Martin,
Coming from a statistical viewpoint- what you seem to have missed is that the law in the case of spousal homicide is currently skewed heavily in favour of men who kill their partners in a rage and get away with it, and against women who kill in self defence. This "tilting" is evening it up.

Laura Gilbert, Oxford,

Many seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that this is a sudden change - it's not. The increasing interchangeability between the partial defences of provocation and diminished responsibility have been under review by the law Commission for years and this is a step towards clarification.

Rowan Binns, Chertsey, England

another wimmins' charter?wait for all men accused of rape shall be presumed guilty

peter c, devizes, wessex

Adultery is not being legalised here - adultery is not a crime in English law...

Hannah Kennedy, Cambridge, UK

The end of 'the provocation defence' means that 100 people will no longer 'escape' conviction for murder.

These same people will escape a murder conviction as they have been 'seriously wronged' and be convicted of manslaughter.

Isn't this what should happen now under existing Law?

J D S, Cardiff, UK

"The provocation defence is no longer relevant in modern society" Really? So human beings have stopped being human have they? We are now all completely rational, dispassionate and unemotional all of the time? Maybe in left wing la-la land.
Social control gone mad. Get these people out of power

James, Edinburgh,

Seriously wronged by someone's words and conduct?! just another dose of ambiguity added to the legal system, is that political motive i smell!

Daniel Bisby, Hull, England

Harriet Harman has taken the Law Commission's proposals and twisted them for her own political ends. And as it has been said previously her argument is fundamentally flawed. She condemns one type of domestic violence whilst condoning another. Her feminist agenda could not be more obvious.

Stephane Osborne, Manchester, England

I agree with Miriam Binder. Furthermore, I am convinced that judging by the number of sensible and, in the majority of cases, clever men this would have been ok'd by to be passed as an actual change in legislation it cannot be the mere fanciful whims and ramblings of the die-hard feminist Ms Harman.

Christine, Southampton, UK

Wonderfully complex! This could have been designed for lawyers wanting to get their snouts in the trough before someone, hopefully, returns this country to something resembling commonsense administration and law.

D.Henry, Edinburgh, Scotland UK

on average women suffer 70 beatings before they take matters to the police. The majority of complaints are dropped before they get to court. Those in court are often terrified and physically sick. Domestic violence has only been addressed by police in recent years- women victims suffered silently

Carolyn Rhodes, Belfast,

Seriously wronged by someone's words and conduct? What a total mess- how is this additional category necessary when self defence will quite rightly stay in place as a defence? You can just imagine a gangland killing where the defendant claims he/she was seriously wronged.....

Adam, Brighton,

Harriet Harman's the Minister for Women. Refresh my memory somebody, who's the Minister for Men?

Derek, Taunton, UK

Charles Byrnell; there is a difference between legalising adultery and saying you cant kill an adulterer and get away with it!

Rebecca Krasner, Jerusalem ,

Self-defence is only a valid defence if under attack right then. It has nothing to do with Ms Harman being biased - have a look at the actual cases of domestic violence and the inadequate defences of provocation/self-defence if the victim attempts to free themself when they are likely to succeed.

Trina Mell, Rosebud, Australia

This has nothing to do with religion or feminism, but is recognition of the unique psychological trauma suffered by victims of domestic violence which cannot be pigeonholed into the defence of provocation, and acknowledges that adultery can never excuse or justify murder.

Hannah Ashton, London,

I think this is designed so that the man that breaks and lashes out in mindless reaction and accidentally kills an unfaithful or abusive wife, will now face life, but the wife that plots her "freedom" through mindfully murdering an abusive husband will get off scot free! More sexist legislation!

Ken Hall, Barrow-in-Furness, UK

This is the feminist movement on the attack again. To deliberately injure someone, for whatever reason, that results in their death is murder. The ridiculously named 'life sentence' should mean just that, not 10-15 years as is the case right now.

Don, Oxford, UK

The new proposals should be welcomed, not discredited in a "feminists are taking over the world" wave of irrational fear. The provocation defence is no longer relevant in modern society. And like it or not, women traditionally need more protection in absuive relationships - face facts!

Chris Greig, Aberdeen, Scotland

Self defence is a defence of the moment - I hit you because you were hitting me.

What this proposes is that a man or woman who has suffered prolonged abuse form a partner and eventually snaps has a defence in that situation.

