Due to an ongoing health crisis in the family, blogging will be 'on and off' as time and circumstances permit for the foreseeable future. I also beg your indulgence if I am slow in responding to emails. New posts will appear below this notice.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Appeals Court: No forced abortion (shocking background)

A Massachusetts appeals court has verbally skewered a judge who ordered that a mentally ill woman have an abortion against her will even if it meant she had to be “coaxed, bribed, or even enticed” into a hospital.

The Massachusetts Appeals Court this week overturned the ruling by Norfolk Probate Judge Christina L. Harms, who had also ordered that the 32-year-old woman, known as “Mary Moe,” be sterilized.

The appellate decision noted that Moe “has consistently expressed her opposition to abortion” and likely would “continue to do so if she were competent.”

As for the sterilization order, state Appellate Court Associate Justice Andrew R. Grainger wrote: “No party requested this measure, none of the attendant procedural requirements has been met, and the judge appears to have simply produced the requirement out of thin air.”
Read the rest here.

This is insane.  The lower court judge should be disbarred.

9 comments:

The Anti-Gnostic said...

The woman in question is mentally ill, and is doubtless easy to manipulate into sex given her lack of future time-orientation.

Sterilizing her would be an act of mercy, and economy of the public purse.

Anthony said...

Aaaaaand with A-G's comment, I think I need to take a nice long break from reading blogs.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

If you are going to ask society to deal with harsh problems, then you can't bleat and whine when society metes out harsh remedies.

We're adults here; let's talk about real facts, not what we wish would happen or could happen.

The woman cannot care for children. She is bipolar and schizophrenic which puts us on the horns of an awful dilemma: give her anti-psychotic medication which will inflict permanent injury on her unborn child, or withold anti-psychotic medication and risk further mental damage and a suicide/homicide hazard. Her parents are already taking care of one of her children in addition to their child-woman daughter.

So unless you're going to step up to the plate the next time this woman with no future time-orientation is manipulated into sex, then be quiet.

Anonymous said...

AG sounds rather Hitler-esque, if you ask me. I've seen those with mental illness be prescribed birth control pills or shots--both of which are reversible. No real good option either way: too many babies born to a mom who can't care for them, or allowing the government to decide who can and cannot have children.
Angela

John (Ad Orientem) said...

Anonymous,
I think Hitleresque is a bit harsh. But yes, AG has a long history of commentary supporting views that seem better suited to the first half of the 19th century and the Know Nothing Party.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Angela at least tried to make a counter-argument (good luck reminding a psychotic to take her daily estrogen). Just because you have no problem spending other people's tax and insurance premium dollars on your ideal world doesn't mean other people will agree.

A.O. - you style yourself a monarchist throwback. I think social democracy is really more your speed.

John (Ad Orientem) said...

My political views are I think best covered by the term "cognitive dissonance." :-)

Anonymous said...

A truly difficult case all around. We need to keep all parties in our prayers and above all, the child.

Nikolaus

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Nikolaus is correct. Modernity brings some awful challenges. Apologies for my harsh comments.