Shuold disabled be sterilised to stop pregnancy?

Tracey - posted on 02/16/2011 ( 199 moms have responded )

1,094

2

58

/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1357259/Mothers-court-appeal-sterilise-girl-21-learning-difficulties.html

The tearful mother of a pregnant woman with severe learning difficulties pleaded with a High Court judge yesterday for permission to have her forcibly sterilised.

The woman, known only as Mrs P, broke down as she explained the drastic procedure was the only way to spare her 21-year-old daughter the heartache of having further children and being forced to give them up for adoption.

The daughter, known as P, already has one young son and is due to give birth to a girl today by caesarian section.

She was described as ‘sexually healthy and active’ but unable either to exercise restraint, or fully to comprehend the consequences of her behaviour.

Her mother told the Court of Protection that while her family would support these two children, they could not cope with any more.

She said: ‘I want the best for my daughter. We want to keep the children together as a family unit. But obviously we can’t keep on supporting more and more children.

‘She doesn’t see anything wrong with her behaviour. She hasn’t got the capacity to realise about her actions. The problem is, if she has any more children we can’t make a commitment to bring them up. Any future children would be removed. She doesn’t understand that she won’t ever see those children again because she says, “I am their mummy”.

‘She doesn’t understand that they will get a new mummy. She thinks she will be able to see them at Christmas, birthdays and weekends.’

Campaigners have warned that the case – which could result in P’s fallopian tubes being sealed – could have a devastating impact on the human rights of the disabled.
Like a bereavement: Mr Justice Hedley said that Mrs P may not understand the full impact should any children be taken away from her

Like a bereavement: Mr Justice Hedley said that Mrs P may not understand the full impact should any children be taken away from her

They said sterilisation is too extreme a step to be carried out without consent and called for alternatives such as a long-term contraceptive to be considered instead.

But Mrs P told the court she had already tried – and failed – to persuade her daughter to have a long-term contraceptive injection at the family planning clinic. After initially agreeing, P refused to have the jab at the last minute and came out of the clinic carrying a bag of condoms which the court heard were ‘useless’ for her situation.

Mrs P said: ‘We need something done. She fell pregnant with her second child quite quickly and the thing that worries me is if something isn’t done she will be pregnant quite quickly again.’

Mrs P, who is not represented at the hearing, brought the case to the Court of Protection, sitting at London’s Royal Courts of Justice, because she believed sterilisation was in the best interest of her daughter.She said that with a boy and a girl her daughter would have ‘a complete family’ and that she could help bring them up together in the family home.

Her NHS Trust and local authority are also understood to support the application. But Official Solicitor Alastair Pitblado, representing P’s interests at the hearing, said expert evidence was not yet available for the court to rule whether she should be sterilised.

‘The issues raised by this application are extremely serious and important,’ he said. ‘A decision maker acting on behalf of P must always question if they can do something else that would interfere less with her rights.’

Adjourning the case until May, Mr Justice Hedley said P was a young woman who ‘by reason of a medical condition suffers from significant learning difficulties’. He said: ‘If she were to have a child which could not be cared for within the family there would almost certainly be an immediate intervention at birth and a permanent removal with a view to adoption outside the family.

‘P herself would understand that she had lost a child, but would not understand how final that loss might in fact be... It is easy sometimes to underestimate the impact of that kind of loss, which is as near to bereavement as is possible to get without an actual death.’

This conversation has been closed to further comments

199 Comments

View replies by

[deleted account]

Sal I understand why they are having sex, that wasn't the point I was trying to make. If people are not mentally able to understand sex and the repercussions of it, we as society should be doing everything we can to stop them having sex, much as we do with children. We should be fighting to stop abuse and rape of everyone including mentally disabled people. There are more things to worry about than just getting pregnant, not only are there diseases and illnesses but what about the mental repercussions just because a person has a limited understanding of sex doesn't mean having it or being raped won't adversely affect them mentally. That is the point I was trying to make :-)

Charlie - posted on 02/16/2011

11,203

111

401

Jackie ....WOW what disgusting views , you should be ashamed .....there isn't much nice I can say ."



I work with Autistic children , My godson is Autistic some of the greatest people in their field have contributed more to society than you will ever achieve all with autism your comments make me physically ill .



These people are all on the Autism spectrum :

Famous people with unspecified

forms of autism

The following people have been diagnosed as being somewhere on the autistic spectrum but the specific classification is unknown.



* Daryl Hannah, an American actress best known for her roles in Splash, Blade Runner and Kill Bill was diagnosed as a child as being 'borderline autistic'

* Christopher Knowles, American poet

* Matthew Laborteaux, actor on Little House on the Prairie

* Katherine McCarron, autistic child allegedly murdered at the age of three by her mother, Karen McCarron.