This is redressing the balance, while also helping battered husbands.

Joss, MK, UK

Surely by introducing this defence, gender inequalities will be balanced; far more men currently evade life sentence by pleading provocation than women. What I want to know is whether the new law will be extended to include those suffering sexual or emotional abuse as well

K, London, UK

Killing is always wrong and must be punished. Self defence is clearly excluded but no man or woman has the right to kill someone because of infidelity. A civilised society cannot result to violence to deal with life situations.

Andy Ceccanti, london,

This act is a response to common defences by (mostly) men who use domestic violence against their partners and claim "crime of passion" to get off. Its so common! This act will do away with that excuse and get the psychos the punishment they deserve. Domestic violence is a real problem here.

Elaine, London,

This man hating feminist needs to be sacked... in fact this Govt needs to be sacked!

"people who kill because they feel seriously wronged by someone’s “words and conduct” could escape a murder conviction"

Watch as droves of gang members get off by claiming the person they killed was racist!

Dean, Southampton, England

This defence doesn't make it "ok to kill" - it is a partial defence which if successfully pled will reduce a murder charge to manslaughter and will thus give discretion in sentencing, allowing the judge to take account of the reason for killing - really important and fair in cases like these.

ALP, Manchester, UK

I seem to remember my Mum telling me that 2 wrongs never make a right. Murder is murder. It's not gender specific.

W Smith, Manchester,

What is also important here is to look at the societal deficiencies which lead to men killing their wives.

1. Emotionally illiterate/malevolent mothers failing to engage empathically with their sons.
2. Adult men and women not demonstrating to children how to resolve conflict.
3. (Fe)male evil.

Rhys Jaggar, Leeds, UK

Neither sex should be offended by adultery. It is up to both to keep a relationship going. If a relationship fails the more mature should have the decency to leave. Men perpetuate much physical aggression and if these laws help curb this, then good. Words don't kill, people do! If unhappy leave!

kevin, Lincoln, UK

Harman made it clear on TV this morning; this is aimed solely at putting more men in prison. There was no mention of women who might kill men in similar circumstances. Women have undoubtedly been treated unfairly over the centuries, but it should be about equality not revenge shouldn't it?

Dave, Croydon, UK

Clearly there will still be a burden of proof on the defendant to prove a sustained pattern of abuse, and clearly it will not be an absolute defence because it won't result in acquittal.

And just because this defence is available doesn't mean it will work. Give our judges some credit...

Gareth, St Peter Port, UK

Firstly this law is not designed to benefit either sex it is a response to years of examining the legal systen and the main perpetrators happen to be male!! And for those of you who contend that an affair counts as abuse are you seriously trying to justify killing someone for that reason-I hope not!

Jess, London,

What about a girl who "seriously wrongs" her family by having a relationship against their wishes?
Honour killing will be downgraded, then??

Graham Rounce, London, UK

What does Ruth think?

martin, sheffield, uk

" essentially commonplace and people need to be able to deal with them "

Sorry mate, lost your wife to a lover on the side, house and children - deal with it.

Whilst adultery shouldn't be illegal, the law is essentially promoting it through its apathetic stance.

Howard, Manchester,

"Why shdn't divorce & adultery be 'legal' - it's up to each individual how they conduct their personal life."

Not unless it involves hurting your partner. Shouldn't adultery qualify as psychological abuse anyway? This new law is contradicting itself.

Howard, Manchester,

So, a woman can kill a man with impunity, but when a victimised man finally turns and kills a vicious wife it is murder. What happened to legal equity? Do they sell holiday homes on Mount Athos by any chance?

Richard, Norwich, UK

It may be that mostly male defendants escape murder convictions for manslaughter. But in terms of percentages, one might expect that women comprise the greater escapees. And if that doesn’t raise questions, Harriet, you are not thinking rightly.

Franco Carrieri, Bow, UK

We welcome the Minister's comments .However,last week ,the government rejected recommendations by the Home Affairs Committee on domestic violence, around commissioning and funding services for perpetrator programmes, failing to recognise the key role preventive programmes have in reducing violence

Everyman Project, London, UK

NUTS
1."people who kill because they feel seriously wronged"
This is a murderer's charter. It legitimises those hoodlums who knife people for "dissing" them;
2.The law never recognised "crime of passion" as a defence!
3.Murder and Manslaughter have pracrtically same penalty so agree with Rob H.

