The Court of Appeals in New York has ruled that an unborn child still in the womb of its mother is not yet considered a person.
The court made the ruling as it overturned the conviction of Jennifer Jorgensen, who was charged with manslaughter after her unborn child and two other individuals died due to the injuries they suffered during a vehicular accident in 2008.
Jorgensen, who was eight months pregnant during the time of the accident, was found to be driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol, according to Christian News. After she crossed oncoming traffic, she got into a collision with another vehicle driven by couple Robert and Mary Kelly.
The Kellys died because of the accident, while Jorgensen suffered injuries. When she was rushed to the hospital, doctors decided to perform a C-section to save her unborn child. However, after six days, her child died because of injuries suffered during the accident.
She was indicted for aggravated vehicular homicide because of the Kellys' death, driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol, manslaughter in the second degree for the death of her unborn baby, and endangering the welfare of a child in 2009.
However, Jorgensen's lawyers argued that since the baby was inside her womb when the injuries occurred, she could not be held responsible for killing a person. Jorgensen appealed to the New York Court of Appeals, and the latter subsequently reversed her conviction on Thursday.
The judge reasoned that while state law defines manslaughter as any reckless action that causes the death of another person, a person is still defined under homicide law as "a human being who has been born and is alive."
"[H]ad defendant's foetus died in utero, then, plainly, defendant could not have been prosecuted under the manslaughter statute because the foetus would not have fallen under the definition of a 'person,'" Judge Eugene Pigott, Jr. wrote on behalf of the majority. "[Prosecutors] concede that, had defendant not consented to the caesarean section with the result that the child be born alive, she would not have been prosecuted for manslaughter in the second degree."
"Thus, if we accorded the word 'person' the interpretation advocated by the People, it would create a perverse incentive for a pregnant woman to refuse a caesarean section out of fear that if her baby is born alive she would face criminal charges for her alleged reckless conduct, jeopardising the health of the woman and the unborn foetus," he said. "This is plainly not what the legislature intended when it enacted the definition of 'person.'"
