Commonsense judgments of infanticide - Murder, manslaughter, madness, or miscellaneous?

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 teach 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.