Amin Aswet, Gibraltar,

Sorry I seem to have lost the plot. As far as self defense is concerned. If you feel in fear of your life; that would be a defense on murder. Other reasons given would only be mitigating circumstances to be taken into account when sentence is given. Or has like many things, has the law been twisted

bill, cornwall,

Excuse me, but it seems that under these proposals, a woman can kill and man who she anticipates may harm her without being guilty of murder (though presumably, still manslaughter), but a man who finds his wife in bed with some other bloke will now have no defence at all to reduce the charge. Unfair

A.N, London, UK

True we do have self defence to murder charges, but this only deals with situations where an individual is facing a direct physical threat - it doesn't deal with the 'slow burn' cases where, for example, a partner kills their abusive partner after years of abuse, nor currently does provocation

Vicky, London,

A successful defence of provocation would not result in acquittal. The murder charge is reduced to manslaughter where the Judge may impose a life sentence, mandatory for murder. The sentence would fit the crime. So what is the purpose or point of Harriet Harman's reforms?

Rob H, MCR,

Charles Brynell: we're not living in the 17thC. Whilst based on Jewish/Christian principles, our law has evolved over 100s of years. Why shdn't divorce & adultery be 'legal' - it's up to each individual how they conduct their personal life.Morals are personal, they can't be imposed by the State.

Donna Walker, Effingham, England

Am I understanding this correctly? Don't we already have the "self defence" argument to counter a murder charge? Or are these changes designed to tilt the law against men and in favour or women? Ms Harman certainly seems to think so. But then she would, wouldn't she?

Martin, Newmarket, Suffolk

An act of apostacy? Like it or not, we have a secular government and quite rightly too. Do we really need to be ruled by the constraints of the organised religion that happens to be flavour of the month?

Miriam Binder, Brighton, UK

As for the gender bias ... surely that depends entirely on the wording of the act. Provided it uses non-gender specific terms - spouse/parter/significant other - then it would apply equally ... which it should anyway in my opinion.

Miriam Binder, Brighton, UK

So, a man using physical violence is a defense, but a woman using physcological abuse no longer is?

Greg, Surrey,

So a woman can legally kill a man just by claiming that they were beaten? Does nobody else see a problem with this? This Govt is plain nuts.

Ian, Tokyo, Japan

Ms Harman evidently likes the "battered woman syndrome" defense, now discredited even in the U.S. The defense, which treats murder as preemptive self-defense, has been attempted almost exclusively for women murdering men in their sleep. UK men: wake up and resist this ultra-feminist legal atrocity.

Jason Masson, Geneva, Switzerland

so much talk about women abused !! how many men suffer daily beatings by unfaithful wives ? they know the goverment will make it profitable to sleep with some one other than a childs father. csa ? they get their cut . who loses only the children and fathers ? who gains only the goverment and mothers

graham dean, swansea , wales

I never agree with crime of pasion been and escuse to kill a person, but from that to say adultery is not wrong doing... it does not make sense then to go on saying that words and acctions can be partial defence, but not in case of adultery. Isn't it adultery an offense to our core values?

jr, bournemouth,

all this is nonsense, what is it exactly that stops a person to divorce his/her partener in case of domestic violence? How can we make it ok to kill a partener, by saying he/her was violent? infidelity commonplace? So, infidelity is not wrong? sorry i'm lost here.

jr, bournemouth,

Wrong. Wrong.Wrong. We cannot have leglislation founded on the man-hating myths held by Harriet Harman, minority pressure groups, and government paid think-tanks . What is absent from these misguided proposals is common justice, and the informed views of ordinary solicitors and judges.

Steward James, Birmingham, UK

Much more important , they should legalise suicide and provide euthanasia on demand then there would be no need for assisted suicides. There are many cases all the time when a person may be beyond medical treatment and a long painful and humiliating death is the only outcome. Make it legal in the UK

m wilson, bidache, france

This is nothing but the abolition of the crime of adultery, being a further act of apostacy of an apostate government.

Since 1960s the morals of this country have been dictated by irreligious lawyers pursuing a feminist agenda. It started with legalizing divorce and now legalization of adultery.

Charles Byrnell, Fleet, UK