Woman with mental age of child to have abortion, court rules

[Della]

"The woman’s mother explained to both doctors and court that she would be caring for the child. Lieven does not believe the mother would be able to care for both her daughter and granddaughter simultaneously.

Although the identity of the disabled woman in question is unknown, it is understood that she is in her twenties, is Catholic, and has the mentally capabilities of a child in grade school. Her mother is said to be Nigerian."

https://humanevents.com/2019/06/22/no-c ... ing.com%2F

How could the mother not handle taking care of her daughter and granddaughter if the daughter is mentally like a grade school child? Do women not take care of grade school children and new borns all the time?

Does she have the funds? Are you willing to support this family for at least 18 years (if taxpayers aren't already)?

Was she in her mother's home and care when she became pregnant? Was she raped?

Have you ever dealt with an adult sized 6 - 9 year old?

[Della]

This is the kind of healthcare they want for all of us.. with a judge deciding who gets what treatment.
A judge deciding who lives or dies. There has been no crime committed, they're not on trial, they just need healthcare!
No thank you!

What do you believe private insurance in the US would have done for him without the preexisting clause?

They actually barred them from leaving the UK and traveling to Italy, where they found a doctor who would have treated him. That wouldn't have likely happened in the US. The government decided that treatment wouldn't help him, and they wouldn't allow anyone else to try.

I thought that was wrong, but I still don't believe he would have survived. However, my point is that private insurance companies quite often deny cases like his. Insurance companies are the "judges" when determining what health care procedures they'll cover. Yes or no?

[BionicBunny]

"The woman’s mother explained to both doctors and court that she would be caring for the child. Lieven does not believe the mother would be able to care for both her daughter and granddaughter simultaneously.

Although the identity of the disabled woman in question is unknown, it is understood that she is in her twenties, is Catholic, and has the mentally capabilities of a child in grade school. Her mother is said to be Nigerian."

https://humanevents.com/2019/06/22/no-c ... ing.com%2F

How could the mother not handle taking care of her daughter and granddaughter if the daughter is mentally like a grade school child? Do women not take care of grade school children and new borns all the time?

Does she have the funds? Are you willing to support this family for at least 18 years (if taxpayers aren't already)?

Was she in her mother's home and care when she became pregnant? Was she raped?

Have you ever dealt with an adult sized 6 - 9 year old?

I don’t understand your question. I don’t think this happened in the US. Are you asking if the taxpayers should be willing to support this family if this happened in the US?
The nature of how she got pregnant is still being investigated.
You act as though a 9 year old is an out of control 2-3 year old toddler with temper tantrums. Just because in some cognitive areas this woman thinks like a 9 year old doesn’t mean everything about her is like a 9 year old.

[KaiandKadensMama]

The woman is a ward of the state. Her own mom isn’t even a legal guardian. Not to mention, this woman was clearly RAPED if her mental state is that of a child. I kind of get the judge’s ruling, but wonder WHY only now was this put in front of a judge??

[Della]

This is the kind of healthcare they want for all of us.. with a judge deciding who gets what treatment.
A judge deciding who lives or dies. There has been no crime committed, they're not on trial, they just need healthcare!
No thank you!

What do you believe private insurance in the US would have done for him without the preexisting clause?

I have no idea what their insurance policy might have covered. Or what services the government might have covered...

Not sure how this is a hard question to answer. Did you misunderstand the question? I'll ask again...

What do you believe private insurance in the US would have done for him without the preexisting clause?

And, I'll add another: Do you believe the maximum OOP would have been high enough to cover all of his care, had it been private insurance?

Do you think the world will rally to donate enough funds to cover all infants with an illness that will or could lead to a to death? Would the world also cover that child for his entire life if necessary?

[Deleted User 276]

"The woman’s mother explained to both doctors and court that she would be caring for the child. Lieven does not believe the mother would be able to care for both her daughter and granddaughter simultaneously.

