Amazon.com Widgets

Should mothers be legally prevented from putting their babies at risk during pregnancy?

  • Yes, it is a human life

    Mothers should not be allowed to put a baby at risk during pregnancy. The baby is its own person and it is the mother's responsibility to care for it. If they do not want to care for a child, then they should not have gotten pregnant in the first place.

  • Yes, mothers should be legally prevented from putting their babies at risk.

    I definitely think that mothers should be legally prevented from putting their babies at risk during pregnancy. I think that a lot of mothers should not be able to do such things as smoke and drink during a pregnancy at risk of being arrested for a crime. I think its a policy that people would support.

  • Why do that?

    Yes, mothers should be legally prevented from putting their babies at risk during pregnancy, because it is the same thing as child abuse. If a mother drinks or smokes while knowing they are pregnant, they should have to answer to society. The unborn child does not have a say, so they should have to protect him or her.

  • They fuck up

    Them fucking up ucks up kids wtf . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . .

  • Mothers should not be legally prevented from endangering the fetus.

    Prosecuting a mother for endangering a fetus has only one result; the woman goes to prison. Now this mother has a criminal record, has done time in jail, and has little future of being able to support the child because of something like drinking wine while pregnant. The morality clause is no reason to interfere with a woman's ability to carry a child. If any laws were to be created like this, they could only apply after the third trimester.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.