a question of rights
The BBC News website has posted a story today about a convicted murderer who has re-requested the right to father a child via artificial insemination. He and his wife, who he met via a penpal scheme when she was also in prison, believe that their previously turned down request is a violation of the Human Rights Convention.
All kind of thoughts come to mind at this request. There’s the nature/nurture debate - would the child of two convicted criminals, one a murderer, be psychologically stable? Should a convicted man have the right to conceive a child whilst in jail? Isn’t one of the points of incarceration to punish the criminal for wrong doing, and keep them away from society? The request stems mainly from the fact that his wife will likely be too old to conceive by his earliest release date, and at 48 may well encounter difficulties anyway. The couple claim that their “rights to respect for private and family life” and “rights to marry and found a family” are being violated. When you’re convicted of a crime, those rights - the rights of a free man - should be forfeit until such time as you’ve completed your sentence.
How dare they argue that his rights are violated? Does his murder victim have any chance to have children and see them grow up? It may be unfortunate for Mrs Dickson, who is now free and wants to father a child with her husband, and others may well argue, but I sincerely hope that the European Court of Human Rights upholds their previous decision.




