of W.Va. Code § 61-8D-4a would lead to criminalizing conduct—the prenatal ingestion of drugs—when it results in the birth of a live child, while not criminalizing the same conduct if the unborn child dies in útero. This problem was addressed by the Supreme Court of North Dakota, which ruled that a pregnant woman is not criminally liable for the endangerment of a child for prenatal conduct that harms a subsequently born child. The court stated that to rule otherwise “would create an absurd result. It would criminalize conduct that is not a crime at the time the conduct occurs, is not a crime if the unborn child dies in útero, but is a crime only by virtue of its effect on the child born alive.” State v. Stegall, 828 N.W.2d 526, 533 (N.D. 2013). Nevertheless, the State argues th (<HOLDING>); State v. Gray, 62 Ohio St.3d 514, 584 N.E.2d
holding an unborn child is not a child for purposes of criminal prosecution of mistreatment of a child holding an unborn child is a child for purposes of prosecuting chemical endangerment of a child holding a mothers ingestion of a controlled substance while pregnant does not constitute child abuse as an unborn child is not a person for purposes of criminal prosecution holding that an unborn child is not a dependent for purposes of the neglect statute holding a fetus is not a child person or individual for purposes of criminal prosecution under the reckless injury to a child statute