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

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To ask if you agree with forced sterilisation?

239 replies

NeedACleverNN · 29/05/2016 16:24

An acquaintance I know has been court ordered to be sterilised. No choice.

I don't know the exact details but I do know several children have already been removed on welfare issues.

Whilst I feel sorry for her because she loves children, I do think the judge made the right choice. She has a few mental health problems and struggles to take care of herself let alone dependent children.

Do you think judges should be able to do this or not?

OP posts:
BoneyBackJefferson · 29/05/2016 19:53

Someone said that its not a black and white issue and I agree with that.

But there have been some really stupid responses on the thread.

TheVillagePost · 29/05/2016 19:55

Its acrwalky tricky one but actually I think if you've had several babies and neglected or abused them then you lose the right to have any more. I would be more concerned with the vulnerability of the children than if the mother, particularly monsters like Baby P's mother, or Kathryn whatnot who stamped on her little girl....

ClashCityRocker · 29/05/2016 19:56

Yes duchy that's what concerns me. If a woman is being coerced or manipulated into having sex, is it ok because she can't get pregnant? Of course not.

The flip side is the devastating effect a pregnancy and having the child taken off her could have on top of the abuse.

There needs to be the support in place to protect vulnerable people from this situation - but I do think that is a separate issue from ensuring they do not have the added complication of pregnancy.

LouBlue1507 · 29/05/2016 19:58

I agree

ClashCityRocker · 29/05/2016 19:59

I think there are two different issues here though; people who are not capable of comprehending sex, contraception and the implications of having a child and people who are capable but don't care and subject their children to horrendous abuse and neglect.

NeedsAsockamnesty · 29/05/2016 20:08

op I think your missing the point a bit, as far as I'm aware nobody in very recent times in England has been forcibly sterilised because they are a child abuser or because children have been removed from their care and there is a wish to prevent further children being born.

People get court orders granting hospitals permision to sterilise them (and perform many other operations and treatments) because they need the court to step in and protect them from themselves, we do not do it for people who make bad choices infact the law does not allow us to do so as we cannot prevent people who have capacity from continuing to do so.

We can only do it when the health and welfare of the actual person having the treatment requires it AND they lack the ability to give informed consent

MangoMoon · 29/05/2016 20:08

My initial gut response is damn right, they should be.

My logical, response with proper thought is no - not unless 'exceptional circumstances'.

Then I realise that that is the sort of mealy mouthed thing that I hate in the abortion debate - what exactly is classed as 'exceptional' enough and who is the judge & jury.

So, I really don't know - I'm really conflicted tbh.

I read the link about the 'Pause' scheme that Apocalypse linked to and that seems the best way all round I think.
Shocking to read that 205 babies were born to just 49 women (and removed), 65 children to just 9 women.
It's an endless cycle and just so sad for all concerned - traumatic for the children; breaking the cycle is the only real solution I think.

Lunar1 · 29/05/2016 20:08

Our prison sentences for child abusers in the uk are pathetic. The least we could do is sterilise both men and women convicted of such crimes. It's sad enough children are born into such circumstances, but to allow abusers to have more children is disgraceful. It's either that or lock their cell and throw away the key.

NeedsAsockamnesty · 29/05/2016 20:09

Sorry that top paragraph should say a wish from other people as clearly someone who lacks capacity can want to prevent it

dillydotty · 29/05/2016 20:10

It is the thin end of the wedge. It has been tried before and governments have overstepped the mark.

In North Carolina, a state noted for its discriminatory sterilization practices in the 20th century, 65 percent of sterilization procedures were performed on black women, even though only 25 percent of the state’s female population is black.

Eugenics is all a bit Nazi Germany.

If you sterilise child abusers, what about Angela Canning and Sally Clark? They were found guilty of murdering their own babies, surely they should have been sterilised? Miscarriages of justice can happen.

NeedsAsockamnesty · 29/05/2016 20:11

Fwiw it is possible even highly likely that someone who does not have the capacity to consent to medical or welfare decisions does have capacity to consent to sex.

AppleSetsSail · 29/05/2016 20:13

A woman's right to autonomy over her body has to be balanced against the rights of the children she might produce. I'm sure there are extreme circumstances in which it's in everyone's best interest.

