If a specific victim is targeted and there is clear evidence of an intention to cause distress or anxiety, prosecutors should carefully weigh the effect on the victim, particularly where there is a hate crime element to the communication(s): see the section on Hate crime below. A prosecution for an offence under section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 may be in the public interest in such circumstances, particularly if the offence is repeated; alternatively, a prosecution may be merited for an offence under section 127 (2) of the Communications Act 2003 in respect of the persistent use of a public electronic communications network for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, assuming the high threshold for prosecution has been passed.
In the August 2010 issue of Obstetrics & Gynecology the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) published an update of its 1999 and 2004 clinical guidelines for VBAC. This follows the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Development Conference on VBAC (March 2010) findings of the latest research on the safety of VBAC. The revised ACOG guidelines (Practice Bulletin #115 ) reflect a much more positive view on the safety of VBACand make a strong statement in favor of women’s right to make informed decisions about how they want to give birth after a prior cesarean.