* Jason McElwain, high school basketball player

* Michael Moon, adopted son of author Elizabeth Moon

* Jasmine O'Neill, author of Through the Eyes of Aliens

* Sue Rubin, subject of documentary Autism Is a World. Sue Rubin has no oral speech but does communicate with facilitated communication.

* Birger Sellin, author from Germany,

* Robert Gagno, actor from Vancouver,



Famous people with

Asperger syndrome



* Dan Aykroyd, comedian and actor: Aykroyd stated he has Asperger's .

* Richard Borcherds, mathematician specializing in group theory and Lie algebras



* Craig Nicholls, frontman of the band The Vines

* Gary Numan, British singer and songwriter

* Dawn Prince-Hughes, PhD, primate anthropologist, ethologist, and author of Songs for the Gorilla Nation

* Judy Singer, Australian disability rights activist

* Vernon L. Smith, Nobel Laureate in Economics

* Satoshi Tajiri, creator of Pokémon

* Daniel Tammet, British autistic savant, believed to have Asperger Syndrome

* Liane Holliday Willey, author of Pretending to be Normal, Asperger Syndrome in the Family; Asperger syndrome advocate; education professor; and adult diagnosed with Asperger syndrome at age 35



People with high-functioning autism



* Michelle Dawson, autism researcher and autism rights activist who has made ethical challenges to Applied Behavior Analysis

* Temple Grandin, a designer of humane food animal handling systems.

* Hikari Oe, Japanese composer

* Bhumi Jensen, Thai prince, grandson of King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand; killed by drowning in the tsunami caused by the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake

* Dylan Scott Pierce, wildlife illustrator

* Jim Sinclair, autism rights activist

* Donna Williams, Australian author of Nobody Nowhere and Somebody Somewhere; after testing for deafness in late childhood, and being labelled 'disturbed', Donna was formally diagnosed as autistic in her 20s

* Stephen Wiltshire, British architectural artist

* Axel Brauns, German author of the autobiographical bestseller Buntschatten und Fledermäuse and filmmaker





Famous People With Autism







Below is a list of famous people with autism, some with unspecified forms, high-functioning, autistic savants and severe autism.





Famous people with unspecified

forms of autism

The following people have been diagnosed as being somewhere on the autistic spectrum but the specific classification is unknown.



* Daryl Hannah, an American actress best known for her roles in Splash, Blade Runner and Kill Bill was diagnosed as a child as being 'borderline autistic'

* Christopher Knowles, American poet

* Matthew Laborteaux, actor on Little House on the Prairie

* Katherine McCarron, autistic child allegedly murdered at the age of three by her mother, Karen McCarron.

* Jason McElwain, high school basketball player

* Michael Moon, adopted son of author Elizabeth Moon

* Jasmine O'Neill, author of Through the Eyes of Aliens

* Sue Rubin, subject of documentary Autism Is a World. Sue Rubin has no oral speech but does communicate with facilitated communication.

* Birger Sellin, author from Germany,

* Robert Gagno, actor from Vancouver,





Famous people with

Asperger syndrome



* Dan Aykroyd, comedian and actor: Aykroyd stated he has Asperger's, but some feel he was joking.

* Richard Borcherds, mathematician specializing in group theory and Lie algebras



* Craig Nicholls, frontman of the band The Vines

* Gary Numan, British singer and songwriter

* Dawn Prince-Hughes, PhD, primate anthropologist, ethologist, and author of Songs for the Gorilla Nation

* Judy Singer, Australian disability rights activist

* Vernon L. Smith, Nobel Laureate in Economics

* Satoshi Tajiri, creator of Pokémon

* Daniel Tammet, British autistic savant, believed to have Asperger Syndrome

* Liane Holliday Willey, author of Pretending to be Normal, Asperger Syndrome in the Family; Asperger syndrome advocate; education professor; and adult diagnosed with Asperger syndrome at age 35







People with high-functioning autism



* Michelle Dawson, autism researcher and autism rights activist who has made ethical challenges to Applied Behavior Analysis

* Temple Grandin, a designer of humane food animal handling systems.

* Hikari Oe, Japanese composer

* Bhumi Jensen, Thai prince, grandson of King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand; killed by drowning in the tsunami caused by the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake

* Dylan Scott Pierce, wildlife illustrator

* Jim Sinclair, autism rights activist

* Donna Williams, Australian author of Nobody Nowhere and Somebody Somewhere; after testing for deafness in late childhood, and being labelled 'disturbed', Donna was formally diagnosed as autistic in her 20s

* Stephen Wiltshire, British architectural artist

* Axel Brauns, German author of the autobiographical bestseller Buntschatten und Fledermäuse and filmmaker











Famous autistic savants



* Alonzo Clemons, American clay sculptor

* Tony DeBlois, blind American musician

* Leslie Lemke, blind American musician

* Jonathan Lerman, American artist

* Thristan Mendoza, Filipino marimba prodigy

* Jerry Newport is an author, savant, and has Asperger's. His wife, Mary Newport, is also a savant on the autistic spectrum

* Derek Paravicini, blind British musician

* James Henry Pullen, gifted British carpenter

* Matt Savage, U.S. autistic jazz prodigy

* Henriett Seth-F., Hungarian autistic savant, poet, writer and artist













People with severe autism



* Tito Mukhopadhyay, author, poet and philosopher

Sal - posted on 02/16/2011

1,816

16

33

i think it should be the choice of the care givers, and need more than going to the local dr to get it done, but i do belive that if the person can not care for the baby, has no hope of recovering then yes it should be an option available, someone asked if they are so menatally challanged why are they having sex, well two reasons, the same reason we all do, it's fun and feels good, but we ( at least i hope) know if we get down to business we can get pregnant, not always a link made by someone like the girl in the story, and the second reason is they are raped molested and taken advantage of just like anyone else can be but often more often, there was the case of a woman who was basically in a coma who got pregnant, i do know a family who had their daughter given an hysterectomy as she was hysterical when she saw blood, and she was so naive that she trusted anyone and they were scared of someone taking advantage of her, she was in a loving family home but spent time at a daycare faciity where she had a bf, if she'd got pregnant her mum would of had to look after her and the baby, i think her family done the right thing,

Angela - posted on 02/16/2011

313

36

10

And what I dont understand is they suggest sterilization for her cause she doesent understand and is mentally disabled,but how about the woman who keep having children and abuse them and get them taken away? How about the woman who have no way to support their children and keep having them and keep on abusing the system? I mean we cant knit pick when we want to folks,its either all or nuthin at all!

Angela - posted on 02/16/2011

313

36

10

"I actually dont get why people with such severe low mental capacity arent just put to sleep anyway. I have a friend who has twins with severe autism... they are violent, cannot communicate, and have not learned the simplest of rules or self control. She has already planned for them to enter a facility at the age of 18. Why even waste the time, money, and energy on them?

People need to stop wanting to save everyone as the resources arent there to fulfill everyone's wishes. Clean out prisons of the lifers or clean out the mental homes... personally I would clean them both out."

I think I just crapped myself!!! WTF?!!!
I just want to know what your reasoning is, jackie?
I really do want to hear it cause your talking about putting people who are mentally disable down?
They are not animals,they are humans and they have rights...My uncle whom I grew up with had Downs Syndrome he had low mental capacity and couldnt care for himself,and we cared for him and loved him with everything we were,he passed away 3 years ago at 37 years old.
Tell me Jackie,should I have the right to slap your kid in the face if they are misbehaving?
Do I have the right to put your child down if they get in a car accident(god forbid) and became mentally disabled?

I just want to know,cause that statement you made,hit home for most if not all of us,and now I would like for you to take in perspective if it was your child.

In regards to the original post,I really do feel for the mother and Daughter but that has to be tough. Its just a sticky situation through and through...the daughter is a human being with rights and she shouldnt have those rights taken away,however she doesent understand her actions.

"My concern with sterilizing people with mental disabilities is that if they are so mentally disabled they should be sterilized what are they doing having sex in the first place?"

that is exactly my question Toni.

[deleted account]

Mike many teens are not intelligent enough to understand the repercussions of not using contraception it doesn't mean we should have them sterilised, it doesn't say anywhere in the article whether this lady has been educated in anyway about contraception and the importance of it, so like those immature, uneducated teens she may well be able to learn about the importance of using contraception!

My concern with sterilizing people with mental disabilities is that if they are so mentally disabled they should be sterilized what are they doing having sex in the first place? Shouldn't we as society be aiming to protect them from sexual contact rather than just sterilizing them, just because them having sex doesn't result in them having a baby doesn't mean there can't be repercussions from it. They are still likely to contract std's/ sti's, which could lead to them needing even further lifelong medical interventions.

Desiree - posted on 02/16/2011

910

17

12

Sorry I happen to agree that there should be sterilisation in certain cases. It has nothing to do with Human rights or rights of the disabled. In the cases of the mentally challenged (extreme cases) they are unable to look after themselves much less children. We already live in a world where in certain cultures the grandparents look after the kids for what ever reason, and in africa Children looking after their siblings, because the parents have passed. Now we are trying to create the world where the child will end up looking after the mother. You can't have it both ways. Some one is going to have to pay the price and as usual its the children. We can't have it both ways.

