[Potential Trigger] Bipolar woman in legal battle over abortion

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

I wasn't sure if this belonged in Women's Struggle or not...
Just thought this raised an interesting question over women's reproductive rights and if there was a point where their right to choose could be negated by the state / their family.

The High Court in London is judging whether a pregnant woman with bipolar disorder has the mental capacity to request an abortion.
The married 37-year-old, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, is 23 weeks into her planned pregnancy.
The court heard how she began asking for a termination after she is believed to have stopped taking her medication.
Her doctors say she is not sound enough of mind to decide for herself.
The woman, who has been detained under the Mental Health Act, had said she would probably kill herself if she was forced to give birth and "locked up".
The judge, Mr Justice Holman, has been hearing evidence from a consultant psychiatrist involved in the woman's treatment, from a lawyer representing her husband and from the woman's mother.
The psychiatrist said he was "100% certain" that the woman lacked the capacity to make a decision about termination.
A lawyer representing her husband, who was at today's hearing, said he agreed with the psychiatrist's evaluation, and the woman's mother told the judge: "I know my daughter when she is well and she is definitely not well."
The hearing continues.

(from BBC News)

[evermilion]

Her doctors say she is not sound enough of mind to decide for herself.


Which is exactly why they feel she's capable of bearing and raising a child.

[piet11111]

Which is exactly why they feel she's capable of bearing and raising a child.

Very interesting counterpoint.

Honestly i cant say whats right and wrong here as i do not know what she is like if she is well and how capable she is now that she stopped taking her meds.

All i can say is that one of the people i work with is also heavily medicated for mood swings (i think he might be bi-polar but i never heard him say what it is that he is diagnosed with) and that those get so bad that i called in sick a few times to avoid having to deal with him.
He takes a bucketload of pills every day and gets an injection every 2 weeks.
And those moodswings happen while he is on his medication so i can see how someone who stopped taking their meds can end up being incapable of taking important decisions.

[Craig_J]

Which is exactly why they feel she's capable of bearing and raising a child.

Beat me to it, my father has bipolar and the effect of it when you're not taking your medication can be very unpredictable.

It's probably best just to let her get an abortion. Clearly she can't raise the child and if you force the poor lady to give birth then take her child away because she can'[t care for it she may end up reacting badly to that, seeing as there is a large difference between the idea of having a baby and actually seeing and holding your newly born baby.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Very interesting counterpoint.

Honestly i cant say whats right and wrong here as i do not know what she is like if she is well and how capable she is now that she stopped taking her meds.

All i can say is that one of the people i work with is also heavily medicated for mood swings (i think he might be bi-polar but i never heard him say what it is that he is diagnosed with) and that those get so bad that i called in sick a few times to avoid having to deal with him.
He takes a bucketload of pills every day and gets an injection every 2 weeks.
And those moodswings happen while he is on his medication so i can see how someone who stopped taking their meds can end up being incapable of taking important decisions.

It doesn't matter. It's her body, and the last thing we need is the patriarchal state deciding what happens to women's bodies.

[Ligeia]

That's a difficult case. I don't think it is as much about her having bipolar disorder as it is about her probably being in a bipolar phase while pregnant.
If you have BD you still can have lapses were you're normal, even time-spans ranging from months to years. And it is manageable. So that shouldn't be the issue.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Again, why should it matter if the woman in question has a bipolar disorder or is in the middle of a bipolar phase? I am surprised that so many comrades would back the state line on this case - the supposition seems to be that the state knows what is best for this woman better than she does, and of course not having an abortion is best because abortion is wrong somehow.

[piet11111]

It doesn't matter. It's her body, and the last thing we need is the patriarchal state deciding what happens to women's bodies.

I dont care about the baby if its aborted or not but i do care if this decision is made by someone who is able to make such an decision.

In this case abortion would be the better choice as she is not going to be able to care for the child all the time.

But going along with the abortion right now because that is what she wants at this moment to me also feels an awful lot like making a patriarchal decision over her because we think it better for her.

[slum]

But going along with the abortion right now because that is what she wants at this moment to me also feels an awful lot like making a patriarchal decision over her because we think it better for her.

how on earth did you come to this conclusion?

[Ligeia]

The article states the pregnancy was planned which probably means she wanted to get pregnant.
Her phase started after stopping medication which some psychiatrist recommend during pregnancy, keeping in mind the dangers of severe mood swings.
I wouldn't imagine them not having thought about complications or difficulties that can arise with such a mood disorder.

[soso17]

Most medications for bipolar disorder (which I have, BTW) are pregnancy category x, meaning that they are incredibly harmful to a developing fetus. Thus, the woman most likely went off the meds DUE TO her pregnancy. If she remained on them, most doctors would have explained that abortion would be a wise choice. Such meds can actually make the fetus unviable or cause a miscarriage.

