Causing death of an unborn child

[tomyoung90]

I wonder if anybody could help me with this query. I've done some cursory research which hasn't thrown up any hard and fast result, but I'm in the middle of exams and can't dedicate the time required for a suitable answer.

If an employer refused to allow a pregnant employee to attend hospital after feeling pain, resulting in the miscarriage of the baby, what would the ramifications be, both criminally and in tort? I know that it couldn't be any type of involuntary manslaughter as the baby was not independent of its mother, but it must surely be a criminal offence? The employer's attitude was 'if you leave your station, you leave your job'.

Thanks in advance for any answers.

[FredPuli43]

The Infant Life Preservation Act, 1929,provides that anyone who by any wilful act causes the death of any child capable of being born alive, is guilty of an offence. Maximum sentence: life imprisonment.

Proof that a woman has been pregnant for 28 weeks is to be taken as presumptive proof that the child is capable of being born alive. ( Crimes Act 1958)

Liability in tort; obvious . But you may have a problem of causation

[FredPuli43]

The offence is called 'child destruction' ,in case you're wondering , and it would appear as such on the indictment . (Not that many people have seen an indictment for it recent times, or at all)

[shoota]

I think that if the mother was free to leave and attend hospital, ie not physically prevented rfom going, then the fault lies with her.
Harsh but which is more important?

[shoota]

from even.....

[bednobs]

didnt that bloke in wales who set fire to the pg girl's flat get child destruction added?