A true story - Pregnant Autistic Woman

[FlorenceHamilton]

An acquaintance of mine has a daughter with a high functioning form of autistic spectrum disorder. She is intellectualy within normal limits, but lacking in executive function. She is 18 years old. From the time she was young, she desperately wanted to fit in with the regular kids, but was horribly awkward. As mant young people in the aitistic spectrum, when she frustrates, it becomes somewhat violent. There are times she inflicts injury upon herself, other times on property and someitmes on other people. She has been to many psychiatrists and neurologists, has had developmental training and was finally placed in a residential school for 11th and 12th grade after a series of unfortunate incidents in the public school (The public school that routinely refused to give her special education because she was academically adequate.)

This young lady uses sex to get attention from boys and from girls. She was put on birth control whci she did take religiously. Her several boyfriends have all also been neurodevelopmentally atypical. The last boyfriend broke up with her recently and the young lady had a plan. She stopped taking her birth control pills and she lured the young man into a sexual encounter. (She is 18 and he is 17). Now she is pregant. She intellectually can tell you that her body is going to change and that she is going to give birth to a totally dependent new human being. But she is very impulsive. She has a history of engaging in dangerous behaviors. She lacks insight. She is body dysmorphic to begin with. I shudder to think of how she will react to her changing shape.

How can we possibly legislate morality to this girl? How can we force her to proceed with a pregnancy that she does not have the tools to cope with? If we force her to continue the pregnancy, how can society suport her health and well being and that of the unborn? If she gives the baby up for adoption, what are the adoptive parents entitled to know about the neuropsychiatric background of the parents? Both she and the father are physically healthy and intellectually within normal limits. My guess is that adoption agencies limit the details.

How can we legislate what is right for every pregnancy situation with one blanket set of restrictive laws? A pregnancy that is unintended may simply be less than optimal timing. Or it may be potentially disatrous for all involved. It is a time of great change and big decisions. It needs to remain a personal decision. It is a private matter with public repercussions. This girl need support and education. She does not need another head trip with waiting periods and ultrasounds. She needs facts. And if she continues the pregnancy, she needs help. And the child needs parents that are armed with the knowledge that the baby is healthy but high risk so that they can get intervention as early as possible.

Thoughts?

[Soldier of the One]

No easy answer here. What a dilemma.

What I *do* know is that neither the girl nor the boy need extra guilt and judgment piled onto them. That might be a fine start in this day and age.

[shesinsane]

Somehow I feel no matter what happens, this young lady will never be ok.

I know the fundie answer would be make her have the baby and give it up for adoption*, without regard to what effect this might have on her, since it's only the baby that matters. I believe if she's capable of making her own decisions, it's up to her. If she's got a guardian to make decisions, perhaps they could work together?

*is there a better phrase to use than "giving up for adoption"?

[Elle]

You phrase is as "forcing" her to continue a pregnancy. The default is continuing a pregnancy. If she was forced into anything, she would be forced into an abortion. An abortion for an older teen or adult of any age absolutely can NOT be forced. Period. Meaning that a pregnancy isn't being forced to continue. It's just continuing as it is. If abortions could be forced on the disabled, as it once was...well, do you want to live in a country that forces abortions on the "less desirable" in society? No. An abortion is continued, a pregnancy is not. She can abort if she wants. So who is forcing her to remain pregnant?

If she is unable to parent a baby alone, and it sounds like she probably can't, then the state will step in and determine if there is any reasonable assistance that can be given to help her be the actual hands-on mother (versus , and if not, then her rights will probably be terminated. If she decides on her own to abort or to put the baby up for adoption, her parents can't stop that, but they can't force her to do either. This doesn't matter if she's 18 or 28 or 14 - grandparents can not force an abortion or adoption of a child that they do not have parental custody of. So no one can force an 18-year-old, a legal adult, to abort if she doesn't want to, no matter what the circumstances, and only the court and system can terminate her parental rights if it's determined she isn't capable of safely parenting a child. If the doctors of this girl don't notice anything amiss, then her parents, if concerned, can contact the human services department for intervention.

