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.

I'm sorry I skipped to the end just to say that I don't think the idea of a mental age is a useful term. If a nine-year-old got pregnant there would be too much physical harm to her body in letting a pregnancy come to term, whereas a real nine-year-old is presumably much quicker on the uptake that this poor woman.

catholicherald.co.uk/news/2019/06/21/court-orders-mother-to-have-abortion/

My understanding is that terminations are far, far safer medically (even at 22w) than child birth. Pyschologically extremely difficult to know, I have been at 2 births where the baby was being relinquished, both times it was taken into another room immeadiately so the mother didn't hear the cries or actually really see it. However presumably the milk still came in, which would be difficult and I think the clincher in this case was that it would disrupt the only home this young person has at her most vulnerable time.Whereas she will go home after her "procedure" or "operation" those are the words I would use, to recover. I think organising some sort of funeral and making this woman attend would be very ill advised.

Look the grandma is definitely Catholic. Just posted a link. Don't know why any one thinks I am making it up that there will most likely end up being a service for this baby.

I was trying, perhaps badly, to make the point that the effect on this young woman needs to be considered in the context of the family she comes from and the community she lives in who will consider that something appalling has occurred.

Not sure on what basis the judge can conclude that the harm of continuing will out way the harm of this late abortion.

Legal or not late abortion involves a very developed baby. It is a decision that very few women make usually for difficult reasons. I do not wish the law to change because I think women are best placed to decide.

However I do not think a judge should be intervening in this way against the wishes of this family. The justification is too weak.

Cases like this will totally undermine confidence in abortion in this country.

Oh and the stats quoted up thread about abortion being safer than childbirth are all about early abortion.

Late abortions are much riskier.

Her mother's religion should not factor into a decision about the welfare of the young woman.
Guardianship is about making the best decision for the person in their charge, not the decision that suits the guardian's religious belief.

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R45161.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwimou2h-v7iAhWbi1wKHQp_C-cQFjALegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw3--gkdaEc_tAjEKRe63bOK" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R45161.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwimou2h-v7iAhWbi1wKHQp_C-cQFjALegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw3--gkdaEc_tAjEKRe63bOK

This is a good article on abortions after 20 weeks.

Mortality rate for abortions after 18 weeks in the US is 6.7 per hundred thousand as opposed to 8.8 for birth.

She has no understanding of this baby as a foetus

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

Who knows, twicemummy1? She may have simply have been having sex because it felt nice, because she wanted to please her boyfriend, because she thought a nice cuddly baby would just appear like a dolly.

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?

Again, who knows? He may have been learning disabled himself.

@santaclara but she doesn't exist in a vacuum does she? The impact on her can't be considered in total isolation.

I would however agree with you if there was a clear justification. There doesn't seem to be. It appears to be the judge's opinion.

I think this is wrong, and I'm a bit 🙄 at people framing it as forced abortion is less stressful than having your baby taking away so it's in the best interests of the woman. There is simply no proof for that, and personally I would consider forced abortion worse, as killing my wanted child (irrespective of my capabilities or not as a parent) would affect me far worse than giving birth and never seeing my child again.

“I would however agree with you if there was a clear justification. There doesn't seem to be. It appears to be the judge's opinion.”
Of course it is. The Jusge’s opinion on what is in the best interests of the woman concerned, based on her experience, on the pile of evidence that will have been out before her, on the advice of a wide range of professionals.........

personally I would consider forced abortion worse, as killing my wanted child (irrespective of my capabilities or not as a parent) would affect me far worse than giving birth and never seeing my child again.

The key word there is "personally". This girl is not you. She has a different level of understanding. She doesn't have a concept of what's happening inside her uterus at the moment. If she has a general anaesthetic, she won't really be aware of what's happened to the foetus, as she won't see or feel anything. It was stated that she does understand something being given to her and taken away again.

So "personally" it seems she will be more affected by giving birth and having the baby taken from her, than by having the abortion.

Why don't women know they lack capacity?

I can't believe someone is seriously asking that question. The clue is in the words "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?

It almost certainly was. However, you seem to have some idea that people who lack capacity should be watched like hawks 24 hours a day so that they can't have sex. What happens if the parent who is caring for them can't or won't do that? Should they be taken away from their homes and institutionalised against their will?

Seriously, since when was the state seen as a benign arbiter with regards to women's interests? Thats' right, never.

The courts are not the state.

What do you think the benign answer would have been in this case? To allow the woman to go through a birth process she doesn't understand only to have the baby taken away? Or to be forced out of her home so that the baby can stay safely with her mother?

It's got nothing to do with there being a live baby at the end of it. It's to do with forcing life changing and traumatic medical procedures on someone.

