Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Forced sterilisation. Who is bu?

177 replies

pyjamaramadrama · 10/03/2014 11:06

My boyfriend and I got into a heated debate over this at the weekend.

We were speaking about someone I know 'of', she's had 8 children, there are 5 different fathers and some dispute over the paternity of the children. The children have all been neglected, emotionally and physically abused and are now all in care and have unfortunately been separated as they all had different needs and physical and behavioural problems due to what they have been through. She is now pregnant again and the baby will be taken straight into care.

My boyfriend thinks that she should be sterilised because she will just go on having more babies who will be taken straight into care. I think that he is wrong.

My argument against is that where would you draw the line? This woman's situation is extreme, but would it open the door for other 'undesirables' to be sterilised? I also said that she may still turn her life around, unlikely, but she could.

His opinion is that even if she did turn her life around, she's ruined all those young lives and doesn't deserve a second chance, he compared it to killing somebody, I made the point that even murderers get a second chance.

I asked him if he also thought that runaway dads should be sterilised, he said that they should. See how the gates have opened?

I'm pretty sure that most on MN wouldn't agree with forced sterilisation, but I'd be really interested to hear some intelligent arguments about why this could never work. Or perhaps some people think he has a point.

OP posts:
Dinosaursareextinct · 10/03/2014 20:40

Are you for real, Donna?
You think that women should be given the choice of sterilisation or homelessness and starvation (including the homelessness and starvation of their current children)?
And that's how you define VOLUNTARY sterilisation, is it?

Original poster
pyjamaramadrama · 10/03/2014 20:45

This woman wasn't actually a single parent, she has had several relationships but at no point has she been a single parent so the fathers would all need to be sterilised.

As for linking it to benefits, it's not only benefit claimants who neglect or abuse their children.

OP posts:
Purplepoodle · 10/03/2014 20:46

I wouldn't sterilise but I would force her to have the contraceptive implant as it can be reversed.

RiverTam · 10/03/2014 20:52

of course it should not be linked to benefits. But I don't agree with the view that I think many (a surprising number, imo) MNers hold, that every woman has the right to procreate till the cows come home, regardless of how utterly useless, feckless, abusive, neglectful and downright shite she (and any other adult in the household, but we're talking about mothers here) is as a parent. And 8 children in, that is an unarguably fact. I would have implemented this after child 3 or 4, to be honest.

Children have the right not to be born to useless wasters like this, and frankly their rights should trump hers. To allow her to continue to have children, even if removed at birth - what's that all about? Is she there to provide for couples who want to adopt a baby? And as a PP said - what about all the children who don't get adopted - their outlook is pretty grim, and probably the cycle will begin again.

It won't ever happen, of course, and there will still be a trail of unwanted, unlooked-after children starting on their long journey through care, institutionalisation and so on. Which, to my mind, doesn't sound much better.

Dinosaursareextinct · 10/03/2014 20:56

It's really shocking what some people have said on this thread. Once you introduce law to force sterilisation or long term contraception, people like this will push it further and further. Before long no-one on benefits will be allowed to procreate.

SeaSickSal · 10/03/2014 21:00

I do not agree with sterilisation but I am in favour of court ordered contraception. Mainly because a friend fosters 3 little boys with fetal alcohol from the same mother and is expecting to have a 4th sibling with the same condition join her after it's birth later this year.

When children keep being born with these terrible disabilities and they have no intention of even trying to stop drinking the women doing it just need to be stopped.

Original poster
pyjamaramadrama · 10/03/2014 21:01

Rivertam I'd like to say that such extreme cases as this are rare, but sadly they aren't that rare, there are 1000's of children going through the care system each day. And 1000's more who probably should be in care but stay in dire circumstances because there isn't enough space for them all to be accommodated.

Although it's rare to have so many children after 1, 2 or 3 have been taken, so I'm not sure how many children sterilising would save.

I know I'm sort of contradicting myself there.

OP posts:
Bogeyface · 10/03/2014 21:07

River you a making a massive mistake in assuming that because many of us are against forced contraception or sterlisation that we must support the right to continue to birth children that the parent is incapable of caring for.

What we are saying is that if you introduce something like this for women such as in the OP, where would it stop?

Who would decide who gets sterilised and who doesnt? Social workers? Given the massive fuck ups by SS in recent years I dont think anyone would be happy with that.

A court? Who would pay for that? Would the women get legal representation? That could imply a level of criminality to a woman who got pregnant after having chilren removed, which is crashingly unfair given that sterilisations and contraception do fail (the failure rate is 10 times higher for women than men after sterilisation).

Whatever you feel about women like this continuing to have children (and the men who impregnate them), you simply can not live in a democratic liberal society and have all of the benefits of that society (one man one vote, freedom of speech etc) and at the same time take control of other peoples bodies on the basis that you dont agree with their life decisions.

Bogeyface · 10/03/2014 21:07

How many babies are actually removed at birth in the UK? Does anyone know?

Original poster
pyjamaramadrama · 10/03/2014 21:15

I'm not sure Bogeyface but I imagine that after 1, 2, 3 children the rate must get lower.