It has already been determined that disabled parents have the full right to raise their own children unless they are unable to do so safely, and it's already been determined to be extremely wrong to make the decision to abort on the part of anyone but a very young child (and the circumstances of any pregnancy of a very young child would have police launching a major investigation for rape).

If the baby is adopted to someone else, the adoptive parent(s) is/are entitled to any information pertinent to the child, including biological family history.

[valsa]

The default is continuing a pregnancy.

I disagree. As long as all options are still legally available, there is no default.

[valsa]

is there a better phrase to use than "giving up for adoption"?

I usually use "making an adoption plan".

[QAF_Rocks]

I usually use "making an adoption plan".

I think that's the preferred term. They're trying to phase out "give up for adoption" because it has negative connotations.

[Elle]

I disagree. As long as all options are still legally available, there is no default.

The default is continuing a pregnancy because that is what will happen is nothing is done. She has the option of aborting, so no one is forcing her to continue being pregnant. What would have to be forced is an abortion, and she has the legal right to refuse that. So I repeat the question, how is she being forced to continue a pregnancy?

[valsa]

The default is continuing a pregnancy because that is what will happen is nothing is done. She has the option of aborting, so no one is forcing her to continue being pregnant. What would have to be forced is an abortion, and she has the legal right to refuse that. So I repeat the question, how is she being forced to continue a pregnancy?

If she doesn't want to be pregnant, if she's just ambivalent about it, or if she doesn't have the ability to make decisions for herself, she could be forced into continuing the pregnancy.

[Minerva]

I would want to see that decision left to everyone who is even remotely able to make it, and she certainly seems to be in that range. I have family members with autism who are not as high functioning as she, and I would be happy to see them become parents one day, too (I'm assuming she's going to carry to term, but it sounds like that's her intention). Would it be better for her financially, education-wise, and preparedness-wise if she didn't have a baby at 18? Of course, but you can't force someone to have an abortion anymore than you can force someone to carry to term (and it IS forced if you don't want it). I would guess that the trauma of losing control of your body like that would probably be worse than most other situations.

[Elle]

If she doesn't want to be pregnant, if she's just ambivalent about it, or if she doesn't have the ability to make decisions for herself, she could be forced into continuing the pregnancy.

If she doesn't want to be pregnant, she can get an abortion. There is no law saying someone of a normal intelligence can't get an abortion. If she's ambivalent (I hate to break it to you, but it's not that uncommon for women to be ambivalent and so just roll with it without caring one way or the other), then it's still her choice not to abort. You can't put someone through an abortion just because they don't care one way or the other. NO ONE is forcing that ambivalent person to stay pregnant.

If she is mentally unable to decide (and really, there's nothing here to indicate that she's unable), well there's already legal precedent that an abortion can't be forced except under extreme circumstances. The default is to do nothing, which is continue a pregnancy, which is why pregnancies continue. Doing nothing is passive. You can argue at that point that either decision made on someone's behalf is forced on that person, even if the decision is not to make any decision. Since the girl in question is considered to be of normal intelligence, then it's her decision, and she's not being forced to remain pregnant.

I find it repulsive that anyone can argue that a normal-intelligence adult not being forced into an abortion means she's forced to remain pregnant. Basically what it seems to be coming down to is that someone who has some measure of mental disorder should be put through an abortion, even if she doesn't want to, because magnanimously allowing her to continue with her own pregnancy, even if she wants to have the baby, is forcing her to remain pregnant. Because someone is slightly non-neurotypical, a pregnancy for that person is wrong. Wow. That's fucked up.

If this girl WANTS to remain pregnant, then, even if she was of lower than average intelligence, she is NOT being forced to remain pregnant. That's the danger in claiming that a pregnancy, when abortion is a legal option, is forced. it implies that abortion is what would be normal, and anything else is what's forced. It is disgusting that what's being implied if she should be strapped down and put through an abortion so that her pregnancy, that she damned well may want, won't be "forced." Explain how someone can be forced to do exactly what they already want to do. If this girl wants to remain pregnant, then, regardless of her mental state, an abortion is what would be forced on her.

