Court Opinion

ID: 9718125
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 07:17:22.899744+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:57.461759
License: Public Domain

Holbrook, J.
(dissenting). The facts of this case are analogous to the Biblical account of Moses’ parents circumventing an Egyptian infanticide law by placing him in an ark of bulrushes along a river’s bank. There, as here, plans and preparation were directed to the well being of an infant in the face of seemingly adverse circumstances.1 The defendant, not unlike Moses’ sister “stood afar off, to wit what would be done to him.” Exodus, 2:4. As an omniscient and omnipresent observer she regulated to a great degree the events leading to the proper care of her child that was ill. This, from her testimony, was her only intent, which was not disputed. The need *532for- immediate medical attention for her infant prompted the action. Her act may be criticized but should not be condemned and punished.
I am persuaded that the evidence herein was insufficient to establish the necessary element of intent to abandon beyond a reasonable doubt.2 Defendant did not design or intend to commit a wrongful act— i.e., the abandonment of her child; and the employment of a dubious course of action to obtain the necessary medical attention should not be interpreted as wilful and intentional abandonment.3 The child was taken to receiving hospital and given the necessary medical attention for several days. While the child was in the hospital, the mother called the hospital and visited the child daily.
For these reasons I am constrained to voice dissent and find that the trial court should be reversed.

 Defendant was separated from her husband who had refused to pay for the necessary eare and medical attention of the infant. She was completely without funds to obtain such services and, without funds, she knew of no way to have her baby receive immediate hospitalization or medical attention except through the action she pursued.

 “In order to constitute the offense of abandonment, under statutes of the character under consideration, there must be an intention wholly to abandon the child and entirely sever, so far as possible, the parental relation and to throw off all obligations growing out of the same.” (Pootnote omitted.) 46 CJ, Parent and Child, § 206, p 1349.

 CDS 1961, § 750.136 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.331).