A woman with mental age of 9 forced to have abortion

[Gingerkittykat]

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/woman-abortion-court-of-protection-ruling-mentally-ill-a8970121.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0LrwkWGx-4dJtABJSuHLlzyLs7IArhgM_CQVisVjx4Asf3YoCeW4aKk1Y#Echobox=1561203238

I understand that this woman will not be able to care for a baby but cannot believe forcing her to have an abortion under any circumstances is appropriate, especially since she is already 22 weeks pregnant.

I am 100% pro choice, but this woman is having her choice taken away from her.

It makes a difference because if we were talking about a zygote or an underdeveloped embryo, the physical and emotional toll on the mother would be significantly reduced in forcing an abortion. But for a pregnancy of this late stage, it is literally impossible to remove it without horrendous cost to the mother. And if we are talking about a baby that has reached a stage of development where it is almost, if not yet already, at the point of surviving independently from the mother, that further impact should be taken into consideration.

Honestly, this is not a magic button that resolves things. There is a dreadful cost to paid already.

@YourSarcasmIsDripping I seriously hope that isn't aimed at me.

*@Isatis
*
She has no understanding of this baby as a foetus

If she doesn't understand even this, why was she having sex?

She couldn't have understood what she was doing. If she didn't understand to ask for a condom, take contraception or the consequences, then the man doing it to her must have noticed all of these things surely? He knew he wasn't using a condom so he was relying on the possibility she was on the pill?

*This case isn't about the rights and wrongs of abortion, early, late or otherwise.

It's about a young woman who lacks capacity and is therefore a vulnerable adult. The court of protection exists for her. The judgement is about what is least bad for her from a range of deeply unpalatable choices.

22 week abortions are legal in the UK and, sad as it is, the law covers this type of harrowing case. The rights and wrongs of 22 week abortions are not relevant here.*

This, exactly. People get emotional and can’t see the Wood for the trees when babies are involved. It was same in the tragic cases of Alfie Evans and Charlie Gard. Where they are incapable of deciding for themselves and the guardians wishes conflict with an objective assessment of best interests the court become involved.

Vulnerable women who lack capacity to make huge life changing decisions that could have a lifelong impact on their phycial and mental health are not incubators. My understanding is that (physically anyway) abortion is always safer than pregnancy and childbirth. Fair enough if someone with capacity can choose the more risky option but not if they can’t. Babies are not property.

I for one am extremely grateful we have these courts and people looking out objectively for the best interests of the vulnerable.

then the man doing it to her must have noticed all of these things surely? He knew he wasn't using a condom so he was relying on the possibility she was on the pill?

Not necessarily if the man involved was a peer of similar mental capacity.

But for a pregnancy of this late stage, it is literally impossible to remove it without horrendous cost to the mother.

As had been stated repeatedly she can have a surgical abortion under sedation and significant pain medication and not even remember the procedure at all.

How is that worse than a childbirth with its own risk of complications (I have friends all living with major trauma from childbirth - one is lifelong dependent on a colostomy bag due to her traumatic childbirth, one has severe PTSD after almost dying after hemorrhaging. Another woman I know died a few days after delivery due to a clot.)

This is not likely a woman who is going to understand what is happening when her body is in labour, or what to do about it. So then you say a C-section. Okay, well that if far more physical trauma then a surgical abortion under sedation at 22ish weeks.

And if we are talking about a baby that has reached a stage of development where it is almost, if not yet already, at the point of surviving independently from the mother, that further impact should be taken into consideration.

But not independent from significant medical care. It can’t breathe on its own, for one thing.

How did the NHS "allow a man to get her pregnant"?

You tell me. She was in their care, thus she should have been protected by them, yet somehow she's pregnant.

Disabled women are some of the most vulnerable to sexual exploitation yet the NHS, her "carers", didn't stop it happening.

*@nolongersurprised
*
Do you think that if there was no “society“ that sex wouldn’t happen?

It would happen a LOT less. I want porn and prostitution banned for example, if that's what you call "society". That would certainly lessen the prevalence of intercourse

@nolongersurprised

I liked the way you spelled it out. I understand what you say, but, having the grandparents take the child was the only option you gave where the child didn't die- so I pick that one.

If you lack capacity your wishes or what you want are pretty meaningless

So let the baby live?

She couldn't have understood what she was doing. If she didn't understand to ask for a condom, take contraception or the consequences, then the man doing it to her must have noticed all of these things surely? He knew he wasn't using a condom so he was relying on the possibility she was on the pill?

Vulnerable adults can still have sexual desires. Vulnerable adults can have romantic and sexual relationships with other vulnerable adults without understanding the potential consequences of sexual relationships.

She was in their care, thus she should have been protected by them, yet somehow she's pregnant.

Where is it said she was in their care???

How did the NHS "allow a man to get her pregnant"?

You tell me. She was in their care

No she wasn't. She lives with her mother.

Oops posted accidentally before done.

She was living at home with her mother.

Why don't women know they lack capacity?
Is this something that's only decided after they get pregnant? Surely it's something that should be spotted by the relevant people before it gets to this stage?

*@FeministCat
*
Vulnerable adults can still have sexual desires

I've addressed this downthread. Sexual desires are overrated. The consequences to women are too great.

I liked the way you spelled it out. I understand what you say, but, having the grandparents take the child was the only option you gave where the child didn't die- so I pick that one.

Which proves the point you don’t care about the mother - the vulnerable adult - or even the baby once born.

You care about having a live baby at the end of a pregnancy and that is it.

If the grandmother raises the baby the vulnerable adult would have to go into other care, such as residential care, in order to protect the baby. Or else the mother would stay and the baby would be at risk.

So let the baby live?*

The court case was not about the baby! It wasn't wether the baby can live or die . It wasn't about what was best for the baby! And frankly in a situation like this it should never be.

It was about picking the least harmful option for a woman,out of 3 shit options.

@FeministCat

I don't think you understand the physical and emotional impact on your body of being pregnant one minute and not the next. I mentioned some upthread, but I can go over them again. Firstly, it will be very painful. Even if you have an operation under general anaesthetic, it will be very painful afterwards. Also, I don't know if you've ever had an operation under general anaesthetic, but it's pretty frightened, even for someone of full mental capacity who has given consent. Following the termination, your breasts will start producing milk. You will most likely bleed for a long time and suffer very painful cramping. You will also experience very, very dramatic hormonal changes. Try experiencing the baby blues knowing your baby has died.

So let the baby live? First. As a mother myself and in full capacity mentally, yes, of course that screams out to me.

But this isn't what's happening here and we don't know all of the details.

My DD1 is 13. She has MLD and goes to special school. She already has romantic urges, but when a boy put his hand on her leg this week and it was raised as a concern (her school has CCTV and teachers staff the playground during breaks), she had no idea his hand was on her leg (I suspect she didn't register it, rather than actually being unaware) and when spoken to, couldn't see a problem with him touching her leg because it 'wasn't on the gross bit'.

Children in her special school have weekly Personal Development lessons. It is expected that many, if not most, of the children will go on to have sexual relationships. It's fairly inevitable. Children with SN actually tend to develop sexual urges earlier than NT children, according to one of her very experienced teachers.

It frightens me that I will soon have an adult child who will want independence, but will be so vulnerable. She will not be a child, but has always tracked at about half her chronological age in social maturity.

The court has decided this case and I don't think it's for us to challenge on limited facts. I hope the young woman has some very strong support networks that will be put in place.

Sexual desires are overrated. The consequences to women are too great.

And, that is your view...what is your point? This woman can still have sexual desires even if you think they aren’t overrated. I have sexual desires and don’t care if you think they are overrated (what does that even mean?).

@FeministCat how do you know that she is going to get this surgical abortion under sedation when many women having late abortions are induced and give birth? Did the court specify this would happen?

It would happen a LOT less. I want porn and prostitution banned for example, if that's what you call "society". That would certainly lessen the prevalence of intercourse

You were the one who mentioned society, hence the inverted commas.

I still don’t really understand your point. Are you saying that an intellectually disabled but sexually mature wouldn’t have autonomous sexual desires? And that sex is foisted upon her due to the sexualisation of “society”?

Why don't women know they lack capacity?
Is this something that's only decided after they get pregnant? Surely it's something that should be spotted by the relevant people before it gets to this stage?

Sorry, what? None of this post makes any sense at all.

My MIL has advanced Allzheimers. Like this young woman, she lacks capacity to understand decisions. Yet you think my MIL should understand that she doesn't have capacity? She doesn't even know what capacity means.