No one has the right to imply that the right thing is to put her through an unwanted abortion, and it's extremely dangerous and disgusting to even suggest that the default is to abort the babies of people with mental disorders. Eugenics isn't a good thing, you know.

[Witsec1]

Elle, to whom is this rant directed? You are arguing with an imaginary person.

[Witsec1]

Elle, read the OP again, especially this paragraph.

How can we legislate what is right for every pregnancy situation with one blanket set of restrictive laws? A pregnancy that is unintended may simply be less than optimal timing. Or it may be potentially disatrous for all involved. It is a time of great change and big decisions. It needs to remain a personal decision. It is a private matter with public repercussions. This girl need support and education. She does not need another head trip with waiting periods and ultrasounds. She needs facts. And if she continues the pregnancy, she needs help. And the child needs parents that are armed with the knowledge that the baby is healthy but high risk so that they can get intervention as early as possible.

You've gotten hold of the wrong end of the stick, completely.

[Koala]

I would want to see that decision left to everyone who is even remotely able to make it, and she certainly seems to be in that range.

Would it be better for her financially, education-wise, and preparedness-wise if she didn't have a baby at 18? Of course, but you can't force someone to have an abortion anymore than you can force someone to carry to term (and it IS forced if you don't want it). I would guess that the trauma of losing control of your body like that would probably be worse than most other situations.

I agree. I guess the best you can do is to be there for her with as much help and support as she's willing to accept. No matter which choice she makes...

[Elle]

Flora, reread the part where the OP said, "If we force her to continue the pregnancy" No one is forcing her. This girl who falls in the range of normal intelligence made the decision to toss out the birth control to get pregnant. I take issue with the implication that the right thing is to strap her down and abort her baby because kindly allowing a normal-intelligence adult who happens to be on the very high end of autism is the same thing as forcing her to be pregnant.

The OP seems to think that a pregnancy continuing when someone doesn't have the tools to cope means it's being forced. Every day women who are very poor or very stressed or lack family support are pregnant, and no one sees it as forcing them to remain pregnant, and we're told to support her decision. That should not change just because the woman in question has a mental condition, and it should be seen as her being "forced" to remain pregnant when she clearly wants to be.

My rant is aimed at the OP (and anyone else) who thinks the right thing to do is to abort the babies of people with mental conditions on the wrong belief that letting the pregnancies continue is by force, even when the woman in question, who can legally obtain an abortion, WANTS to be pregnant.

[Witsec1]

Elle. What does "if" mean? You are misreading the whole thing. Florence was pointing out that we cannot legislate morality here, either way. If abortion becomes illegal, then pregnancy is forced. Obviously, we cannot force this young woman to have an abortion, and no one, except in your fevered imagination, is advocating for that.

Valsa was simply pointing out that continued pregnancy is not the default, it is possible for a pregnancy to be forced, along a continuum of outright physical force to mental pressure. Actually under current laws it is much easier to force or pressure or guilt someone into continuing a pregnancy. For an abortion, consent forms have to be signed, you don't have to sign consent forms to continue a pregnancy. Most of the recent ultrasound laws are actually attempts to pressure women to continue pregnancy.

Edited because I messed up the name of the OP.

[browngrl]

The OP seems to think that a pregnancy continuing when someone doesn't have the tools to cope means it's being forced. Every day women who are very poor or very stressed or lack family support are pregnant, and no one sees it as forcing them to remain pregnant, and we're told to support her decision. That should not change just because the woman in question has a mental condition, and it should be seen as her being "forced" to remain pregnant when she clearly wants to be.

My rant is aimed at the OP (and anyone else) who thinks the right thing to do is to abort the babies of people with mental conditions on the wrong belief that letting the pregnancies continue is by force, even when the woman in question, who can legally obtain an abortion, WANTS to be pregnant.