[deleted account]

Fuck me Jackie, you do realise you sound like Hitler? I thought we might have actually learnt someting from the huge atrocities he commited, seems not. I mean how far do we take this putting people to sleep? Should we 'put to sleep' children born with heart defects or cleft palates because they don't meet your criteria of perfect? Mass murder is certainly not the way forward!

I can understand the reasoning for wanting certain people sterilized, people whom are mentally and/ or physically unable to look after children, but addicts can and do recover, I'm sure many of us know a recovered addict (we may not even realise they were once an addict) to suggest they are sterilised is completely sureal. Surely like suggested for this girl long term contraception should be mandetory for addicts, so if they stay addicts they can't have children (there was talk about a contraception that could last 10 years before needing replacing, I don't know if it is available yet but there is definately ones that last 5 years before needing replacing) and then if they get clean they still have the option of having children.

Marylea - posted on 02/16/2011

236

3

24

It didn't say her kids would be seized at birth, her mother said that she didn't think she could raise anymore of her daughter's children so they would give any future kids up for adoption. That's not the same thing. No where has is said exactly what is wrong with this young woman other than "severe learning difficulties" it doesn't say she's a bad mother. The issue is her mom doesn't want to support any more of her kids (understandable). As for her children being adopted there are open adoptions where the bio parents do get to see their kids at holidays and things like that so its not totally unreasonable. A lot of teenmoms who choose adoption want those same rights even though its unrealistic to expect such things. Should they be sterilized? There are young women who aren't disabled who have multiple children they can't support and leave it up to the grandparents, with no regard for what they're doing should they be sterilized? There are many people disabled or not who really shouldn't become parents but just because a person is disabled doesn't mean they should automatically be sterilized. That is my point. Once you allow one mother to sterilize someone who shouldn't be a parent whose to stop someone else from sterilize someone that is capable?

Jessica - posted on 02/16/2011

95

8

1

Being the parent myself of a child who isnt capable of being a parent i am all for the mothers wishes in having her daughter "steralized" Anaddiction can be cured, however a mental illness cannot be. Soo many children are placed into the foster care program because of parents who cannot provide a life for their children. I agree it is a delicate situation since we are dealing with humans and not animals.

Sharon - posted on 02/16/2011

11,585

12

1314

Marylea - you aren't thinking clearly. The retarded woman isn't going to be allowed to keep any more children. They will be seized at birth and put into the system and then farmed out to whoever wants a baby from a retarded mother. OBVIOUSLY I wasn't the one who made the judgement call that she can't raise her own kids.

The retarded woman also can't understand that these kids will be taken from her after birth. Her mother says she thinks she'll still get to see them for celebrations and nothing she says can get it through to her that is NOT how it will be.

The woman in question is FAR GONE. Cannot raise kids. Cannot understand consequences. That is NOT my judgement call, it was someone elses.

Marylea - posted on 02/16/2011

236

3

24

@Mike

Its not our place to decided who should and who shouldn't be allowed to have children. Where do you draw the line? Some mentally disabled people are perfectly capable of raising kids how on earth can you determine who will be good parents and who wont. If you're going to sterilize addicts and the disabled then why not anyone who carries defective genes or has a family history of illness? Should paralized people be able to have kids? After all its not like they can run around after them? How about people who aren't disabled but are simply bad parents? If you start deciding who can and can't reproduce eventually you'll have a whole world of sterilized people. Things aren't as black and white as you're making them you can't just draw a line and say everyone on this side can't have kids. Its utterly absurd.



Also the article didn't say that she was having sex with mentally disabled men it just said she was sexually active and healthy. So its an unknown factor. You say that you know some addicts will never recover, well who are you to judge that?



Mentally retarded adults, as you called them, will not suddenly get better, you are right about that. But who are you to decide that they are incapable of loving and caring for a child. Who are you to rob them of that oppurtunity. I'll agree that some disabled people should not have children, but I'm not going to be the one to take that right from them.

Sharon - posted on 02/16/2011

11,585

12

1314

Marylea - more mentally disabled men will. And yes they should be sterilised too.

Addicts CAN recover - some we all know never will.

Mentally retarded adults never suddenly get better. Sterilisation is the best thing for them.

haven't you all met or known of someone who was just FUCKED, had kids while addicted, kept having kids while doing drugs? Don't you think those people should be stopped?

Jocelyn - posted on 02/16/2011

5,165

42

274

Gee Jackie, my family would be fucked in your world. My son is autistic (high functioning) and I'm a recovered coke addict. Praise the Flying Spaghetti Monster that I was never sterilized, nor was my son killed.

