As always, you can find the Dobbs v. Jackson decision here.
Paragraph 5 of 8
Sentence 3 of 5
The next sentence provides some support for the current train of thought:
“Hale wrote that if a physician gave a woman ‘with child’ a ‘potion’ to cause an abortion, and the woman died, it was ‘murder’ because the potion was given ‘unlawfully to destroy her child within her.’ 1 Hale 429–430 (emphasis added).”
It is true that Matthew Hale wrote this in his History of the Pleas of the Crown. I’ve found the text online–page 394 of the PDF has the cited sentence, but pages 429-430 of Hale’s original document runs from page 392 to page 395 of the PDF.
It is true that Matthew Hale wrote this in his History of the Pleas of the Crown. I’ve found the text online–page 394 of the PDF has the cited sentence, but pages 429-430 of Hale’s original document runs from page 392 to page 395 of the PDF.
“But if a woman be with child, and any gives her a potion to destroy the child within her, and she takes it, and it works so strongly, that it kills her, this is murder, for it was not given to cure her of a disease, but unlawfully to destroy her child within her, and therefore he that gives a potion to this end, must take the hazard, and if it kill the mother, it is murder, and so ruled before me at the assizes at Bury in the year 1670.”
There’s a complication, though. In this passage by Hale, the attempt to end the pregnancy is called “unlawful,” but not “murder,” as the Dobbs Court seems to claim. The death of the pregnant woman is murder in this scenario, but there is no label for the attempted abortion beyond “unlawful.” It looks like the writer is trying to use the word “it” as an ambiguity pivot to imply Hale is calling the abortion murder. Or it could be a simple case of pronoun confusion—just sloppy writing. Or something in the next few sentences could justify everything about this sentence. Nothing to see here, move along, Johnny, etc.
So although this reads as a false claim, I’m going to file it under “undetermined” for now:
- “Hale wrote that if a physician gave a woman ‘with child’ a ‘potion’ to cause an abortion, and the woman died, it was ‘murder’ because the potion was given ‘unlawfully to destroy her child within her.’”