This is not how I understood the original post. I believe the OP was describing a difficult situation that she has come across. I believe the point was to open up a discussion on the ethics of situations like this. I have had to deal with situations similar to this in real life. It is not easy. Often it is the parents of the pregnant woman who end up bearing the burden of care and sometimes the baby ends up in a sad situation because of neglect and or abuse and yet how can we take away another's right to choose. So what to do? Even having worked with ethics committees and with legal advice I still just don't know if there is ever a right answer.

[LadyBlue]

I think that's the preferred term. They're trying to phase out "give up for adoption" because it has negative connotations.

As an adoptee, I find that wording disingenuous at best and down right disgusting. It's just another way for the adoption industry to minimise the harm and pain that adoption involves for everyone in the triad. At least "give up" is somewhat honest.

[valsa]

If this girl WANTS to remain pregnant

Notice how someone who "wants to remain pregnant" is not on the list of women who can be forced to stay pregnant? Maybe you should pay attention to that next time.

Also, women with disabilities, particularly mental, do have a much harder time getting abortions in many states. Since they typically live on a fixed or low income and have transportation issues, things like mandatory waiting periods, couseling at CPC, and requiring multiple visits to the doctor can affect her ability to get an abortion. And that's not even mentioning mandating she undergo unneeded testing or be given " fetal stats" (some of them false)

[valsa]

It's just another way for the adoption industry to minimise the harm and pain that adoption involves for everyone in the triad.

Not to make this into an "is adoption good or bad" debate (because we've had more than enough of those here) but every adoption is different and you cannot make blanket statements like this as if they're true for every adoption. Also, I'm pretty sure the "give up" language was changed because it dehumanizes adoptees. You "give up" an animal (say, to a shelter or humane society), you don't "give up" a person.

[FlorenceHamilton]

BrownGirl is correct. I made no judgement at all. I simply told a story that would open a discussion. If abortion is made illegal, she would be forced to continue the pregnancy. If she lived in a state that required her to have many visits, ultrasounds and waiting periods, she would be forced de facto into continuing the pregnancy. After all, isn't that the point of making all of these obsacles...to make terminating a pregnancy very difficult.

As it turns out, this girl has decided to continue her pregnancy. Choice means choice. And this is her choice.

She did speak with an adoption counselor. However, I last heard that her boyfriend is back in the picture. Being emotionally immature, she now thinks they are going to be a family. I suspect there will be a lot of drama over the coming months. She has been hovering at the edge of competency since reaching majority. She has had two psych admissions in this last year. At discharge, the topic of making her father guardian did come up, but the decision has been thus far to allow her to remain her own agent.

If this girl does decide to allow her child to be adopted by another family, we then get into the adoption industry. I did bring this up in the original thread. What obligation does the agency have to inform the adoptive family about the neuroatypical background of the potential baby? Since both biologic parents are physically healthy and intellectually with in normal limits, are the adoptive parents entitled to know that there are less concrete, but important issues that this new human may have inherited?

If this girl decides to maintain custody of the child, should she be entitled to government assistance? She and the boy both have parents who currently support them. Should they foot the bill and go through the emotional roller coaster (again) with this new little person?

I do not know answers. I know only questions. I can make guesses about what is likely to happen. My guess is that this young lady will remain pregnant. My guess is that she will have a difficult time during the pregnancy and likely practice self-harm. (Sh has a history of this behavior). My guess is that the boy will withdraw and that his parents will agree to some amount of money to be given to this girl on a monthly basis. Nobody is wealthy here. It will be helpful, but modest in sum. My guess is that the girls parents will have the lion's share of responsibility for another neuro-atypical child. They were not very good at parenting the first one. It broke their marriage. Dad has been unemployed for 5 years and has had a very difficult time getting a job. He suffers severe depression. Mom is bipolar (untreated) from observation.

I got jumped over in a previous post because I said that making decisions about an inopportune pregnancy is a terrible position to be in. I think that there are many crossroads that are difficult. This issue is complicated by issues involving a developing life. It is a horrible position to be in. Even if an emotionally competent woman is making the decision, it is still a tough spot.