I mean children will usually be taken into care at an older age with their siblings.

Women who become pregnant every year are rarer but it does happen.

OP posts:
Bogeyface · 10/03/2014 21:15

Just had a look and there were over 800,000 births in the UK in the year of June 2011- June 2012. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23618487

There was an article in the Fail (sorry but the best I could find) that suggest that "hundreds" are taken in to care at birth. That is a very very small number compared to the numbers of births. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2408192/Tragedy-4-000-babies-placed-risk-register--theyre-born.html

So despite what has been asserted about "these women", the number is actually very low.

TOADfan · 10/03/2014 21:24

I think its a disgrace these women/mem can have children when others are desperately trying to have kids and cant.

The world is majorly over populated as it is.

Bogeyface · 10/03/2014 21:27

I think its a disgrace these women/mem can have children when others are desperately trying to have kids and cant.

The world is majorly over populated as it is.

Eh? Am I the only who see's the dichotomy here?!

TOAD - forcing "these" people to stop having children wont help the infertile conceive, and surely you wouldnt want those who cant have children to conceive anyway, as the world is already over populated. Hmm

Dinosaursareextinct · 10/03/2014 21:27

Toad - there is no link whatever between "these women" having children and those with fertility problems not having children. So no, it's not a disgrace, it's the way of nature, or whatever.

WestieMamma · 10/03/2014 21:29

I'm gobsmacked that anyone would give JustCallMeDave and his mates this power. You really want them to have ultimate say over whether you can have a child? Because that's what it comes down to.

RiverTam · 10/03/2014 21:35

It's not just this thread, Bogey - I'm not that dim. But if you hear about something awful like this and make the suggestion that perhaps an abortion or sterilization (not forced) would have been the better option, a load of people pile on defending women's 'right' to have children regardless. I don't buy that right, I'm afraid. I also think that too many children are left with their useless parents too long - more should be removed at birth, for the benefit of the children, which is what is important here.

It won't happen, I know that, and I know that's right. But when you hear a story like this, I wish it could, and I don't apologise for wishing that.

Dinosaursareextinct · 10/03/2014 21:39

You've made it pretty clear that you support forced sterilisation, though, haven't you River? Non-forced sterilisation is already freely available.

RevoltingPeasant · 10/03/2014 21:39

Am I the only person who feels the least shred of pity for this woman?

Yes, she has had 8 children. Probably trying to make up for the ones taken away from her. By that, I do not mean for a second that she should be allowed to keep them, but my God, can you not imagine how she must be grieving? Do you all think she is likely to be some benefit claiming caricature laughing all the way to the bank and thumbing her nose at social workers?

I think it is much more likely that she has had some deeply fucked up things happen to her. Perhaps she was in care herself? Or abused? Has anybody thought to ask why she continues to behave in such a destructive way?

Just a thought, a small girl who is in care now and who has been horribly damaged may in a few short years start acting out in deeply unattractive and antisocial ways. Would all the people on this thread now showing pity for these poor children turn on them as women if they turned to defuse had their own children and started the cycle all over again?

Dinosaursareextinct · 10/03/2014 21:42

Yes, no-one in their right mind conceives a child in the knowledge that it will be seized by SS at birth.
I wonder how much help the woman has been given? And how much education about contraception.

RiverTam · 10/03/2014 21:44

in this case, yes I do. But I can totally see the argument against and, as I have now said several times, I know it won't and can't happen. But the idea of this woman, and others like her, bringing child after child after child into abuse and neglect - that turns my stomach more. And yes, I do feel sorry for her - but I feel a whole lot more sorry for her children, who are far more deserving of our pity.

I can support things in theory whilst knowing that they are unworkable in practice.

Bogeyface · 10/03/2014 21:46

River I think that the reason that children arent taken away sooner is because life in care is, for most, far worse than life at home. Children are only taken in extreme circumstances because taking a child into care is such a massive thing.

The care system needs a massive overhaul, with more foster carers who get better support than they currently do. Many fostering placements and adoptions fail because the adults and children concerned are not given the right help and support. Until that changes, children will be left in less than ideal home situations because it is still marginally better than care.

Original poster
pyjamaramadrama · 10/03/2014 21:48

I do revoltingpheasant although I know that isn't a popular way to think.

Usually people who end up in these circumstances have had horrific things happen to them in their own lives.

OP posts:
mrsjay · 10/03/2014 21:53

Yes, she has had 8 children. Probably trying to make up for the ones taken away from her. By that, I do not mean for a second that she should be allowed to keep them, but my God, can you not imagine how she must be grieving? Do you all think she is likely to be some benefit claiming caricature laughing all the way to the bank and thumbing her nose at social workers?

you know it is not her childrens fault she is sad and grieving her children have no rights who they are born too but yes lets all feel sorry for the grieving woman for fucks sake ,

mrsjay · 10/03/2014 21:54

sorry i meant to quote revolting

mrsjay · 10/03/2014 21:55

I have worked with women who have had baby after baby believe me they are not all earth mothers who clutch their children to their bosum