Forced Sterilization?

When I came across this story this morning, it disturbed me. Although it did not take place in the country, the very idea of government over stepping outs bounds can have a profound effect world wide.

The UK government may soon be all set to forcibly sterilize a mother of six with learning disabilities, according to shocking news reports. But don't worry, they say it's for her own good.

Social Services have requested that a judge approve of them forcibly entering her home, dragging her to the hospital, and sterilizing her. Sounds like a scene out of a horror movie or Nazi Germany. But they say it has nothing to do with eugenics.

Eugenics is the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits. 

But according to social services, no It's nothing like that.

Health and social services officials want the judge to declare:

" the woman lacks capacity to make decisions under the terms of mental capacity legislation; a "therapeutic" sterilisation is in her best interests – and authorise medics to sterilise her; to authorise her removal from her home to a hospital; to authorise deprivation of her liberty; and to authorise the use of forced entry and "necessary restraint". Mr Justice Cobb was told the woman and her partner had repeatedly refused to co-operate or engage with medical and social services staff and a legal representative."

She had said she wanted to be "left alone". The judge has seen evidence from psychiatrists, an obstetrician and gynaecologist plus social workers. Details of a number of gynaecological problems the woman had were detailed in the report. Specialists have said the issues would pose a grave risk to her health if she became pregnant again. The judge was also told professionals had faced difficulties in trying to persuade the woman to use contraception and in administering contraception. Barrister Michael Horne, who is representing the interests of the woman, said the issues raised had nothing to do with "eugenics". He said sterilisation was "therapeutic" and the most effective way of mitigating "grave risks" to the woman's health and life

This is just flat out dangerous. And the reports I've read say things like "the woman has health problems that could be exacerbated by another pregnancy."

I don't know the particulars of this case but I know how people react to a woman who've had many pregnancies. Many people have a passionate disdain for them because these woman always seem to be receiving some kind of assistance at tax payers expense.

 The woman in this case has resisted advice from "professionals" to use contraception. Well, that solves it, as for as UK social services is concerned.  She needs to be sterilized. After all, what kind of nutcase refuses contraception? 

In all honesty this woman is not a runner up for the mother of the year award. That's for sure. And perhaps she has some health issues. And mental issues. But do we really want a government sterilizing those it believes require contraception? The question we must ask ourselves constantly is, if it starts there where does it end? The truth is it won't. Don't think that just because this story takes place in the UK that it can't happen here.

PR