To think you can't physically force somebody to have a late term abortion?

[Cringemum]

Just that really.

I was following the thread on the feminist board about the 22yo woman with LD's, who is 22 weeks pregnant, and a judge has ordered the pregnancy be terminated against her wishes.

The thread reached the maximum amount of comments before anybody was able to shed any light on my question.

I can't fathom how she can be physically forced to go through the procedure if she refuses to comply.

Could anybody shed any light on how exactly something like this could be enforced short of physically dragging her to the hospital and restraining her.

Horrible, horrible case by all accounts and my POV is that the judge has made the wrong decision - for the mother - I'm strictly pro choice in all situations but this doesn't sit right with me at all.

Many on the previous thread strongly disagree as is their prerogative but I don't understand how she can be made to go through with a termination?

Anybody?

But the contractions are extremely painful in either event. Even with pethidine and G&A.

Why on earth could she not have an epidural, or an anaesthetic?

By that logic, no woman should be permitted to have a termination if there is a relative around who wants to take care of the baby.

She's not being "permitted to have an abortion".

And yes yes I realize a lot of people are highly invested in believing the system is fair , have jobs in the field and so on, doesn't mean it can't all be held up to scrutiny.

Remember the government and its medical minions believe people can change sex. Are we seriously supposed to believe that anyone that works for such a government can have a rational understanding of women's capacities

Ok sure, despite having had my own termination, donating money regularly to BPAS, and supporting local campaigning against pro-life demonstrations, I'm pro-life because I don't believe in forced terminations. If you say so.

You’re either pro-life, or you’re someone who cynically uses pro-life rhetoric to make a point when it suits you, despite knowing how harmful it is to women who are seeking terminations.

Tell me, which option do you prefer?

Why wouldn’t she have an abortion under general anaesthetic? The medical staff will be looking at the best option for her.

Ask the NHS. Don't ask me. If you have a late term termination, you are given G&A and pethidine injections.

As people have said it's the lesser of 2 evils
Sadly she is clearly deemed not to have capacity or it wouldn't of got this far .
So she had the child she's a reported mental age of 6/9 how would she raise and care for a child .
Adoption would be more traumatic and if her mother raised the child how would that work. Mild LD with support is totally fine but she has a mental age of 6 to 9 she can't raise a child .

By that logic, no woman should be permitted to have a termination if there is a relative around who wants to take care of the baby.

Well, that plus: we'd have a bay taken care of by a woman whose record of caretaking includes her DD with severe LD getting pregnant in the first place and far enough along for this discussion to even be happening. Seems less than ideal, all things considered.

FWIW, I'm very firmly on the fence on this case - as is my close relative (as stated in my initial post on this thread) who was much more directly involved in a similar situation some 2 decades ago.

But it's surely not as simple as "have baby - happy ending for all" on the one hand or "terminate - all forgotten" on the other.

This case is a human tragedy that should never have happened. But it very much did and someone has to deal with the fall-out.

I'm not sure that our government and it's workers is capable of making judgments about women's capacities.

The judgement was not made by the government it was made by the courts. The two are separate.

I like experts. They tend to have knowledge, experience and training.

She wouldn't because the pregnancy is advanced to a stage where it isn't necessarily possible for her to have a D&E. It's not generally advised for a pregnancy of this development. And even if it were, it's done under sedation, not a GA. The safest option to avoid retained products is for the heart to be stopped with an injection into the uterus and for labour to be induced so that the contents of her uterus can be expelled whole.

"It's still guesswork - the judge doesn't have a crystal ball to see into the future of two scenarios and see which one results in less harm. She has made a guess hoping it is the right one."

Discounting the idea of saying a judge is "guessing" when she hears evidence and uses her decades of training to deliberate and make a decision in a terrible situation...

Your argument cuts both ways though doesn't it?

If the judge goes with public opinion and what I'm sure is her initial gut feel reaction, and says sure have the baby, I guess that'll work - then you end up with, worst case scenario, the mother and baby suffering greatly for years on end.

