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 is possible, yes. If there's a serious emergency and there's no time for an epidural.

Is it possible for a baby to be born under general anaesthetic?

Possible? Yes. Without risk? No.

But not relevant as the court of protection was not there to decide on the best interests of the fetus or the least harm to the fetus.

I can only hope he is another young adult with learning difficulties because the alternative doesn't bare thinking about.

So - young adult men with learning difficulties should be allowed to impregnate young women with learning difficulties??!!
Because them being male with learning difficulties overrules women with learning difficulties??

I really hope this wasn't a man with full capacity knowingly taking advantage of a vulnerable young woman.

Yes, that's what I'm worried about. Doesn't seem to matter either way, though - the man gets to walk away without any of this grief.

All sorts of criticisms and judgements of the woman's options.

But the man gets to walk away, no consequences.

The man isn't pregnant though. It is regrettably the woman who ends up bearing this burden.

Mammytothree

Maybe try reading the thread because there are many reasons stated it is seen as harmful for this woman to continue the pregnancy. This was not a decision about the merits of abortion, it was about the protection of the vulnerable adult.

If the decision was overturned by an appeal court I would suggest too late for the fetus.

The judge has to make a difficult choice for sure, but thankfully we do live in the 21st century where we do have medical care and protection for vulnerable adults.

I think it is totally wrong that the judge has made this decision. i'm actually appalled that any judge should be able to order an abortion in a woman without that woman's consent.

It's actually very scary to me that the law feels able to make such a judgment.

And this is a matter of subjective opinion

But the judge has had to make an objective decision, based on the evidence.

There is no possible way any of us knows what the least distressing thing will be for this woman, short of manipulating time.

Obviously. But, again, maybe the doctors who know her and who have the required expertise, and the judge who has been given all the facts, have a better chance of assessing what is likely to be the least distressing option.

Nobody has to make the decision to terminate at all!

Yes, they do, because there is a strong body of opinion that it is in this woman's best interests not to continue the pregnancy, whilst her mother thinks otherwise. The court has to decide on that. It can't just refuse to do so in circumstances where it has evidence that allowing her to continue will or is very likely to be harmful to her.

There isn't a legal process with every pregnancy to determine whether it should be allowed to go ahead or not.

Obviously. Just as there isn't a legal process with every other medical procedure to determine whether it should go ahead or not. However, there is a legal process to make that determination when there is a dispute about the best interests of a person who lacks capacity.

You could have simply had a judgement or intervention from professionals to manage the ongoing pregnancy with support.

But the professionals also apparently considered that this would be more harmful to the patient.

Remember, the one thing they cannot manage for this woman is to accede to her wish to keep her baby.

without that woman's consent.

She lacks capacity.

She can’t consent to pregnancy.

She can’t consent to abortion.

She can’t consent to medical interventions during labour.

She can’t consent to an adoption.

Heck, she can’t consent to a root canal.

So what do you want to happen? For this woman to flop about the world and have things just happen as they may?

Why kill a healthy baby? It's not the babies fault

You could ask that of each and every one of the 185,000 women who have abortions every year in the UK. If you want to debate abolishing abortion altogether in this country, that's another discussion.

But not relevant as the court of protection was not there to decide on the best interests of the fetus or the least harm to the fetus.

But the mother said she wanted the baby. I am aware that due to her learning difficulties she may not have grasped the full impact of this.

But after termination, we do not know how she would have mentally coped with the situation. But that decision is final, she may have been so negatively affected by the loss of her baby. I worry about her mental health.

If she could be under general anaesthetic, and spared the full ordeal of childbirth. Then once the baby was born, the mothers full state of mind and health could be gauged?

I just wonder if there would be more options open and reduced psychological trauma under full anaesthetic?

Italiangreyhound, it's not as clear-cut as saying this woman hasn't consented to an abortion. What she wants, apparently, is to keep the baby. But that isn't going to be allowed, for the baby's safety. Or do you think that's totally wrong also?

“You could have simply had a judgement or intervention from professionals to manage the ongoing pregnancy with support.”
Yes of course you could. And this would have been part of the consideration. But the judge, who had the benefit of all the evidence and professional input decided against that option.

@Italiangreyhound

I totally agree with you, but be prepared for an interrogation from others on the thread. Some people really can't accept the existence of opposing viewpoints on this.

But after termination, we do not know how she would have mentally coped with the situation. But that decision is final, she may have been so negatively affected by the loss of her baby. I worry about her mental health.

If she could be under general anaesthetic, and spared the full ordeal of childbirth. Then once the baby was born, the mothers full state of mind and health could be gauged?

The decision was made before a termination.

She lacked capacity before this pregnancy. She had a mood disorder before this pregnancy. This is why she was a vulnerable adult.

Having the baby is not going to cure her of her learning disability and mood disorder.

