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?

@carla1983 again this thread demonstrates the lack of understanding about the Court of Protection, mental capacity and best interest decisions. The person and their wishes are central to the decision making process. As someone has said, this is enshrined in law. This isn't patriarchal.

Lots of comments on here mention assumptions being made because the woman has a LD. The assumptions I see are those being made be people with no understanding of the process or knowledge of the case.

We don’t know what the situation was with the sexual interaction. Could be someone else with LD who can’t be prosecuted.

Taking care of a baby is a fairly serious thing. It’s not a toy for goodness sake, it’s a human being. Would forced adoption be better?

If your definition of her mental capacity is correct then she has been raped and the state has failed her

Depends very much on who the father of this child is. If he also has similar disabilities, he will not be capable of consent either. Did she sexually assault him?

Why the state has failed I’ve no idea. You can apportion blame to individuals - her parents, or supervising adults who were negligent in their position of care, but the state?

I really hope the woman gets through this and stays healthy and well.

Definitely seems to have been overturned on appeal (Guardian and WSJ reporting).

How very upsetting for all involved. I hope she is coping ok.

Termination of a pregnancy is a healthcare proceedure and it appears she desperately needs access to this asap.

I'm sure she will be treated with dignity and respect, perhaps more so than her caregivers have.

@twicemummy1

"@gingerpaleandproud If your definition of her mental capacity is correct then she has been raped and the state has failed her. Then it fails her further for intervening "in her best interests" which go against her personal wishes."

The phrase "two wrongs don't make a right" sounds too flippant, but I can't think of anything else readily. The two things are separate.

A woman with a cognitive impairment was assessed as being competent to make the decision to live on her own. She smokes. She set her flat on fire as she did not have the understanding or skills to extinguish her cigarettes properly. She's is hurt in the fire. She gets taken to hospital. She says she wants to go back and live alone. But she is unable to explain how she will prevent a further fire from happening. She is adamant that she wants to carry on smoking at home. . She is adamant that she does not need support and will not let a support worker in. She is unable explain the connection between the house fire and her action of smoking and not putting out the cigarettes, as she does not have the cognitive ability too.
What do you do? I know this is a far far cry from having an abortion. But I just want to try and get across the idea.

@IsabellaLinton
The state can't have it both ways. It has the right to enforce abortion but no duty to prevent or prosecute the rape? No duty to provide women with problems with the economic resources they need to keep babies they might want. In other words the state dips in and out of its responsibilities but still believes it can insist on some draconian measure not wanted by the victim

Yes, just read the article in the guardian. I'm very, very relieved.

Now the ongoing situation needs to be managed in the kindest way possible to all parties.

Well yes men often use the "i didn't know it was rape" excuse.

Or you could make a decision on, oh I don't know, your principles and ethics?

You can’t do that without information and expertise.

I don't agree that someone with the mental ability of a 9 year old has zero capacity to understand

Reading that somebody has a particular mental age in a newspaper report does not enable you to judge their capacity to make decisions.

@merrymouse

Considering what has passed for "expertise" in the past I think everything needs to be more transparent.

As this is a woman's rights issue we need to know what passes for expertise in this area. Feminists may not agree with the experts because the logic or science of experts is VERY often flawed

So she either has a forced abortion or a forced third trimester pregnancy, labour and birth? She isn't capable of understanding the long-term implications, presumably.

It's known to be less risky to health to have an abortion (where safe and legal) than a late pregnancy and birth. So given there's no easy decision, and the only person affected isn't capable, I can see why the judge made that decision.

Taking the mother's wishes into account would set a terrible precedent. I think people are more uncomfortable with the forced abortion than continued forced pregnancy because it seems to be intervention vs 'natural' consequences, like the classic philosophy trolley problem.

My heart goes out to the judge and all involved.

As this is a woman's rights issue we need to know what passes for expertise in this area.

The people involved also have s right to privacy.

@twicemummy1 the decision making process will be transparent. It will recorded as a matter of law.

Very relieved too. Hopefully they won't overturn it in the next 2 weeks.

And it’s not a women’s rights issue if the circumstances of the case aren’t broadly applicable to other women.

The key point is that she does not have mental capacity.

I think people are trying very hard to make this into a feminist issue, but without necessary knowledge of the case to make that argument.

You could argue that this is a disability rights case, but then you would also need to show that she does have mental capacity, and nobody on this thread is in a position to do that.

@merrymouse

Oh!

state enforced abortion = not a woman's rights issue

Got it

That's me told

@gingerpaleandproud Transparency is one thing, but this has definitely opened a can of worms for feminists. Do state experts have any legitimacy when it comes to decisions made about women?

in light of her mood disorder which seems to include psychosis

Where have you read that her mood disorder seems to include psychosis?

Unless I've missed something her diagnosis hasn't been made public.

A mood disorder could be anything from mild depression right the way down the line to something which yes could include psychosis but at this stage there's no evidence made public to imply such a thing.

I have a mood disorder but I'm certainly not psychotic.

Women need to know precisely what criteria is used and we also need to be asked whether we agree with that criteria. We may not agree with the experts. What if the government expands the criteria without giving us a heads up?
It has form for passing laws about women without women's consent

state enforced abortion

It isn’t state enforced abortion.

A medical decision has been made by a judge for somebody who lacks capacity.

This is not a state policy but a judicial decision that is specific to the circumstances of this case.

@twicemummy1
The woman in question is not able to make decisions because she does not have the mental capacity. . It's not because she is a woman, it's because she has a mental and cognitive impairment. Yes the Court of Protection has a legitimate right to make those decisions in her best interest as that is the whole point of its existence.

@twicemummy1 I posted this earlier but I'll post it again for you

There was a mention of fears of psychosis later in the pregnancy from one of the medical people. It didn’t go into detail. I’ll have to search for the link. For it to be mentioned as a real risk factor the woman must have had a previous occurrence/ occurrences. As you’ve mentioned, it’s not a factor in many ‘mood disorders’