Anyway, about the article:
I can see where the mother is coming from, I completely understand her view. I probably wouldn't push for sterilization (in this case), but I see no reason for the court not to order her long-term birth control. The Copper T is good for 10 years! That seems like a great compromise.

Marylea - posted on 02/16/2011

236

3

24

Oh and another thing people who seem to be in support of sterilizing disabled and drug addicts have mentioned removal on the uterus. Um what about men?? There was no mention of baby daddies in the article? What kind of sick man is going to sleep with a disable chick without protection?

Should we just castrate all drug addict and disabled males as well as removing women's uteruses??

Why stop there? Lets cut off the hands of theives and the heads of infadels.

Marylea - posted on 02/16/2011

236

3

24

Holy Jackie, I would hate to live in your world. Am I reading this right? Are there actually people that think this way? Killing the diabled and sterlizing drug addicts. Wonderful, while you're at it why don't you just kill everyone that's different from you, but not before you torture them in consentration camps right Hitler??



Jeez, I'm so angry right now my hands are shaking.



As for the article, they haven't said what the disability this woman has is. Just that she has learning disabilities and a lack of understanding. Based on the information given I think its wrong to sterilize her. I think she should go on some form of long term birth control. Maybe she's just afraid of needles there are other long term birth control options such as an iud. No where does it say what kind of education she's been giving on birth control/contraceptives/reproduction. Perhaps if she were to go to some classes that could properly explain things to her she might understand a bit better. My other question is where is she having all this sex? It sounds like she lives at home but has enough freedom to be sleeping around. I personally haven't been given enough evidence in this article to support sterilization of this young woman. Its not impossible to think that perhaps one day she might find a husband who could help her with any children they might decide to have. It just seems like such a drastic solution.

[deleted account]

Jackie, by your logic, I'd have never had my son. Recovering crack addict here. 17 years clean. Thank the gods I wasn't sterilized by some sweeping law like you propose. No offense Jackie, but I sorta take offense to that. And I think so would my son, if he could understand what you're saying. So would every person who knows and loves him.

LaCi - posted on 02/16/2011

3,361

3

171

I'm talking about that as well. Not for any particular disorder. It all depends on severity, quality of life, and so on. I think it should be optional. If there is no one to care for a person who is incapable of functioning and has a horrible quality of life, I'm not opposed to euthanasia (though I don't LIKE the idea of killing people, I think it's more humane in MANY circumstances). I'm NOT for sweeping through all institutions and killing everyone who is a *drain on society* however.



I'm also against the death penalty, but I'm not opposed to having it be an option for someone who will never get out of prison. If they would choose to die rather than live that way, then it should be their choice. everyone should have the choice to die as well.

Tara - posted on 02/16/2011

2,567

14

107

But Jackie was not talking about the option to abort, she was talking about "putting to sleep" children with autism and prisoners who have mental illnesses and addicts etc. she used the term "clean out". Which smacks of genocide.
Abortion under informed circumstances is up to the woman carrying the fetus, giving birth to a baby with a disability that is not life threatening and deciding to have that baby "put to sleep" is murder.

Sharon - posted on 02/16/2011

11,585

12

1314

Pft considering our society today - I'm willing to bet many of those retarded women have already been baby farms. Who is going to complain afterall?

I'm not for euthanasia per se. But extreme lifesaving measures - NOPE.

Like I've said repeatedly - if the sterilised person in question pursues the rights to reverse their tubals etc through the tangled court systems... by all means go for it. If they can navigate that, they've earned the right and proven ability - right?

LaCi - posted on 02/16/2011

3,361

3

171

"Perfect is one thing, able to function and have any sort of quality of life is another."

That I agree with.

I think it should be an option. Not necessarily mandated. If someone is capable of supporting and caring for the kid and they WANT to, for whatever reason, then I don't think it should be mandatory to euthanize. Though I think, in some cases, it can be cruel to force someone to exist in certain ways. In the case of the baby with no brain, they usually die within hours of birth if they are born alive so that's a pretty surprising case. I don't think it's problematic to let it die on its own, I DO think it's ridiculous to demand that it be "saved" when it can't be. Nonvoluntary euthanasia is normal in many places in cases like this, in which death is inevitable anyway.

As for the mental handicaps and such, it should be an option. Down's is a great example, there are plenty of people who are okay with raising kids with down's. I'm not, which is why I'm for the testing so could just abort. I don't think it should be mandatory that everyone whos tests indicate high probability of down's abort... but it's all about options.

Anyway, I'm pro non-voluntary euthanasia in those types of circumstances, in which a person is not going to attain a decent quality of life and those who would be forced to care for them decide they'd like that option.

