Fetal Alcohol Syndrome in the Argumentative Offense - Essay Example

It will also explain why the court’s judgment was wrong, and then conclude that it is not right to prosecute the people suffering from this disorder, but instead, allow them to get medical attention. The Canadian court argument that Trott, the defendant, is guilty of the offense of slaying Jessica Russell is invalid. This is because; the defendant has been afflicted by a mental disorder, Fetal Alcoholic Syndrome. This disorder has been medically proved to have several traits among them “retardation in growth, microcephaly short palpebral fissures, and poorly developed philtrum, damage to the central nervous system, resulting in neurological disorders, developmental delays, behavioral dysfunction and learning disabilities” (Larry & Ella).

We all know how this can have drastic effects on the victim’s behavior since he cannot think right. I will therefore argue for the view that, the Defendant actions were due to his healthy condition, and it is with no doubt that since he cannot think decently, he did not, at the time of committing the crime, know what he was actually doing. Philosophically, we all know that pressing charges to a person with unsound mind is unjust, and for that reason, fair proceedings should be followed in order to deal with such matters similar the one at hand.

My subsequent argument is that, I believe the offender’s plea of guiltiness should be highly put on consideration. This is because; he is not to blame for a condition that is leading him to commit the crimes. If at all there is any one to put the blame on, is the mother, who ignored the fact that taking alcohol in time of pregnancy could cause irreversible disorders to the child. We all understand that this condition of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome is an avoidable situation, but, if only expectant women can be disciplined and responsible enough to avoid taking alcoholic drinks at the time of their pregnancy.

Given this argument, by pressing charges to the offender, he pays for the mistake that was done by his mother, an act that is against the law. Hence, I believe that we should be well informed and be prepared to deal with criminal cases relating to individuals suffering from mental disorder, like in this case of Trott, rather than unjustly taking legal actions against them (Larry & Ella). In addition, I strongly disagree with the accused lawyer, Howard Smith, and how he gave up following the defendant’s pronouncement to plead being on the wrong side of the law.

The lawyer thought that since the client was suffering from mental disorder, there is nothing that can be done about the condition (Larry & Ella). At first peek, this is a very alluring consideration. However, the lawyer’s assumption is faulty, for the reason that, the offender’s condition is just but one of the uncountable disorder cases that we have in the community. Therefore, the philosopher’s resigning act on condition that the defendant is suffering from Fetal Alcohol Syndrome is not right.

This case needs special medical care, rather than assuming that there is nothing to be done about it. I believe that for justice to prevail, we should put the lawbreaker on probation and send him to a proper rehabilitation centre for medication. This is because confining him in the prison is an act that will not improve the