If the judge goes with what she has read and heard, and forces herself to go against public opinion and cultural norms, and instead rules for an abortion to take place - then you end up with, worst case scenario, the mother suffering greatly for years on end.

Which one is better?

I'm not sure how you can say that a forced late stage termination and losing her baby, is less traumatic, long term, than a c section?

Yet again, the people with access to all the relevant information, i.e. the doctors treating this woman and the judge, have said that is the case. There are certainly scenarios where that is distinctly possible: the likelihood is that this woman has no real concept that she has a foetus inside her, and she may well have no concept of losing that foetus because to her it is completely meaningless. So far as she is concerned, the experience may well be considerably less traumatic than having, say, an appendicectomy.

I just think some of you have way too much faith in the judge who made this decision, like she has the ability to see into the future to see what would happen if the woman gets a termination vs carrying the child to term.

For the record, now this decision has been made, I hope the judge is right for the woman's sake.

Remember the government and its medical minions believe people can change sex.

No, they really don’t.

I'm not sure that our government and it's workers is capable of making judgments about women's capacities.

It wasn't a judgement made by the Government it was decided by a group of professional experts and agreed upon by a judge who had heard each side. You know those people whose job it is to listen to all the facts present their knowledgeable expertise to help create an informed decision?

“the judge doesn't have a crystal ball to see into the future of two scenarios and see which one results in less harm. She has made a guess hoping it is the right one."

She makes an informed judgement, looking at all the facts available and taking into account the professional opinions of medical professionals and social services. Is she infallible? No. She’s making a decision because someone has to make decisions on behalf of those who lack the capacity to do so themselves.

Not making any decision and leaving things to play themselves out, because what’s in the best interests of the woman concerned is unpalatable, would be an abdication of our responsibility as a society.

The anaesthetic option depends on whether she can have an anaesthetic and what is in her best interests. They can do it surgically or medical induction

I also don’t see how essentially losing her mother living with her and caring for her in this process by her mother adopting her full term baby and leaving the home will benefit the woman either.

Look I see some of the messages coming across as pro life because it seems like logic is surrounding the foetus and people are alluding or saying ‘baby’ when it isn’t yet a viable pregnancy. If the foetus was born now it would have virtually no chance of survival and/or serious health problems. The woman will never be able to keep the baby and childbirth is very painful and dangerous.

It really comes over on this thread that everything should be done to keep the foetus alive no matter what cost to the mother which is the opposite to what the judge has decided, because forced adoption and forced termination are both forced, neither are choices. if you are pro-choice you believe what is in the best interests of the woman who is pregnant, not the best moral outcome for the child

like she has the ability to see into the future to see what would happen if the woman gets a termination vs carrying the child to term.

No, she doesn't. And neither does anybody on this thread or anyone else alive today.

But she's been placed into the impossible position where she has to to try and guesstimate precisely this in a professional capacity. Because, in the absence of the patient's ability to make a sound judgment and given her circumstances, someone ezternal to the situatioj had to.

I think this deserved tremendous sympathy and respect. Because surely it's a crap situation to find yourself in.

Sorry - it is still a guess, an informed guess but a guess nonetheless. That's why I feel the people here saying they are experts and they know best are naive. It's guesswork. No one can know how this will affect the woman going forward.

*are being naive, I should say.

@AmeriAnn

Sorry where have you read this info this is not correct at all re how a termination works. No one injects anything into a foetus’s head

there's nothing that would change my own mind about forcing her to undergo a termination against her will

How about the fact that the information we have so far doesn't indicate that it would be against her will? All we know is that she's said she wants a baby, rather in the same way as she'd like a doll - which really isn't the same thing as saying she doesn't want a termination.

You literally do ‘know better’ if you are making an informed guess.

@AmeriAnn

What awful emotive language!! That description is offensive to any woman who has had a termination.