About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

34 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 1 (1996-1997)
Mothers Who Kill: Coming to Terms with Modern American Infanticide

handle is hein.journals/amcrimlr34 and id is 13 raw text is: MOTHERS WHO KILL: COMING TO TERMS WITH MODERN AMERICAN INFANTICIDE Michelle Oberman* I. INTRODUCTION ....................................... 2 II. AMBIVALENCE ABOUT INFANTICIDE ACROSS TIME AND PLACE.... 6 A. Infanticide and the Pattern of Lenience: A Study in British Legal H istory ..................................... 7 1. The Jacobean Law of 1623: A Presumption of Guilt In British Infanticide Cases ........................... 9 2. Nineteenth Century British Infanticide Law Reform ........ 11 3. De Jure Lenience: Great Britain's Twentieth Century Infanticide Statute ................................ 14 B. Contemporary Infanticide Statutes: A Cross-Cultural Pattern of Lenience Toward Infanticide ........................... 17 III. INFANTICIDE, AMERICAN STYLE: OUTRAGE AND AMBIVALENCE IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN CASES ......................... 20 A. Latent Signs of a Modern Epidemic ..................... 20 B. Neonaticide ....................................... 22 1. Neonaticide Described ............................ 23 2. Neonaticide in the Criminal Justice System ............... 25 3. Ambivalence About Neonaticide: A Case Study ........... 27 C. Infanticide ........................................ 30 1. Infanticide Described .............................. 31 a. Infanticide and Postpartum Psychosis ............... 33 b. Infanticide by Mothers with Chronic Mental Disabilities.. 36 * Associate Professor, DePauf University College of Law. J.D., M.P.H., 1988, University of Michigan; B.A., 1983, Cornell University. Heartfelt thanks are due to the many readers who commented upon early drafts of this Article. Among these are the participants at Cornell University's Program in Ethics and Public Life's Young Scholar Workshop, with special thanks to Kathryn Abrams, Katharine Baker, Bernardine Dohm, Dorothy Roberts, and Henry Shue. The following readers provided critical insights and suggestions from a variety of perspectives: John Decker, Harold Krent, Stephen Landsman, Jane Larson, Larry Marshall, Sallyanne Payton, Michael Perlin, Nancy Press, Jane Rutherford, Stephen Schulhofer, Steven Siegel, Jeffrey Urdangen, Mark Weber, and Melissa Whelan, and members of the Chicago Area Feminist Law Colloquium. Heather Fields, J.D., 1996, DePaul University, worked with me over the course of her three years at DePaul, providing me with assistance that far surpassed the call of duty. My research assistants Candice Bowen, Dawn Best, Bethany Hengsbach, and Geri Thomas willingly undertook the laborious tasks associated with helping me pull together the grim research findings on which this article is based. The supportive attitude and helpful feedback of the editors at the AMERICAN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW eased the painful process of revision. Finally, I thank Dean John Roberts and the DePaul Faculty Research Fund for the generous support that made this Article possible. Special thanks also to Quijote and Ursula.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most