This woman is going to have to go through life changing and traumatic medical procedures of some sort anyway. In similar cases, consideration has had to be given to whether the mother can be allowed to go into labour naturally because she may not know when it is happening and may not seek help, putting herself and the baby in severe danger. So if she were to continue with the pregnancy the likelihood is that birth would have to be by way of a Caesarian.

Society shouldn't be making those decisions

So who should? Do we allow this pregnancy to continue in circumstances where, if the mother had capacity, she would probably want to terminate it also, and indeed would probably have done so already? What if she isn't capable of keeping herself or the baby safe?

Sure, society may not make the right decision. Is that a reason to be paralysed into making no decisions whatsoever and just allowing awful things to happen?

I don't think vulnerable adults should be put in a situation where a court decides to forcibly abort their children, no

Even if carrying on the pregnancy will kill them or cause life-changing physical or mental consequences?

OK. The people who think that the court should not have been involved in this awful situation- who should?

Its possible also that they are wrong that she would be a danger to the baby if it was in her mothers care. I wonder whether her mother is in agreement with that assessment or how they can know that for sure without reassessing after the birth before making a final decision.

This isn't just a case of saying she can't look after her baby, but who knows, let's give it a go and see if she learns. She has a disorder that severely affects her moods which makes her dangerous to the baby. There isn't going to be a miraculous cure after the birth. Her mother may well think differently, but this is the mother in whose care she got pregnant and who apparently didn't notice she was pregnant for several months.

Also I don't understand why people here think the baby doesn't matter at all. ... I am in favour of abortion because I believe it to be essential to women's rights but I am not blind to the fact there is a potential conflict of rights taking place.

No, no conflict. The baby is not a separate being and the mother's rights come first every time.

nolongersurprised
This case just backs up my personal knowledge of Englands care/mental health system.
Why?
Because it's my DS who was told after 6 months of waiting for CAMHS to deem him an appointment and then 6 cancellations, give him 15 mins and told him when you do harm yourself we will look to do something.
At his university its a 8 to 12 week wait for MH appointments, upto 8 months of you use the cities NHS system
A friends daughter was sent 350 for a inpatient bed after she self harmed, she was 13.
We know of 4 adults who have committed suicide after been turned away from local MH services, all professional people.

I dont know if you work in the MH service, but as a end user it is shit and nearly pointless.
Care kids are failed massively, less then 1% get a levels, then there is the abuse and neglect and lack of funding.

Even the judge in this case admitted what she was ordering was bordering on wrong and sounded very uncomfortable about it.
I don't know all the facts so will say judge is probably right.

But fgs where was the SW, NHS mental trust support team. Because surely the best outcome for this lady was never ever to become pregnant.
But surely the Sussex and numerous MH trust who have fail adults like this poor lady so how useless we are.
Even when they are in residental care, at least 3 homes have been proved since 2000 to torture their inmates.

Posters even want cases like this kept secret. Because out of sight is out of mind not my problem.

Finally I am on 12 hour nights, knackered and with personnal experience, plus a great aunt who was put in a mental home in Grassington, in 1923, for having sex, and died in same home in 1989, she was the brightest person in the family. I really should leave you all to it.
Its to close for comfort.

Its possible also that they are wrong that she would be a danger to the baby if it was in her mothers care.
Evidence will have been provided to the court by pretty much everyone who has ever been involved with this young woman. Schools, social care, psychologists, any day care centre and carers etc. It's highly unlikely that all those people who know her week will be wrong on this.

And of course there's no way of knowing without putting the baby in her care and seeing what happens. Would you take that risk, despite what they have all said?

Not sure on what basis the judge can conclude that the harm of continuing will out way the harm of this late abortion.

She can decide that one outweighs the other on the basis of all the evidence she has before her about this particular woman which you haven't seen or heard.

However I do not think a judge should be intervening in this way against the wishes of this family. The justification is too weak.

So should the family's wishes come first, come what may? Even if their wishes will result in greater harm to the mother?

Ffs, autocorrect. Know her well.

“However I do not think a judge should be intervening in this way against the wishes of this family. The justification is too weak.”

How do you know? Have you heard/read all the evidence?

Given all the threads on mumsnet about unreasonable and controlling parents, I'm surprised at the number of posters on this thread who presume that family know best about decisions regarding their adult daughters.

Its interesting because I agree with posters on the feminist board about a lot but when in comes to late abortion I see a dogma as absurd to me as saying transwomen are women because the law let's you change your birth certificate.

Everyone knows a 22 week fetus is a baby not a clump of cells. You can see it on a scan. It's not just another medical procedure and women making this decision will take this into account.

State ordered abortion of the child of a woman with learning disabilities against her wishes and her families (in the absence of serious medical conditions etc) is a massive violation of her human rights.

Something else has just occurred to me too, birth can be horrendous for someone with any kind of mood disorder and another factor may be they can't risk upsetting the balance/meds she is currently on because we have to remember this decision has been made for the good of the mother .

I agree Bertrand who else if not the courts?