Title : "A British court has ordered an abortion for a mentally disabled woman against her and her mother’s wishes, with the judge calling the decision 'heartbreaking' but in the best interests of the woman, who is 22 weeks pregnant."
link : "A British court has ordered an abortion for a mentally disabled woman against her and her mother’s wishes, with the judge calling the decision 'heartbreaking' but in the best interests of the woman, who is 22 weeks pregnant."
"A British court has ordered an abortion for a mentally disabled woman against her and her mother’s wishes, with the judge calling the decision 'heartbreaking' but in the best interests of the woman, who is 22 weeks pregnant."
"The unidentified woman, who lives in London, is in her 20s and has the mental capacity of a 6- to 9-year-old child.... 'I am acutely conscious of the fact that for the state to order a woman to have a termination where it appears that she doesn’t want it is an immense intrusion,' Justice [Nathalie] Lieven said in her decision. But the judge said she had to act in the woman’s 'best interests, not on society’s views of termination.'... The jurist said that though she was aware that the woman wanted to keep the baby, she was not sure the woman had any sense of what having a baby 'meant.' 'I think she would like to have a baby in the same way she would like to have a nice doll,' the judge was quoted by British news outlets as saying.... She also said she thought the woman would suffer more if the baby was brought to term and taken away to foster care or for adoption than if pregnancy was terminated. The woman 'would suffer greater trauma from having a baby removed,' the judge said, adding, 'It would at that stage be a real baby.'"From "U.K. Court Says Mentally Disabled Woman Must Have Abortion" (NYT).
You may be thinking this sounds like Buck v. Bell, the U.S. Supreme Court case in which Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. wrote the unbelievably cruel line "Three generations of imbeciles are enough." But the British judge is following the idea that she's doing what is best for the pregnant woman, not (at least not overtly) the idea of sparing society the burden of new, undesirable citizens.
But it's mind-boggling to think that forcing a woman to have an abortion is doing her a favor because she's not able to analyze the nature of her own suffering properly. Her wanting the baby magnifies the suffering of abortion but the judge still thinks that suffering is outweighed by the suffering of having the baby. Why isn't the suffering you choose for yourself inherently better, even if it hurts more?
This decision is, of course, horrible to those who are anti-abortion, but it also violates the principles that underlie the right to have an abortion, which is personal bodily autonomy and freedom of conscience.
Thus articles "A British court has ordered an abortion for a mentally disabled woman against her and her mother’s wishes, with the judge calling the decision 'heartbreaking' but in the best interests of the woman, who is 22 weeks pregnant."
that is all articles "A British court has ordered an abortion for a mentally disabled woman against her and her mother’s wishes, with the judge calling the decision 'heartbreaking' but in the best interests of the woman, who is 22 weeks pregnant." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article "A British court has ordered an abortion for a mentally disabled woman against her and her mother’s wishes, with the judge calling the decision 'heartbreaking' but in the best interests of the woman, who is 22 weeks pregnant." with the link address https://usainnew.blogspot.com/2019/06/a-british-court-has-ordered-abortion.html
0 Response to ""A British court has ordered an abortion for a mentally disabled woman against her and her mother’s wishes, with the judge calling the decision 'heartbreaking' but in the best interests of the woman, who is 22 weeks pregnant.""
Post a Comment