To be honest it raised loads more questions in my mind. If anything I was left feeling even more sorry for the pregnant woman with learning disabilities after I had read it. It sounds an unusual upbringing.
It also seems really weird that the original judge decided one of the reasons it would be in her best interests to have an abortion would be because her mother might look after the baby and she might have to move out , given that she wasn't even living with her mother at the time of the hearing???
I have to say I agree with the argument by her mother's solicitor that to go against the wishes of a woman without capacity and order an abortion a higher threshold should be met. The same one that enables abortions to be carried out after 24 weeks e.g. compelling medical reasons.
But that wasn't what the appeal judges concluded. They felt that insufficient weight had been given to the wishes of the woman. And to her mother and to her social worker and to the opinion of the official solicitor who interviewed her. And that the medical evidence was only that 'on balance' the abortion would be better than continuing with the pregnancy. They also noted the difficulty of abortion at that stage of pregnancy which was something that came up on the original thread.
To me it seems that we need better safeguarding of the rights of women with learning disabilities and/or mental illnesses who are pregnant. I dont think their wishes should be overridden except under extreme circumstances.
It also sounds like there are problems with the system. It took 11 weeks from her mother noticing she was pregnant to the matter getting to court. There is obviously a massive difference between being 12 weeks pregnant and 23 weeks pregnant.