--soso

[piet11111]

how on earth did you come to this conclusion?

Well she wont be making the decision as she is locked up in a psychiatric institution.
If she does or doesn't get the abortion it will be the result of someone elses decision.

And if they go along with the abortion i am worried its not because of her wishes but because they consider her an unfit parent.

But like i said earlier i do not know what her wishes are when she was on medication or her motivation to get an abortion now that she is off meds.
But my impression is that when she was still on meds she wanted the child.

[blake 3:17]

WTF!!! It is her right to her body! And who says "meds" enable a person to make good decisions?

Some psychiatric medications do relieve suffering and enable some people to live better lives. But the idea that because someone is taking x pill x times a day makes them sane and if they don't they're insane and incapable, is just not true.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Well she wont be making the decision as she is locked up in a psychiatric institution.

And that is precisely what any consistent communist opposes. A woman's body is hers to dispose of as she sees fit. End of the discussion. It doesn't matter if the woman is "sane" (which is an unscientific, ideological and horribly vague term in any case), if she has bipolar disorder, if she thinks she should abort because the aliens told her to or if she thinks she shouldn't abort because some sky tyrant disapproves. At no point should a woman become a ward of the patriarchal-bourgeois dictatorship, at no point should committees of bourgeois patriarchal philistines decide what she gets to do with her body.

[piet11111]

But the idea that because someone is taking x pill x times a day makes them sane and if they don't they're insane and incapable, is just not true.

I disagree the guy i work with has thrown rocks through his neighbor windows because he thought he was a KGB spy when his injection was wearing off.

He has to get his blood checked every month to see if his liver and kidneys are functioning properly because of the medication he takes.

Now i dont know how bad the woman is but i now the guy i work with when he has such an episode is absolutely incapable of making any informed decisions.

At one point he was going on about how strong he is and he started pushing everyone around including the boss who he pinned to the wall at that point he realized he was making a mistake and tried to turn it into a joke but everyone thought it was going to end up in a fight.

[Orange Juche]

Again, why should it matter if the woman in question has a bipolar disorder or is in the middle of a bipolar phase? I am surprised that so many comrades would back the state line on this case - the supposition seems to be that the state knows what is best for this woman better than she does, and of course not having an abortion is best because abortion is wrong somehow.

Because, when in a state which the brain is not malfunctioning due to the disorder she may vehemently not want that. I'd say it's more of a question of looking at her as a stable person vs what the disorder does, and protecting what choices she would want when functional. It's not about oppressing her, but protecting her choices against what the disorder makes her think or do - that's the crux of it. Protecting her personal freedom and choices against how the disorder can inhibit that, essentially. Personally, I'm not sure what's right or wrong, but I think that's what makes it a grey area and not as black and white as "this oppresses women".

Mentally ill individuals do have a disconnect between when their illness overtakes them and when they're more functional, and I think those here who are weary are just more concerned about her choices in a "functional" state vs "non-functional".

It really is a difficult area to explore and legislate, and definitely one - I think - we shouldn't go into without deep thought.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

So the state, in its supposed disinterested benevolence, knows what this woman wants more than she does? Sorry, I don't buy that. She might regret her decision later, but anyone can regret the decisions they make. That doesn't mean the repressive apparatus should imprison them and make them pick the "right" choice.

The entire framework of "malfunctions", "disorders" etc. is thoroughly unscientific and makes no sense unless one assumes that there is some sort of normativity in nature - surely, as communists, we need to criticise this idealist notion mercilessly?

[Orange Juche]

So the state, in its supposed disinterested benevolence, knows what this woman wants more than she does? Sorry, I don't buy that. She might regret her decision later, but anyone can regret the decisions they make. That doesn't mean the repressive apparatus should imprison them and make them pick the "right" choice.

The entire framework of "malfunctions", "disorders" etc. is thoroughly unscientific and makes no sense unless one assumes that there is some sort of normativity in nature - surely, as communists, we need to criticise this idealist notion mercilessly?

I'm not saying they're correct. I'm only saying it's a bit more complex than you're making it out to be.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I don't think it is. The patriarchal state is trying to limit a woman's reproductive freedom. We are opposed to that. It doesn't matter if the limitation is in her supposed best interest (that the state knows better than she does).

[Orange Juche]

I don't think it is. The patriarchal state is trying to limit a woman's reproductive freedom. We are opposed to that. It doesn't matter if the limitation is in her supposed best interest (that the state knows better than she does).

But two very similar situations can still have nuances. I'm not arguing for or against what they're doing, what I'm trying to say is you can look at this without saying "this is patriarchal oppression!" as a person on these forums and not be a hypocrite, given the complexity of the situation.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

But two very similar situations can still have nuances. I'm not arguing for or against what they're doing, what I'm trying to say is you can look at this without saying "this is patriarchal oppression!" as a person on these forums and not be a hypocrite, given the complexity of the situation.

