Commonsense judgments of infanticide

V. Dobson and B. Sales (2000) have found that law and science do not align over infanticide. In the present article, the authors examine commonsense justice and how community sentiment judges infanticide cases. First, analzing archival data, the authors find that sentiment has changed over some 450 years, roller coastering from lenient, to harsh, to lenient. Second, analyzing current trends, the authors find indications that sentiment is changing toward harshness. And third, a harsher direction is documented through an experiment in which 4 variables (each with 3 levels) were manipulated: time (neonaticide vs. filicides), depression (its severity and support by psychiatric experts), age (of defendant), and manner (the violence of the death). A complex picture emerges in the verdict, sentencing, and dispositional patterns--a picture that does not look like either murder, manslaughter, or madness. Beyond documenting that commonsense infanticide stands apart from the law, the authors identify reasons for this disconnect and offer suggestions for the two to move into closer alignment

Criminology · Homicide · Injury prevention · Medical emergency · Poison control · Child Abuse and Trauma · Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health · Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse · Medicine · Psychology

• Emotions and culpability

  Norman J Finkel, W Gerrod Parrott•Emotions And Culpability: How the…•2006

  Añadir item

• Judgment under Uncertainty

  Amos Tversky, Daniel Kahneman•Utility, Probability, and Human…•1975

  Añadir item

• Commonsense justice

  Norman J Finkel, Bruce D Sales•Psychology Public Policy and Law•1997

  Añadir item

• Principals and Accessories in Capital Felony-Murder

  Open Access•Norman J Finkel, Stefanie F Smith•Law & Society Review•1993

  Añadir item