WhoTheFuckIsSimon · 29/05/2016 20:14

As a HCP I would like to know how this will work in practice.

Who is going to drag her kicking and screaming into the hospital? I would refuse to cannulate or take blood from someone who didn't want it taken. Well I would want yo refuse. It puts the hcp in a difficult place.

NeedsAsockamnesty · 29/05/2016 20:17

simon a HCP with a patient with a court order saying treatment needs to be done who still refuses to treat is failing to safeguard that patient.

It's down to the HCP in charge to find a way to manage that treatment safely but get it done.

TheDuchyOfGrandFenwick · 29/05/2016 20:17

Where will this lead? In the future Will women be forcibly sterilised before they get pregnant/ have a chance to show what type of parent they will be because they're drug abusers, criminals etc?
I know it seems far fetched but I think it's a real slippery slope to go down.

WhoTheFuckIsSimon · 29/05/2016 20:18

I guess. But it would feel wrong.

VestalVirgin · 29/05/2016 20:22

I think forced sterilisation is much more humane than forced celibacy for a severely learning disabled woman who can't manage birth control. The idea of stopping them from accessing men (i.e. accessing sex - is horrific. They have urges too)

It might be because I don't have the most active of sex drives, but ... I do not think not being able to have sex is a fate worse than death.

In fact, I think being coerced - which will with almost absolute certainly be the fate of a woman whose mental capacity is not sufficient to use condoms (which is not really that complicated) or violently raped, is much, much worse than celibacy.

No one says they shouldn't be able to masturbate. One does not need men to satisfy sexual urges. Besides, declaring a human right to partnered sex is ... not a good idea at all.

If a grown woman wants a sterilisation, she could be able to acess it much more easily than this is possible at the moment. Then perhaps no such dilemma would present itself with regard to the severely disabled - I do believe a well-meaning woman would not want to have child after child be put in foster care because she can't care for them.

Women who are such terrible people that they "don't deserve to have children" ... well, if those things were done in a sensible way, then they'd be in prison with no chance of getting pregnant.

Do people not believe that Baby P's mum should be sterilized? I can't see how you could argue against it with someone as vile as her.

I think that some people deserve death, and some people deserve to be sterilized ... however, I do not think any government should have that power.

greyscalealmond · 29/05/2016 20:36

But once a vulnerable and non-capacitous woman receives a forcible yet potentially lifesaving sterilisation - will anyone be there to safeguard her from future rape?

Lweji · 29/05/2016 20:41

Exactly, it feels like the lazy cheap option.

NeedsAsockamnesty · 29/05/2016 20:44

The capacity to consent to sex and the capacity to consent to medical treatment do not both require the same level of ability

Patapouf · 29/05/2016 20:46

It's basically eugenics, which doesn't sit right with me. Where do you draw the line?

However, I think that a child's right to be wanted, loved, and well cared for trumps a woman's bodily autonomy.

AgingJuvenileBinkyHuckaback · 29/05/2016 20:49

Nobody said that celibacy was a fate worse than death. But it's probably a fate worse than sterilisation (when you wouldn't be able to keep any child).

greyscalealmond · 29/05/2016 20:54

sockamnesty No. But anyone being considered a candidate for forced sterilisation must almost inevitably be a person who will find it hard to defend herself against unwanted sex.

ClashCityRocker · 29/05/2016 20:57

greyscale I'm not sure there would be any more or less safeguards put in place regardless of if they were sterilised or not.

needasockamnesty are there guidelines as to what constitutes ability to consent in either situation or is it purely discretionary? I think it's a situation which requires a lot of care and balance, but I'm curious as to what the difference is. At first thinking, I would think someone not capable of making informed choices re preventing pregnancy wasn't capable of consenting to sex, but then I know so many NT women who have got pregnant unplanned purely through having unprotected sex, so actually I guess that can't be the case.

IrishSea456 · 29/05/2016 20:57

What about giving them the option of sterilisation or a regular contraceptive injection (couldn't be removed like a coil or implant). That way it could be reversed if they turned their lives around.

I have worked with parents who have had DC removed by SS. Many of these parents continued to have more children that would be removed at birth, often being born addicted to drugs and with health issues caused by the mother not taking good care of herself during pregnancy.