Tara - posted on 02/16/2011

2,567

14

107

Being born without a brain is totally different being born autistic.
Jackie is arguing for killing or her term "putting to sleep" autistic children and others with disabilities.

I don't think a retarded woman is in danger of becoming a baby farm, not too likely that any parents are going to want to risk getting a baby from the farm that shares a gene pool with someone retarded. So unless they are taking fertile retarded women, and using an egg and sperm from someone else and simply using the retarded woman to incubate them, good luck on starting a baby farm with domesticated retarded women.
The whole idea of sterilizing parts of society starts to sound a little "Brave New World" ish to me, especially when you throw killing them into the mix. Alpha, Delta, Omega, etc. anyone? (sorry to those who don't get the literary references.) :)

Sharon - posted on 02/16/2011

11,585

12

1314

Perfect is one thing, able to function and have any sort of quality of life is another.

I've seen a lot of downs kids - awesome kids. They have quality of life. The sad thing is that there is no way to tell if this baby is going to have high functioning downs or be extremely low.

I read a news story once about a woman whose baby was born without a brain. It only had a brain stem. She argued and fought with the hospital and state that extreme measures be given to save her babys' life. I felt badly for her but wth? How long do you keep that pretense up? It had NO BRAIN. If I remember right, the courts agreed with the hospital that no extreme measures be given.

I happen to agree that addicts and the severely retarded should be sterilised. At the least tubals but mostly I think removal of the uterus and full on vasectomies be performed.

Heres' a thought - a pregnant retarded woman is at risk of being manipulated by a higher functioning woman who wants a baby. A living baby farm. lovely.

Tara - posted on 02/16/2011

2,567

14

107

Hmmm.... Jackie, if you child was born with autism or your child was born healthy but suffered head trauma resulting in enough brain damage to still function but would require support throughout life, would you have them "put to sleep?". To save yourself the money and time?
Honestly your opinion is highly Aryan in nature. It smacks of a superiority complex mixed with some extreme narcissism thrown in the mix.
I take it everyone you care about are perfect. And if you found out that someone you care about were actually battling an addiction to pain killers you would recommend they be put to sleep? Or at least sterilized? Hmmm.... I'm going to have to think on this for... oh no I didn't... that's whacked.

Sharon - posted on 02/16/2011

11,585

12

1314

1. P isn't intelligent enough to have safe sex... this means possible STDs that will affect her unborn child.

2. She doesn't realise any more children will be taken from her family. As I understand the article - the ONLY reason the other two children are still "with her" is because they are being raised "in the family" which means by her mother. Now her mother is at her supportive end. I don't blame her.

3. A tubal is reversable. P COULD push for it but we all know she won't. All anyone has to do is leave her alone to navigate the court system demanding her right to bear more kids that she can't care for and she'll most likely fail.

People go insane trying to save every child. I keep thinking of my friend ... her kid has had every diagnosis under the sun. He's violent. He's a pathological liar. He's evilly manipulative. His bullshit has almost caused her to go to jail. What would happen to her other child? Who takes care of her other child while she deals with him and his hourly issues? He has been in counseling. He has been removed from the home and taken to one of those juvenile camps meant to offer intensive counseling. He's been medicated. He's just FUCKED. She spends all her time and money on this kid and can't afford to do jackshit for herself or her other child. The state has offered TWICE to take him into a longterm care facility and she's refused. Her life is constant chaotic hell and sometimes I think the only reason I can stay her friend is because all that shit is a thousand miles away from me.

At times, I'm kind of grossed out at how people go to extremes to save a child who has ZERO quality of life. Geezus christ we don't do that to our pets. Its not a child. It has a childs body, but no real functioning brain, a body that does nothing, but it sucks of hundreds of thousands of dollars - almost always funded by the government - for what reason?

I saw a family with a "child" had to be a young woman in her early 20s. In a giant stroller, tubes hooked up and tach tube and the bulge under the shirt was probably a feeding tube. I'd want to die if that were me. They wheeled her around, nothing. Her eyes never moved. They often just parked her in the main aisle while they shopped between the clothing racks. She never moved, I didn't even see her blink. Someone came back with something small in their hand and held it in front of her face talking in high pitched baby talk "SEE LISA! PREEETTTTYYYY!!!" She twitched violently and smiled. It was a genuine smile but really? She immediately slumped back to her original position with the same slack look. Other people passing by with bright colored strollers - did NOT attract her attention. Her eyes didn't even flicker in an attempt to follow the movement. They were also parked in front of the toy aisle.. she never made an attempt to see all the bright colored boxes and toys.

The next time I saw them was by the fitting room - same thing - different spot - LOTS of traffic - NOTHING. She never moved. Another woman in their group came by with a music box and held it in front of her face, with the same high pitched baby talk voice was telling her to look at it, listen to it, nothing.