You know what else is final? Giving birth and being “forced” to give your baby away (which she can’t “consent” to either)

I think everyone is worried about her mental health, that is why this case found its way before the court of protection, where evidence of her mental health and risks to it could be put forward from both sides.

But the mother said she wanted the baby. I am aware that due to her learning difficulties she may not have grasped the full impact of this.

And that is the option that is not going to be allowed for her, even if she continues with the pregnancy.

But after termination, we do not know how she would have mentally coped with the situation. But that decision is final, she may have been so negatively affected by the loss of her baby. I worry about her mental health.

But possibly the doctors dealing with her have thought all that through when they recommended termination? And the judge likewise? Of course no-one can make an infallible decision, but perhaps they can at least make an informed decision?

The issue is only around the ordeal of childbirth to a relatively small extent. It has a lot to do with the trauma of taking away the baby once she has had it, or requiring her to leave the only home she knows.

A child of 6 or 7, or 8, or 9 would be able to understand the basis premise of an abortion. If she were asked if she wanted the pregnancy to continue or end, I am sure she could respond and it could be explained that the baby may not be able to live with her.

in the long run I think the termination may cause her and her own mother far more stress and unhappiness than allowing the pregnancy to continue.

I am all for a woman's right to choose but it is not the case for the judge to choose. This is utterly immoral. Many woman in the UK have their babies removed, should these also be aborted because it is less traumatic? Of course not. I really think this will be much more traumatic for all concerned and the judge has made a massive mistake. Very, very sad.

Pouncer, it's the nature of any discussion on a website like this that people will have opposing views and it would be surprising if contributors didn't fully accept that. However, all contributors have every right to challenge the basis for those views.

PouncerDarling "I totally agree with you, but be prepared for an interrogation from others on the thread. Some people really can't accept the existence of opposing viewpoints on this."

That's OK, I am off to bed now so will prepare for the onslaught later!

Yeah, I'm just warning that your idea of challenging can be pretty intense and go on a bit. It's late at night, so might not be the ideal time to be getting into a long debate with you.

Hope you sleep well!!

ItalianGreyhound, this woman really doesn't equate to a child of 6-9. She's an adult with learning disabilities and a mood disorder. That could be, for example, something like bipolar disorder.

Yes, it could be explained to this woman that the baby will not live with her if it is born - and it is "will not", not "may not." That doesn't mean that she will take it in, remember it, or have any understanding of what it means. Nor does it mean the it will be any less traumatic for her when the baby is indeed removed.

You think termination may cause the woman more distress. Yet again, doctors and others who know her well, and a judge who has been given all the facts, think otherwise. Do you think it is just possible that their views might be more reliable than yours or indeed mine?

When a woman is unable to make a choice, and a choice needs to be made in her best interests, who do you think should make that decision?

I do hear you all. I do sympathise with the judge and I'm sure with more information I would agree with the decision. But I can't get the image out of my head of a woman being forced to have a termination, against her will and without her consent. Under any circumstances, but especially when the circumstances of conception are unknown.

If she could be under general anaesthetic, and spared the full ordeal of childbirth. Then once the baby was born, the mothers full state of mind and health could be gauged?

GA sections are usually done in the context of an obstetric emergency and, by definition, are rapid. The baby is often sedated due to the anaesthetic agents passing through the placenta, even though it’s (ideally) minutes from maternal GA to delivery.

A whole labour done under GA would be unnecessarily risky for the baby and very unlikely to be feasible or accepted. I have seen GA sections done for maternal reasons but performing a section to minimise the pain of child birth seems oxymoronic.

A child of 6 or 7, or 8, or 9 would be able to understand the basis premise of an abortion. If she were asked if she wanted the pregnancy to continue or end, I am sure she could respond and it could be explained that the baby may not be able to live with her.

And I also think a child of 6, 7, 8, or 9 who wants to continue a pregnancy should have a court intervene, as well. Again, a child does not have capacity to understand to make truly informed consent.

This adult, who is NOT a child, also does not have capacity. As has been said many times she is not an “adult with a mental age of _ year old child”.

in the long run I think the termination may cause her and her own mother far more stress and unhappiness than allowing the pregnancy to continue.

Why? And why do her mother’s feelings here matter at all?

I am all for a woman's right to choose but it is not the case for the judge to choose.

It is when the adult lacks capacity. Whether it is an abortion or an appendectomy.

This is utterly immoral

The law disagrees. The law is there to protect vulnerable adults.

Many woman in the UK have their babies removed, should these also be aborted because it is less traumatic? Of course not.

Do these women lack capacity? Then no, they can make decisions for themselves even bad ones. They have capacity to make an informed choice.

“But I can't get the image out of my head of a woman being forced to have a termination, against her will and without her consent.”
No. Neither can I. That’s why I would be a completely rubbish judge at the Court of Protection.