In September, Texas judge Charlie Baird sentenced a female to 10 years’ probation for problems for a kid by omission. The lady, twenty-year-old Felicia Salazar, admitted that she had neglected to seek medical care for the child’s injuries, which included broken bones that she had failed to protect her 19-month-old child from a brutal beating by the child’s father, Robert Alvarado, and. As well as other, more ordinary probation conditions (including 100 hours of community solution and emotional guidance), the judge ordered Salazar not to ever conceive and keep a kid while on probation.
In this line, We address the relevant concern whether this kind of probation condition unconstitutionally infringes upon Salazar’s fundamental directly to procreate.
The Appropriate Supreme Court Precedents
The U.S. Supreme Court has yet to deal with a full situation that is exactly on point for this kind of probation condition. Nevertheless, two lines of choices are appropriate. One line involves sterilization. The Court upheld the compulsory eugenic sterilization of the “mentally defective” in a case involving a young woman named Carrie Buck in its infamous 1927 decision in Buck v. Bell. The Court reported that “three generations of imbeciles are sufficient.”
The Court – without overruling Buck – invalidated a punishment of sterilization that was imposed upon some, but not all, types of recidivist felons in 1942, however, in Skinner v. Oklahoma. In doing this, the Court stated that procreation is a simple constitutional right and must therefore not be the topic of arbitrary starvation.
In a moment type of situations, the Court has recognized just the right not to procreate, in choices protecting the usage contraception (Eisenstadt v. Continue reading “A woman is ordered by a Judge Not to possess Kids While On Probation: Did He Violate Her Rights?”