I'm sorry but that is just gross.

Sharon - posted on 02/16/2011

11,585

12

1314

Heres' the thing. A tubal could be reversed if P were to push for it.

Hell yeah, rip all the plumbing out. She's a drain on her family & society.

LaCi - posted on 02/16/2011

3,361

3

171

"People need to stop wanting to save everyone as the resources arent there to fulfill everyone's wishes. Clean out prisons of the lifers or clean out the mental homes... personally I would clean them both out."



This sounds like an abuse of euthanasia. The purpose of which should not be to "clean up" but rather to end suffering. this kind of thought is supposed to be about the individual's who will be euthanized, not about the rest of our benefits. To use euthanasia as a method of "cleaning up" is a perversion of what it is supposed to be. So, while I can get down with the idea of euthanasia, I think you're taking it to an extreme comparable to genocide. Killing people all willy nilly because they don't live up to whatever standards you have is really just mass murder.



Should we start a new thread on that? Could get interesting.

[deleted account]

I personally think it needs to be done on a case by case basis. In this case I would support the sterilization. However, forced sterilization for anyone disabled would not fly with me.
I do understand and would even promote a case by case review to force sterilization because in cases like this the adult is unable to. If the adult is not an adult, cannot care for themselves, and cannot care for any existing child, then they need to be sterilized.

Sarah - posted on 02/16/2011

628

0

83

I'm gobsmacked. I thought views like that went out round about 1945.

Jackie - posted on 02/16/2011

87

2

2

I actually dont get why people with such severe low mental capacity arent just put to sleep anyway. I have a friend who has twins with severe autism... they are violent, cannot communicate, and have not learned the simplest of rules or self control. She has already planned for them to enter a facility at the age of 18. Why even waste the time, money, and energy on them?

People need to stop wanting to save everyone as the resources arent there to fulfill everyone's wishes. Clean out prisons of the lifers or clean out the mental homes... personally I would clean them both out.

LaCi - posted on 02/16/2011

3,361

3

171

And you really think that everyone who has used an illegal substance after the age of 18 should be sterilized? Even after acknowledging that addiction itself is a highly biological problem.

That's the most obscenely ridiculous thing I've heard in a long time.

Also, I know plenty of recovered alcoholics who haven't drank in decades.

Lets just forcibly sterilize everyone who has ever done anything "unhealthy"

Obviously they don't care about themselves enough to have children.

"You don't exercise? get on the freakin' table you slob!"

Jackie - posted on 02/16/2011

87

2

2

I am pretty sure it has been proven that people who become addicts have some kind of brain defect.
Addicts can be cured but no one can determine when they will relapse which is a high percentage chance. It isnt like we have a low population problem but we do have a problem with a high percentage of children in the foster system, child abuse/neglect who never go into the system, and the percentage of children with disabilities has risen every decade. If reproduction was changed from a right to an earned choice, women would be more likely to take the care of their bodies and children more seriously.

LaCi - posted on 02/16/2011

3,361

3

171

I can't find anything about a hysterectomy in that article, and if that's what they want to do to her, without a medically necessary reason, then I am ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED. That is FAR worse than just getting the tubal.



But, this is what I saw "Campaigners have warned that the case – which could result in P’s fallopian tubes being sealed – could have a devastating impact on the human rights of the disabled." which sounds like the tubal, possibly the coil version.

Tara - posted on 02/16/2011

2,567

14

107

She's 21 years old, she has been having periods for long enough to deal with them. It doesn't say what her IQ is or what kind of disability she has. It does not say whether she has downs syndrome or is developmentally delayed due to another diagnosis.
Forcing sterilization on anyone without their consent is wrong.
Using an implant as birth control is not the same. If she had diabetes but didn't understand needles, she would still be forced to have them to ensure she is healthy. To me there is no difference in forcing her to have a contraceptive injection.
A hysterectomy is major life changing surgery, it requires hormone replacement after that can lead to cancer and other problems. Not to mention the emotional changes present after the surgery.
Preventing her from making more babies is the goal her mother wishes to attain.
Forcing a contraceptive is much more respectful of her human rights than forcing major surgery or a tubal ligation on her.

LaCi - posted on 02/16/2011

3,361

3

171

That's just my personal opinion. There are risks involved with tubals, tubal ligation syndrome for instance, though it is controversial, but I think making someone go through it and risk such problems against their will when they *could* be on birth control is kind of gross. Now, if there was a health related problem with the birth control, then I'd see a tubal as the next viable option. Her situation is a little different though, she had a c-section with the first, if she has one with the second then it wouldn't be an additional surgery that she would be put through. There's just still that risk of ptls :/ Also, other complications that could require subsequent surgeries... I'm just not a big fan of forcing surgery on someone. when there is another option.