This is patriarchal oppression, though, and it's linked to the continued oppression of those the psychiatric arm of the regime deems "ill". Comrades can fail to recognise this without being hypocrites, but that simply means they have a poor grasp of the situation and the communist stance on reproductive freedom.

And I really doubt that your entire position on this is that you don't have a position. If this is the case, I wonder why you bothered to post anything. That's like participating in a panel discussion in order to announce that you don't care about the issue being discussed.

[blake 3:17]

I disagree the guy i work with has thrown rocks through his neighbor windows because he thought he was a KGB spy when his injection was wearing off.

He has to get his blood checked every month to see if his liver and kidneys are functioning properly because of the medication he takes.

Now i dont know how bad the woman is but i now the guy i work with when he has such an episode is absolutely incapable of making any informed decisions.

At one point he was going on about how strong he is and he started pushing everyone around including the boss who he pinned to the wall at that point he realized he was making a mistake and tried to turn it into a joke but everyone thought it was going to end up in a fight.

So you're talking about someone whose mental illness either causes them to be violent or disinhibits them enough to start to become become violent or engage in wreckless anti-social behaviour.

I agree that there should be controls around violent and extremely anti-social behaviours, like throwing rocks through neighbours windows. Not cool.

This is about an abortion. Her body.

Her body. Not the neighbour's house. Not a fight at work. Her body.

[piet11111]

So you're talking about someone whose mental illness either causes them to be violent or disinhibits them enough to start to become become violent or engage in wreckless anti-social behaviour.

I agree that there should be controls around violent and extremely anti-social behaviours, like throwing rocks through neighbours windows. Not cool.

This is about an abortion. Her body.

Her body. Not the neighbour's house. Not a fight at work. Her body.

Except you fail to recognize that his behavior came from his illness instead of his own free will.
And i know for a fact that under normal conditions he never would have acted this way.
If i where to walk up to him right now and ask how he felt about that he would deeply regret that.

If i then think about this woman who wants an abortion while she is of her medication then i am deeply concerned that it is the illness talking and that when she is on the meds again she would never have chosen this option.

As the original article stated that she was not herself and a psychiatrist confirming that i am more inclined to believe her husband and mother about her not being herself.

In this case based on the information available i must say that she is truly not capable of making such a major decision and that the abortion would probably be against her wishes if she where on her medication.

[MarxSchmarx]

I've moved this thread to discrimination. I think politics was overall a fine forum for it to start, but given the direction this discussion has taken, I think it is actually now somewhat more likely to get some constructive and useful responses here rather than in politics

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Except you fail to recognize that his behavior came from his illness instead of his own free will.

So, what is "free will"? How can you tell if someone is acting "of their own free will"? When I drink a glass of Pepsi and become restless and agitated, am I not "acting of my own free will"? When I drink a glass of cognac and suddenly start acting mellow? What if my brain secretes certain chemicals that cause mood changes?


If i where to walk up to him right now and ask how he felt about that he would deeply regret that.

And the woman might regret her decision to have an abortion later. So what? Should the state force everyone to make decisions they won't regret? Should battalions of armed police arrest you every time you want to buy a bottle of alcohol? Or are only the bodies of women subject to this strange state mandate?

I am surprised that so many comrades don't see this for what it is: an attempt by the bourgeois state to seize control over a woman's body and to dictate how she can exercise her reproductive freedom.


As the original article stated that she was not herself and a psychiatrist confirming that i am more inclined to believe her husband and mother about her not being herself.

So now her husband knows what she should do better than she does? Bollocks to that. If there is anything worse than the patriarchal state assuming oversight over women's bodies, that would be individual husbands assuming control over their wives' bodies.

[piet11111]

I would say i explained my view sufficiently if you insist on twisting it i hope you have a good time doing so.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I don't see how I have twisted any of your views. Consistent communists oppose all restrictions on womens' reproductive freedom, no matter how allegedly benevolent they are. On the other hand, you think this restriction is justified. That's all there is to it.

[piet11111]

I don't see how I have twisted any of your views. Consistent communists oppose all restrictions on womens' reproductive freedom, no matter how allegedly benevolent they are. On the other hand, you think this restriction is justified. That's all there is to it.

All i am going to give you on this is that i am unsure about what it is she really wants.

Mental illness like i have seen with my co-worker is something that actually does make it impossible to act on free will.

As such in this particular case and with the information available to us i tend to think an abortion might be a mistake as it is not the decision she would make if she where on her medication.

If you want to make that out to mean that i am being some kind of ultra-sexist patriarchal monster then that is your decision to make.