Forcing a mentally disabled woman to give birth

[Mommy22alyns]

I'd not sure why "'care for'" is in quotes here. There were legitimate ethical issues in that case that required weighing medical pros and cons with regard to the little girl's care. It's not like her parents decided one day to have her undergo surgery just for the fun of it.

I have to agree; I will not judge those parents.

[Mela99]

I'm interning as a guardian ad litem for minors and physically and mentally disabled adults. Some of the things I have seen have made me question humanity in a way I never dreamed possible.

If it could harm her to have the baby, she shouldn't. If she doesn't want the baby, she shouldn't. I don't care how many adoptive couples there are. There seems to be some shitty kind of mentality that just because she's DD, she can't and shouldn't think for herself, and do what it best for her. Yeah, you could probably force her one way or another, or manipulate her, but that doesn't mean you should

[SoybeanQueen]

I doubt they would give her a choice in adoption.

Once they're finished arguing over whether or not she can consent to be pregnant, they can argue over whether or not she can consent to place her child for adoption. :/

[Deleted03]

Once they're finished arguing over whether or not she can consent to be pregnant, they can argue over whether or not she can consent to place her child for adoption. :/

I am sure they have made up their minds. It just makes me sick.

[miffy]

Why wasn't she on depo or implanon?

[emmiedahl]

Why wasn't she on depo or implanon?

No one knows, but I suspect her fundie Catholic family had something to do with that.

[debrand]

ourfullhouse.com/49-health/874-can-the-courts-require-an-abortion-in-america.html

Here is a fundie take on the case. One thing that has impressed me about this thread is that you all understand that this is complex case.

As we draw near to the coming election, I trust you will join with me in voting for a candidate that upholds the sanctity of life in all cases, not just those that are convenient.

With obvious public outcries against forced abortions in China and forced sterilizations of mentally handicapped individuals in Nazi Germany, one might assume the United States knows better.

This means that the writer is fine with forcing a woman to give birth but not fine with allowing her to be forced to have an abortion.

[gilora]

This is obviously a difficult situation. If the woman understands the health risks and consequences of pregnancy/birth, she should be allowed to make the decision. If she does not, and there is no known serious risk to her life or health, her parents should be allowed to make the decision. Some may not agree with that decision, but it should still be the right of the woman or her family to make it. I would hate for the courts to get involved in my medical decision-making for my child, unless the stakes were irreversibly high (and then I'd still hate it) but at least it would be justified.

[Spider Burps]

Maybe this isn't the case anymore, but when I first became certified to oversee the resident's medication I was told that Valproate (Depakote) can be made ineffective by using hormonal birth control simultaneously. So the residents who had Epilepsy were more limited in birth control options. It's been a few years since I have had to oversee that in my job because it's not my area anymore, so maybe that's no longer the case.

I think you're confusing Depakote and Topamax. I've been on both; my neurologist said that Topamax makes hormonal birth control nearly ineffective, but that Depakote was safe and effective (though blood tests were required to monitor hormones and, of course, liver function).

boringness>

[Hane]

She is still on medication for the seizures and the doctors are split on whether the pregnancy is safe. This is exactly the case for a guardian ad litem. I'd also hope that this increased attention will draw out the father to determine if someone needs to be prosecuted.

This, times a million.

[Shoobydoo]

This is obviously a difficult situation. If the woman understands the health risks and consequences of pregnancy/birth, she should be allowed to make the decision. If she does not, and there is no known serious risk to her life or health, her parents should be allowed to make the decision. Some may not agree with that decision, but it should still be the right of the woman or her family to make it. I would hate for the courts to get involved in my medical decision-making for my child, unless the stakes were irreversibly high (and then I'd still hate it) but at least it would be justified.

From what little I know about the situation, this is the case. I sincerely doubt she is capable of understanding the implications of pregnancy. It was actually implied to me that the article exaggerated her powers of understanding. Since people have been wondering, her parents also prevented her from being on BC. I think the parents have made absolutely zero correct decisions about their daughter's sexual health, but it seems that she really is not in a state to decide for herself.

[Coconut Flan]

That is so sad. If they've left her vulnerable to pregnancy when she doesn't have the capability to comprehend getting pregnant or the result, that is simply irresponsible in my view.

[Shoobydoo]

Irresponsible is a much more polite word than what I'd like to use, but I have been requested to attempt to preserve the family peace. :evil: