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.

having the grandparents take the child was the only option you gave where the child didn't die- so I pick that one.

So you pick the option where either the baby would be at risk of harm or the baby's mother,a vulnerable adult would have to move out of her home.

Whose welfare are you considering here?

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?

She was known to lack capacity before it got to this stage. That is why the decision is being made for her.

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

I think your projection is showing here.

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

So how would you handle a woman who can't understand or quantify the consequences but has sexual desires? Lock her up? Make sure she's never alone ? Prohibit her from having a relationship or any contact with males?

The blaming of the woman’s mother on this thread is sickening.

Anyone consider that actually the mother who has skin in the game might actually believe that she is best placed to gauge her child’s best interests. Her legal team were certainly arguing that her daughter’s intellectual abilities were being under-stated.

I am flabberghasted by the blind acceptance that the judge must absolutely have got it right because obviously no bad laws or dodgy judgements are even passed.

This is all about the subjective “best interests” test of the Mental Capacity Act which the UN has said is not fit for purpose as it discriminates against disabled people who need more of a process of supported decision making.

The judgement is inconsistent. On the one hand it considers that the baby’s best interests cannot be served by remaining in the mother’s care, so the best thing is for its life to be forcibly ended before the mother Is made to deliver it.

Can the mother consent to what happens to its remains? Or will they be disposed of as surgical waste because of best interests?

Whole thing is disgusting and does potentially set a very worrying precedent that abortion must be the default if there is any doubt about the mother’s cognitive ability to perform a risk/reward analysis of their pregnancy. Like who really does that?

Thing is regardless of whether she did consent to pregnancy, a 22 week old baby is involved. One which stands a 70% chance of survival in a week’s time.

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?

Have you ever been around someone who lacks capacity?

I'm going to get flamed here..but her mother...the midwife, the catholic...I'm sure had nothing to do with this and acted in her daughters best interests.

I'm glad someone else has.

The ones who are saying childbirth is traumatic for a person with a mental age of 6-9, cannot surely be unaware that abortion at 22 weeks is not going to be any less traumatic.

I don't think you understand the physical and emotional impact on your body of being pregnant one minute and not the next

Only to 10-11 weeks.

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.

Why? Did you have a surgical abortion under sedation (oral, IV sedation, or GA).
She can also receive pain medication. I seem to recall childbirth can also be very painful afterwards, unless my friend who had a shoulder dystocia and is fecally incontinent is lying...

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.

Three times actually. Also have had IV sedation and oral conscious sedation. I had the latter for my own abortion and as I said earlier recall none of it. Recovery from
oral conscious or IV sedation is much easier than GA. IV sedation is more likely for someone doing a D&E than GA.

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.

Oh, so milk does not come in after childbirth? There is no lochia after childbirth? There is no hormonal changes after childbirth? No risk of PPD? Remember this is a woman with a mood disorder already.

Try experiencing the baby blues knowing your baby has died.

Or after your baby is taken away to go to another family. Or you are taken out of the home you have known all your life, still without your baby.

The decision has been made because of the quality of the available parenting.

No, it has not. The decision has been made because the pregnant woman in question is vulnerable.

As per the judge's very considered remarks, this vulnerable young woman is unable to understand what having a baby means, and unable to understand what a pregnancy is and that there is an actual baby growing inside her.

Her doctors and specialists recommended a termination as the best option for her and asked the Court of Protection to rule on this because the vulnerable women's mother (who most likely has guardianship) disagreed with the doctors.

There is nothing in the reporting that suggests any wrongdoing on the part of the vulnerable women's mother. It appears that she wished for a different decision and letting the court rule on this is and has always been a legitimate way to resolve conflicts between parents/guardians and doctors.

The judge was presented with the following facts. (These have been made public.)

1. The vulnerable person in this case is considered to be such a severe risk to the safety of a baby that she would either have to leave her own mother's care or the baby would have to leave the house.

1. The woman wishes to continue with the pregnancy but doesn't really understand what that is and doesn't have the capacity to understand what having a baby means. She does however understand what it means to have something taken away that you want to keep. This applies both to the termination and to having her baby taken away after birth, which because of point 1 above was unavoidable if the baby was to be protected from harm.

1. Changes in the living conditions and arrangements of persons with moderately severe LDs can be extremely traumatising for them. If her own mother had decided to keep her granddaughter, that was a possible outcome for her. An outcome not in her best interests.

The following issues are likely also at play but have not been fully publicised:

1. This vulnerable person also has severe mental health issues. Those are usually treated with strong psychopharmaca which have serious side effects, including damaging the health of a fetus. She is either still taking these which can seriously harm the fetus or she has discontinued taking them which can seriously harm her. The latter is again not in her best interests.

1. She may have other health issues which may also have informed her doctors' and specialists' decision to recommend a termination. Having her carry to term may therefore not be in her best interests.

1. We know from women who went into labour without any awareness of pregnancy that this can be very traumatising. The reaction of a woman with a moderately severe LD who is unable to understand what a pregnancy actually means and what giving birth or having a cesarian entails can be expected to be similar. This is not in her best interests.

1. Because she doesn't understand what a pregnancy means, it is highly likely that she will be able to cope better with losing a 22-week fetus that is not real to her than losing a real live baby she carried to term and gave birth to and can touch and hear and see. Increasing her distress by taking the latter option is not in her best interests.

The court has one purpose, to protect vulnerable people. It was asked to decide only one thing: weigh up what is in the best interests of the vulnerable woman. As there are more negative outcomes for her in carrying to term, the judge decided against it.

And I strongly doubt that this is the first such case and it won't be the last either. Not a precedent, but a terribly sad case with no good outcomes, just a least worst one.

The judgement is inconsistent. On the one hand it considers that the baby’s best interests cannot be served by remaining in the mother’s care, so the best thing is for its life to be forcibly ended before the mother Is made to deliver it.

The judgement was not for the baby! It was for the woman and what would be her best interests. Whether she should deliver or have an abortion. It's plain common sense that when debating the delivery option the possible outcomes for the mother 1.forced adoption or 2.removing her from her home and from her mother's care. There is nothing inconsistent about that.

The 3 (shit and horrible) avenues were explored and it was decided that abortion would be the least harmful one. I struggle with the decision but I understand why.

IT WAS NEVER ABOUT THE BABY!!

The ones who are saying childbirth is traumatic for a person with a mental age of 6-9, cannot surely be unaware that abortion at 22 weeks is not going to be any less traumatic.

She can receive a surgical abortion under oral or IV sedation or GA, either a D&E or a hysterotomy. Not an option during childbirth, especially during childbirth when she would need to be able to listen and respond to instructions.

@Carowiththegoodhair I also believe that in most cases the parents of children with learning disabilities will be striving to act in their best interests.

Can anyone explain how and why this court takes over from the parents of next of kin?

The blaming of the woman’s mother on this thread is sickening.

Anyone consider that actually the mother who has skin in the game might actually believe that she is best placed to gauge her child’s best interests. Her legal team were certainly arguing that her daughter’s intellectual abilities were being under-stated.

Yes, on a feminist board too.

Generally feminists don't trust the patriarchal legal and medical systems to serve women's bests interests, particularly those of vulnerable women, but here their word is being taken as gospel. It's peculiar.

Forced birth and forced abortion are both anti-woman.

Ten to eleven weeks is very different to twenty two weeks. You're talking about another three months of development.

Yes, there's no doubt that childbirth can be painful. And that yes, she will bleed and produce milk either way. And that yes, the baby will be taken away in either circumstance. SO what difference does it make letting the baby be born? She literally can't avoid those things in either case.

And as a PP mentioned - a termination at that stage is most likely to involve giving birth, in actual fact.

The blaming of the woman’s mother on this thread is sickening.

Why? First this woman has the mental age of a 6-9 year old and knows what a baby is and want the baby. 6-9 year old under the care of her mother as it every 6-9 year old. Then the mother is to blame, no? Can't have it both ways.

SO what difference does it make letting the baby be born?

So it is in the end just about having a live baby at the end.

A lot of rhetoric and mental gymnastics,but you summed it up pretty well yourself.

@Erythronium - the judge is a woman.

Can anyone explain how and why this court takes over from the parents of next of kin?

I'd hazard a guess that with all the information in front of them, which we don't have, that the best interests of the person under the COP weren't being upheld. Do they stepped in.

*@Carowiththegoodhair
*
This is all about the subjective “best interests” test of the Mental Capacity Act which the UN has said is not fit for purpose as it discriminates against disabled people who need more of a process of supported decision making.

What stands out to me is where were all these people crying out about her best interests when she was having unprotected sex?

It's a shitshow and the only reason I agree with the judge's decision is because I know they'll take her baby away from her. And I do believe this would be more traumatic for her than a late term abortion.

If she could have been helped to keep her baby that would have been best. People can't just jump in and believe they know about her best interests after she's conceived a child. Why do they do this?

Perhaps people could stop bandying around "mental age" as if it's a real thing.

This is what the British Psychological Society had to say about mental age:

"In practice, some clinicians are known to use child development scales or children’s intelligence tests to profile aspects of intellectual functioning of very disabled adults. Whilst, clinically, this may have some use in assessing performance on specific tasks, attempts to derive extrapolated IQ scores from the use of developmental scales or child intelligence tests constitutes extremely dubious practice and is not recommended. Likewise, the practice of referring to ‘mental age’ when reporting on the level of intellectual or social functioning of adults should be avoided."

thesmallplaces.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/against-mental-age/

Her legal team were certainly arguing that her daughter’s intellectual abilities were being under-stated.

Well, they would say that, wouldn’t they? What did opposing lawyers say?

And as a PP mentioned - a termination at that stage is most likely to involve giving birth, in actual fact.

No, she can have a D&E or a hysterotomy.

The young woman is an adult. Her mother may well now have guardianship, but that doesn't mean she can make any decision she likes. Guardians (in law) have to act in the best interest of their charges.

If other agencies working with the young woman believe that her guardian isn't working in her charge's best interests (and not all parents are perfect and unselfish) they can ask the Court of protection to rule. Which is what happened here.

If the mother is very opposed to abortion, it may well be that she has not looked at this problem impartially and in her daughter's best interests. It's important that the state ensures that she is not putting her own interests before her daughter's.

@charlieparley ok you just answered my question above!

@feministcat Someone has just shared with us details of what sounds like a pretty traumatic late term abortion. Frankly as I stated above friends of mine who have had late abortions have also had a dreadful time. I think it's a different ball game from early abortion. Whatever you think of this case I don't think you should minimise this.