Cruelty to a child under sixteen years
The prosecution case in relation to Count * is that D** neglected C** by failing to provide adequate medical aid and failed to take her to a doctor or hospital on **. She denies this, saying that she herself gave adequate medical treatment.
Someone is guilty of an offence, if having attained the age of sixteen and having responsibility for a child under that age she wilfully neglects that child, in a manner likely to cause her unnecessary suffering or injury to health. Breaking that down into the various elements of the charge, you would have to sure of the following before the offence is proved:
a person having attained the age of sixteen
There is no dispute that D** is aged over sixteen.
having responsibility for the child under sixteen
Again, there is no dispute either, that as her mother, D** had responsibility for C**, or that C** was aged under 16.
wilfully neglected C** in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury to health
A parent liable to maintain a child, as D** was, is deemed to have neglected her in a manner likely to cause injury to her health if she has failed to provide adequate medical aid or has failed to take steps to procure that it be provided.
The word “wilfully” means that there must have been deliberate neglect of the child.
A parent “wilfully” fails to prove adequate medical attention for a child if she either deliberately fails to do so, knowing that there is some risk that the child’s health may suffer unless she receives such attention, or does so because she does not care whether the child may be in need of medical treatment or not. There is no suggestion in this case that D** did not care whether to not C** needed medical treatment, so the issue is whether or not D** deliberately failed to do obtain medical aid, knowing that there was some risk that the C**’s health might suffer unless she received such attention.
A parent, who knows that her child needs medical care and deliberately, that is by a conscious decision, refrains from calling a doctor or taking her to hospital, is guilty.
But a parent who has genuinely failed to appreciate that her child needs medical care, whether through personal inadequacy, stupidity, or some other reason, is not guilty.
So, the questions which you must answer in relation to Count * are:
1. Are you sure that, after being burnt, C** needed more medical aid than D** gave and/or needed to see a doctor or be taken to hospital? If you are sure that the answer to this question is yes, move on to question 2. If you consider that it may be that the defendant’s treatment was adequate and that there was no need for C** to see a doctor, she is not guilty and you do not need to consider any of the further questions.
2. Are you sure that D** knew that C** needed more medical aid than she provided and/or needed to see a doctor or be taken to hospital and that her health might be at risk if she were not provided with it? If you are sure that the answer to this question is yes, move on to question 3. If the answer is no, she is not guilty and you do not need to consider the last question.
3. Are you sure that by a conscious decision D** decided not to give C** more medical aid or not to take her to a doctor or to hospital? If you are sure that the answer to this question is yes, she is guilty of Count *. If the answer is no, she is not guilty of Count *.
back to criminal law back to home