<P> As of 2002, 23 states in the United States still employed the rule, to lesser or greater extent . The abolition of the rule has proceeded piecemeal, from case to case and from statute to statute, rather than wholesale . One such landmark case with respect to the rule was Commonwealth vs. Cass, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, where the court held that the stillbirth of an eight - month - old fetus, whose mother had been injured by a motorist, constituted vehicular homicide . By a majority decision, the Supreme Court of Massachusetts held that a viable fetus constituted a "person" for the purposes of vehicular homicide law . In the opinion of the justices, </P> <Table> <Tr> <Td> "</Td> <Td> We think that the better rule is that infliction of perinatal injuries resulting in the death of a viable fetus, before or after it is born, is homicide . </Td> <Td>" </Td> </Tr> </Table> <Tr> <Td> "</Td> <Td> We think that the better rule is that infliction of perinatal injuries resulting in the death of a viable fetus, before or after it is born, is homicide . </Td> <Td>" </Td> </Tr> <P> Several courts have held that it is not their function to revise statute law by abolishing the born alive rule, and have stated that such changes in the law should come from the legislature . In 1970 in Keeler v. Superior Court of Amador County, the California Supreme Court dismissed a murder indictment against a man who had caused the stillbirth of the child of his estranged pregnant wife, stating that, </P>

Keep the child in you alive meaning in hindi