 1 c 27 1624. * Lord Ellenborough’s Act 42 Geo 3 c 58 1803.

Cases: * R v Cannings [2004] EWCA Crim 01 * R v Gore [2007] EWCA Crim 2789 * R. v. O'Donoghue (1927). 20 Cr. App. R. 132. * K O’Donovan, “The Medicalisation of Infanticide” [1984] Crim LR 259 * Home Office Criminal Department : HO 12/193/92230 (1870)

Books:
Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, 3rd Series, 76, 1844, col. 430-431.
Ryan, William Burke, Infanticide: Its Law, Prevalence, Prevention and History, pp. 45-46.
Vale, Alison, Amelia Dyer, angel maker: the woman who murdered babies for money, (Andre Deutsch), 2007.
Behlmer, George K., Child abuse and moral reform in England 1870-1908, (Oxford University Press), 1982, pp. 25-42
Rose, Lionel, Massacre of the Innocents: Infanticide in Britain 1800-1939.

--------------------------------------------
[ 2 ]. O’Donoghue (1927) 20 Cr App R 132.
[ 3 ]. Infanticide Act 1938, s 1(1).
[ 4 ]. Australian states of Victoria (Crimes Act 1958,s 6), New South Wales (Crimes Act 1900, s 22A) and Tasmania (Criminal Code Act 1924, s 165A).
[ 5 ]. An Act to Prevent the Destroying and Murthering of Bastard Children .21 James 1 c 27 1624.
[ 6 ]. Lord Ellenborough’s Act 42 Geo 3 c 58 1803.
[ 7 ]. K O’Donovan, “The Medicalisation of Infanticide” [1984] Crim LR 259
[ 8 ]. Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, 3rd Series, 76, 1844, col. 430-431.
[ 9 ]. Ryan, William Burke, Infanticide: Its Law, Prevalence, Prevention and History, pp. 45-46.
[ 10 ]. Home Office Criminal Department : HO 12/193/92230 (1870)
[ 11 ]. Vale, Alison, Amelia Dyer, angel maker: the woman who murdered babies for money, (Andre Deutsch), 2007.
[ 12 ]. Behlmer, George K., Child abuse and moral reform in England 1870-1908, (Oxford University Press), 1982, pp. 25-42
[ 13 ]. Rose, Lionel, Massacre of the Innocents: Infanticide in Britain 1800-1939.
[ 14 ]. The Infanticide Act 1922
[ 15 ]. The Infanticide Act 1938
[ 16 ]. Offences Against the Person Act 1861 CHAPTER 100 24 and 25 Vict
[ 17 ]. R v Gore [2007] EWCA Crim 2789
[ 18 ]. R v Cannings [2004] EWCA Crim 01
[ 19 ]. Maureen Marks (2009). "Infanticide" Psychiatry 8 (1): 10–12.
[ 20 ]. Friedman SH, Resnick PJ (2009). "Neonaticide: Phenomenology and considerations for prevention". Int J Law Psychiatry 32 (1): 43–7.
[ 21 ]. Maureen Paul. Management of unintended and abnormal pregnancy: comprehensive abortion care. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 33–34.
[ 22 ]. Friedman SH, Resnick PJ (May 2009). "Postpartum depression: an update". Women's Health (Lond Engl) 5 (3): 287–95.