Although the identity of the disabled woman in question is unknown, it is understood that she is in her twenties, is Catholic, and has the mentally capabilities of a child in grade school. Her mother is said to be Nigerian."

https://humanevents.com/2019/06/22/no-c ... ing.com%2F

How could the mother not handle taking care of her daughter and granddaughter if the daughter is mentally like a grade school child? Do women not take care of grade school children and new borns all the time?

Does she have the funds? Are you willing to support this family for at least 18 years (if taxpayers aren't already)?

Was she in her mother's home and care when she became pregnant? Was she raped?

Have you ever dealt with an adult sized 6 - 9 year old?

I don't think funds were (or should be) an issue when deciding this case. The young woman also has a mood disorder which probably precludes her from living in the same home with the infant. Either the infant would have to go into foster care or the young woman would have to find another living arrangement (group home or institution). The young woman and infant were never going to be living together and this is why the judge ruled that taking away a born infant would be more detrimental to the young woman than having an abortion.

It's a gross misconception that caring for an adult with mental disabilities is the same as caring for a child.

[Valentina327]

What do you believe private insurance in the US would have done for him without the preexisting clause?

They actually barred them from leaving the UK and traveling to Italy, where they found a doctor who would have treated him. That wouldn't have likely happened in the US. The government decided that treatment wouldn't help him, and they wouldn't allow anyone else to try.

I thought that was wrong, but I still don't believe he would have survived. However, my point is that private insurance companies quite often deny cases like his. Insurance companies are the "judges" when determining what health care procedures they'll cover. Yes or no?

Of course they are. They're footing the bill. I don't think that the insurance company would block a family from going to another doctor that was willing to treat though.

[Della]

I read the article. The judge makes some strong points. The woman does not understand her situation and wants a child like a child wants a doll.
However, the mother of this woman is willing to care fir her grandchild to be. The article does not state whether the woman is a ward of the state. Thus, despite the mother being against an abortion, termination can be ordered by the court.
The fetus is already 22 weeks. Just because there are rare cases where a fetus survives at that stage when delivered does not make for a strong argument against termination, especially when the fetus has adverse pathology. I’m pro choice, however, the article does not state fetal pathology that would warrant termination. Additionally, the woman does not have medical issues that a pregnancy to term would threaten her life.
I think the court is grossly overreaching if the mother of this woman has custody of her daughter. Additionally, the mother would not be the first grandmother to care for her grandchild from birth.
This just a tragic situation. The circumstances of conception are also under investigation.
IDK ... this just seems wrong to me.

One point that was made was if the woman took custody of her grandchild, the mother could lose her home.

Why?

[Deleted User 276]

I read the article. The judge makes some strong points. The woman does not understand her situation and wants a child like a child wants a doll.
However, the mother of this woman is willing to care fir her grandchild to be. The article does not state whether the woman is a ward of the state. Thus, despite the mother being against an abortion, termination can be ordered by the court.
The fetus is already 22 weeks. Just because there are rare cases where a fetus survives at that stage when delivered does not make for a strong argument against termination, especially when the fetus has adverse pathology. I’m pro choice, however, the article does not state fetal pathology that would warrant termination. Additionally, the woman does not have medical issues that a pregnancy to term would threaten her life.
I think the court is grossly overreaching if the mother of this woman has custody of her daughter. Additionally, the mother would not be the first grandmother to care for her grandchild from birth.
This just a tragic situation. The circumstances of conception are also under investigation.
IDK ... this just seems wrong to me.

One point that was made was if the woman took custody of her grandchild, the mother could lose her home.

Why?

The young woman is a ward of the state with her mother as her designated caregiver. I imagine that housing for the young woman is part of that arrangement. It sounds as if the judge determined that the infant could not live in the same housing as the young woman. The grandmother would have to be the one to go if she decided to take custody of her grandchild and another caregiver would be found for the young woman.

[Della]

You know I've always hated the word "pro abortion" and "anti choice" and didn't think it really fit either side well but I discovered that we have in this post two people who are both pro abortion and anti choice at the same time. It's sick and disgusting.

It has been very interesting and eye opening. I find it sick that anyone would think it’s ok to take away the mentally disabled rights to make choices.

Forced abortions and Progressive American's who support them.

MAGA 2020.

Check your history, Morgan.