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.

People are "too emotional" about discussing ending the life of almost viable foetus. Where is our humanity if we don't get emotional about it?

IThe court looks at the welfare of the woman. Some on this thread seem to care solely for the welfare of the fetus*

Or for the woman’s mother to have a little dolly to look after.

Personally I think if you are going to forcibly abort all babies born to women of this profile then you may as well forcibly sterilise them. We don’t do that anymore. How is this different? I think it’s worse. All the people saying she should be on long term contraception and/or be stopped from having sex, how is that different than sterilising her? Can’t you just be honest with yourselves and say you have decided people with LD shouldn’t be allowed to have children/sex/relationships (choose where your line is), and then perhaps discuss what the criteria should be for a woman to be allowed to reproduce?

‘How can you people justify killing what is almost a fully formed baby.’

Abortion is legal in England, Wales and Scotland.

As I stated up thread I would like to see clear evidence presented that the women's life or health would be harmed by the continuation of this pregnancy before the court was able to agree to it.

Do you seriously believe the court didn't demand that clear evidence? As for what you would like to see, you really have no right to personal information about his woman.

At the moment it seems to be best interests. Just of the woman and not of the baby I don't think that's enough of a safeguard. I think the law should change.

But that's what the law on abortion is all about. If we can't put the woman's interests before the baby's, we have to abolish or severely reduce the right to abortion. And that leads us directly to consequences such as the awful death of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar Savita Halappanavar]], to say nothing of the horrors of back street abortions.

Sounds like the right decision.

@MrsMiggins37

It's her grandchild, of course she wants to look after it regardless of her faith. What makes you honk it's just a 'dolly'?

Have you never heard of people actually loving children before?

People are "too emotional" about discussing ending the life of almost viable foetus. Where is our humanity if we don't get emotional about it?

It’s a legal procedure. I don’t think it helps the debate to get over emotIonal as it clouds the true issues.

But then, I’ve never been emotional about abortion anyway. I’ve always felt the rights, wishes, and, in cases like this, best interests of the mother trump any other considerations.

She would have been welcomed into the church as a baby, and had first reconciliation and then communion at around 7. If her abilities are in line with a 6 to 9 year old she would presumably have had the same teaching since birth

FFS, we've been through this. You can't assume that woman with a mental age of 6-9 and a mood disorder is precisely comparable with a 6-9 year old NT child.

Have you never heard of people actually loving children before?

Yeah, funny enough I have two of my own.

Her “love” for the foetus does not trump the best interests of the living child she already has.

Stop setting up straw men. In this case with this woman a court has looked at what is in her best interests as she lacks the capacity to do so and she appears to have family members who are more invested in the fetus than her future wellbeing.

No, some of us personally understand exactly what the death of a foetus of that gestation involves and are horrified at the idea of a court ordering that on an unwilling disabled woman.

I understand that perfectly well. I still think that in this case on the information we have that it’s the least worst option. The court agrees with me, not you.

Unfortunately the mother's mental health may be affected either way, so why not at least save the fetus?

Oh, great. So she may be mildly distressed by a termination, or massively distressed to the extent of serious mental health damage by losing her child or her home, but that's preferable because we must put an unborn foetus first. Really?

How can you people justify killing what is almost a fully formed baby.

Due to the fact it’s permitted by the law of the land.

@MrsMiggins37

Off the top of your head, can you think of any decisions made by courts that have been wrong?

Where is the line drawn if we allow that?

FFS. When the vulnerable adult has capacity.

Can’t you just be honest with yourselves and say you have decided people with LD shouldn’t be allowed to have children/sex/relationships (choose where your line is), and then perhaps discuss what the criteria should be for a woman to be allowed to reproduce?

Except no-one on here is saying that. They are saying that they accept that this judge, who knows much more about the facts than we do, is likely to be right to say that it is in this particular woman's circumstances termination is in her best interests. Trying to extrapolate out from this to some massive campaign to sterilise all people with learning difficulties is, frankly, dishonest.

It's neither pro nor anti choice. It's about who has to make the choice when a vulnerable adult lacks capacity to make the choice for themselves. Usually, there would be agreement between those involved in the care of the vulnerable adult. Here, there was a dispute. So the CoP was invoked and made the decision.

Pouncer, are you seriously saying that the courts should never intervene in an incapacitous person's best interests because they might be wrong? Now, that really is a very slippery slope.

@Isatis

Well if she had a c-section the child would be born so not a fetus?

I haven't had a c-section but I'd imagine once it's out she can have more pain relief, so wouldn't be much worse than surgical abortion

I don’t know if it’s been mentioned but perhaps the mother is a risk to the baby while pregnant? I know of one young pregnant woman with LD’s and ASD who would harm herself when distressed/overwhelmed, including punching her bump.

Off the top of your head, can you think of any decisions made by courts that have been wrong?

What does that have to do with anything?

When it comes to forced terminations without the proviso that a life is at risk, yes the court should not have that power.

I find it so very depressing how many people are prepared to put the rights of an unborn foetus and a granny above the best interests of a vulnerable woman who lacks capacity. Truly terrifying actually. Thank god for the courts.