My personal belief is that the government cannot know what is best or what situations arise. It does not belong in the decision at all. Ultimately, this girl deserves support for whatever she chooses to do with her own body. I am certain that her parents favor terminating the pregnancy. But it is not their choice either. And it should not be, even though the burden will most likely fall on them.

Issues that are controversial are so for a reason. THis story underlines the reason. This is a private decision. The ramifications will have public prepercussions. There are no easy answers.

[Deleted03]

Did you think of offering her to watch Teen Mom? The common point of most of the couples is that couples don't last a baby. Anyway, just a thought might be too late, she might have made a final decision already, just wanted to put it out there.

[Iamthatbean]

Why assume that the baby will be neuro-atypical?

[VintageJen1984]

BrownGirl is correct. I made no judgement at all. I simply told a story that would open a discussion. If abortion is made illegal, she would be forced to continue the pregnancy. If she lived in a state that required her to have many visits, ultrasounds and waiting periods, she would be forced de facto into continuing the pregnancy. After all, isn't that the point of making all of these obsacles...to make terminating a pregnancy very difficult.

As it turns out, this girl has decided to continue her pregnancy. Choice means choice. And this is her choice.

She did speak with an adoption counselor. However, I last heard that her boyfriend is back in the picture. Being emotionally immature, she now thinks they are going to be a family. I suspect there will be a lot of drama over the coming months. She has been hovering at the edge of competency since reaching majority. She has had two psych admissions in this last year. At discharge, the topic of making her father guardian did come up, but the decision has been thus far to allow her to remain her own agent.

If this girl does decide to allow her child to be adopted by another family, we then get into the adoption industry. I did bring this up in the original thread. What obligation does the agency have to inform the adoptive family about the neuroatypical background of the potential baby? Since both biologic parents are physically healthy and intellectually with in normal limits, are the adoptive parents entitled to know that there are less concrete, but important issues that this new human may have inherited?

If this girl decides to maintain custody of the child, should she be entitled to government assistance? She and the boy both have parents who currently support them. Should they foot the bill and go through the emotional roller coaster (again) with this new little person?

I do not know answers. I know only questions. I can make guesses about what is likely to happen. My guess is that this young lady will remain pregnant. My guess is that she will have a difficult time during the pregnancy and likely practice self-harm. (Sh has a history of this behavior). My guess is that the boy will withdraw and that his parents will agree to some amount of money to be given to this girl on a monthly basis. Nobody is wealthy here. It will be helpful, but modest in sum. My guess is that the girls parents will have the lion's share of responsibility for another neuro-atypical child. They were not very good at parenting the first one. It broke their marriage. Dad has been unemployed for 5 years and has had a very difficult time getting a job. He suffers severe depression. Mom is bipolar (untreated) from observation.

I got jumped over in a previous post because I said that making decisions about an inopportune pregnancy is a terrible position to be in. I think that there are many crossroads that are difficult. This issue is complicated by issues involving a developing life. It is a horrible position to be in. Even if an emotionally competent woman is making the decision, it is still a tough spot.

My personal belief is that the government cannot know what is best or what situations arise. It does not belong in the decision at all. Ultimately, this girl deserves support for whatever she chooses to do with her own body. I am certain that her parents favor terminating the pregnancy. But it is not their choice either. And it should not be, even though the burden will most likely fall on them.

Issues that are controversial are so for a reason. THis story underlines the reason. This is a private decision. The ramifications will have public prepercussions. There are no easy answers.

Autism Spectrum Disorders are not hereditary. This baby could easily be neurotypical.

[Sky_Diamond]

The one question this story raises, if the girl is not able to take care of a child. Why wasn't she put on a form of birh control that she had no choice over, i.e. an injection or coil.

This story is quite personal because I have AS but i'm fortunate that is high function enough for me to be in control of sexuality and maybe one day if i'm lucky have children.

The girl should have an abortion but it should be made clear that this is her choice and the best solution.