Article 119a UCMJ – Death or Injury of an Unborn Child
Some charges under the UCMJ don’t fit the usual mold—and Article 119a is one of them. It allows the military to prosecute harm done to an unborn child not as a factor in another crime, but as a distinct offense with its own weight. What catches many service members off guard is that the charge can be filed even if they didn’t know the woman was pregnant. The law views the fetus as an individual victim. So if violence takes place—whether during an assault, a manslaughter incident, or something more severe—and it impacts a pregnancy, Article 119a gives prosecutors a second path for conviction. The penalties are real, and the rules give the government broad reach. If you’re facing this charge, don’t guess your way through it. You need someone who knows this system and has fought these cases before.
What Is Article 119a UCMJ?
This article applies when a violent act results in harm to a fetus during the commission of certain criminal offenses. It doesn’t matter whether the accused was aware of the pregnancy. That detail is not a required element. Article 119a treats the unborn child as a separate victim under military law, creating a second layer of prosecution for a single incident. Importantly, this statute doesn’t cover abortions or medical procedures that have the mother’s consent. It applies strictly to unlawful, violent conduct—nothing else. That’s what gives this charge such sharp edges: one act, multiple charges, and a higher risk of conviction.
Which Offenses Can Trigger Article 119a Charges?
Article 119a is only used alongside certain major offenses. The government can bring a 119a charge if the unborn child is harmed or killed during the commission—or attempted commission—of one of the following crimes:
- Article 118 – Murder
- Article 119 – Voluntary or Involuntary Manslaughter
- Article 120 – Rape
- Article 122 – Robbery
- Article 126 – Arson
- Article 128 – Assault
- Article 128a – Maiming
The law doesn’t require proof that the accused knew about the pregnancy. The focus is on the act itself, and whether it caused harm to the unborn child while one of these qualifying crimes was being committed. If both conditions are met, Article 119a can be charged as a standalone offense.
Offense Categories Under Article 119a UCMJ
1. Injury to an Unborn Child
This applies when the accused commits a violent act against a pregnant woman and that act causes harm to the fetus. The injury doesn’t need to be permanent or severe. Bruises, pain, illness, or short-term impairment can meet the threshold. There’s no requirement to prove knowledge of the pregnancy or intent to harm.
Maximum Punishment: Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and six months of confinement.
2. Unintentional Death of an Unborn Child
In this category, the fetus dies as a result of the act, but there’s no allegation that the accused meant for that to happen. Causation is what matters here—if the act led to the death, the charge can be made.
Maximum Punishment: Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and three years of confinement.
3. Attempted Killing of an Unborn Child
This charge comes up when the accused is believed to have taken real, tangible steps toward causing the death of the fetus. It’s not enough to say it was a thought or a conversation—the government must show that the accused acted on it. Intent has to be proven, and the action must go beyond mere planning.
Maximum Punishment: Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and 15 years of confinement.
4. Intentional Killing of an Unborn Child
The most serious version of this offense. It requires evidence that the accused acted with a direct, knowing purpose to end the life of the unborn child, during the commission of a qualifying violent offense. This is not negligence or recklessness—it’s deliberate action.
Maximum Punishment: Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and 15 years of confinement.
Does Article 119a Criminalize Abortion or Medical Treatment?
It does not. This law is not about abortion or healthcare. If a medical provider performs a procedure the mother consents to, and that procedure results in injury or death to the fetus, it does not trigger Article 119a. The statute is narrowly focused on unlawful violence—not medical decisions made between a patient and a doctor.
Is Knowledge of the Pregnancy Required?
Not in most cases. For charges involving injury or unintentional death, there is no need to prove that the accused knew the woman was pregnant. What matters is what happened—not what the service member understood at the time. But for the government to pursue a charge for attempted or intentional killing, they do need to show both awareness and purpose. That’s the difference. Knowledge and intent become key only at the highest levels of this offense.
Your Rights If You’re Accused
If Article 119a has been mentioned in your case—or if you suspect it might be—what you do next can shape the outcome. Here’s what matters right now:
- Don’t talk. No statements to investigators. No off-the-record explanations. No texts to command.
- Get legal help. Whether it’s a military defense attorney or civilian counsel who understands the UCMJ, speak to someone with real experience.
- Don’t hand over your phone or allow searches. Unless there’s a signed authorization, you’re under no obligation to consent.
This charge has layers. The government will try to build its case quickly. You have to get in front of it early—and you need someone who knows how.
Defending Against Article 119a Charges
Article 119a cases are rarely simple. The details—medical records, gestational development, timing, witness statements—can make or break the prosecution’s theory. In many cases, even the existence of a pregnancy wasn’t known until after the fact. Other times, the alleged link between the act and the fetal harm isn’t as clear as the charge suggests. A strong defense team will challenge the government’s timeline, causation evidence, and assumptions about what the accused knew. It’s not about minimizing the seriousness—it’s about demanding proof at every level.
Joseph L. Jordan – Defense You Can Trust
Joseph L. Jordan, Attorney at Law, is a former Army JAG officer who now represents service members worldwide. With a career built on fighting high-stakes cases inside courtrooms around the globe, Mr. Jordan has handled Article 119a charges with the seriousness and skill they demand. He defends Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, Airmen, Guardians, and Coast Guardsmen from installations at home and abroad. When the charge involves the death or injury of an unborn child, the legal pressure is high—and the command environment can be just as intense. You need a lawyer who’s not guessing. You need one who’s been there, argued it, and won.
📞 Call (888) 256-0348 to speak directly with Joseph L. Jordan. When your freedom, your record, and your rank are on the line, you deserve a defense that’s built for military justice.