Tracey - posted on 02/16/2011

1,094

2

58

Why is long term contraception preferable to sterilization? This woman has a life long learning disability which is not gong to be cured and if she can't understand that sex = babies she probably also has problems understanding periods, in which case a hysterectomy would save her suffering every month.

Stifler's - posted on 02/16/2011

15,141

154

597

But it's not like she's going to be just willingly getting sterilized either.

Tara - posted on 02/16/2011

2,567

14

107

@Jackie,
Drug addicts can be cured. If you are a 21 year old addicted to heroin, you are forcibly sterilized because you are an addict, at 24 you get clean, at 26 you get married you want to start a family but oops..... your fallopian tubes are tied because you used to be an addict. Oh well, you could always try IVF!!

LaCi - posted on 02/16/2011

3,361

3

171

"Once you are 18 and you use any illegal drug, you should lose your right to reproduce. Addiction"



Uh, since when does using a drug equate addiction?



this would mean a LOT of college students are forcibly sterilized.



Like.. the vast majority.

Tara - posted on 02/16/2011

2,567

14

107

The article said the courts had tried for the injection, the daughter refused the "jab" at the last minute.
I agree that a court ordered contraceptive injection is the best route to go, but they would to get the courts permission to have her sedated to give her the shot if she won't take it voluntarily.
I empathize with her mother, she has already raised her own daughter with her own disabilities, and now she is raising one grandson born to her daughter and will now have a granddaughter to care for as well.
I would be very worried about STI's and I would worry for her emotional health as well.
This seems like a very gray area for the courts and their ruling could affect many many other developmentally delayed people.

Jackie - posted on 02/16/2011

87

2

2

my constant concern... anyone with a low mental IQ or drug addiction is not capable of caring for a child physically, emotionally, or financially. Those three are the top reasons for children in foster care. Just think how low the number of children would be in foster care if people were forced to take responsibility for their actions... you either do this or you lose your right to reproduce. It disgusts me how many "chances" parents are given once their children are removed from the home.

I know nicotine is a drug... but that is a thin line. I would have to say it is a 50/50 on the number of nicotine users who think their nicotine use rates higher than the welfare of their child. Alcohol users have to be broken down into alcoholics and those that arent... if you feel you deserve a drink every day, you are an addict. It sickens me to hear people who claim their addiction is their right... their right does not apply to the rights of the child. Once you are 18 and you use any illegal drug, you should lose your right to reproduce. Addiction is the reason people make poor decisions and those poor decisions are most of the reasons why so many children are in foster care, grow up with a poor education (parents think it is the teacher's responsibility), grow up with violent/emotional/mental problems...

If someone with a low IQ is able to care for children then they would be perfect to work as a day care worker with a supervisor or coworker. Just like I wouldnt leave my babies with a child, why should anyone who has the IQ of a child be allowed to reproduce?

Louise - posted on 02/16/2011

5,429

69

2296

Why can't the parents take the daughter to have the 5 year implant whilst this is being dragged through the court. I understand that it is the girls human right not to be sterilised but if she does not understand how she is getting pregnant or how to protect herself from pregnancy surely the mother is just trying to prevent a child coming into the world that is not wanted and has no way of being cared for by it's mother.

I think if the medical profession can prove beyond doubt that this girl is not responsible for her actions then she should be sterilised for the sake of the children she could bare. This woman is never going to get any better is she, she is mentally disabled for life. The poor mother of this girl is trying to save a lot of heart ache all round, it is bad enough that she will have to worry about sti's.

Jackie - posted on 02/16/2011

87

2

2

sterilization should be mandatory for anyone who has an IQ under 69... IMO, it should also be mandatory for anyone who has drug addictions as well.

[deleted account]

I agree with Emma and LaCi, there is no reason the court couldn't order a long term contraception such as the implant. I see no reason why this young lady should have steriliastaion forced upon her. I would be concerned with who she is having sex with though, because if she is so mentally disabled she is not aware that if she continues to have children she will never see them again is she really mentally mature enough to be having sex in the first place? I worry that she could be taken advantage of and that she could catch std's which could severely affect her health long-term, sterilisation does nothing to protect for this (I know only condoms and abstinece really provide any protection against diseases).

LaCi - posted on 02/16/2011

3,361

3

171

I agree Emma. All the things we have now, Implanon is what? 5 years? I think that should be an option. Maybe not sterilization, but some form of long term birth control.

Stifler's - posted on 02/16/2011

15,141

154

597

This is really sad. Why cant't they have a court order for contraception rather than sterilisation?

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms