Reproductive Rights of Mentally Ill

[Silverplum]

So you've stated before.

Without answering any questions.

Actually a mentally ill person was coerced, while in a vulnerable state and under the influence of medication that additionally impaired her judgement.

She trusted that her wishes would be followed when she went off her meds. Instead this man waited until she was medically ill and emotionally vulnerable. He bullied and intimidated her into the abortion. EVEN up to the minute before the abortion, she was crying, begging him not to do it.

A neuropsych expert documanted and can testify to her state of mind as well as numerous friends and acquaintances.

 

[Silverplum]

That question is irrelevant.

That's what YOU think.

 

[xylene]

A neuropsych expert documanted and can testify to her state of mind as well as numerous friends and acquaintances.

Testify to what and where?

How she felt about having had an abortion does not mean anybody committed a crime or tortiously wronged her.

 

[Ma.TC]

The OP is here merely to discuss his/her OWN viewpoints on abortion, whilst telling us to keep our opinions on abortion out of it.

HOWEVER, abortion is LEGAL, therefor, there is nothing wrong with it. That is a LEGAL FACT.

OP has no real point here except to grandstand.

Actually, the OP has never stated a personal opinion on abortion.
The OP is an advocate for the rights of the mentally ill, with a personal interest in those that are victimized because of their illness.

I do have a point.
To what extent does a mentally ill person have the right to accept or deny medical treatment?
Within that context, I am aware that there have been cases in the US in regards to sterilization of the mentally ill. I also know there are cases of people with other disabilities who succesfully defended their right to marry and have children.

I had hoped I might find some assistance to guide me in my research.

 

[Zigner]

Actually a mentally ill person was coerced, while in a vulnerable state and under the influence of medication that additionally impaired her judgement.

She trusted that her wishes would be followed when she went off her meds. Instead this man waited until she was medically ill and emotionally vulnerable. He bullied and intimidated her into the abortion. EVEN up to the minute before the abortion, she was crying, begging him not to do it.

A neuropsych expert documanted and can testify to her state of mind as well as numerous friends and acquaintances.

And THAT is where I'm calling BS on this. No doc would perform the abortion if the woman was begging him not to...just not gonna happen.

 

[Silverplum]

Actually, the OP has never stated a personal opinion on abortion.
The OP is an advocate for the rights of the mentally ill, with a personal interest in those that are victimized because of their illness.

I do have a point.
To what extent does a mentally ill person have the right to accept or deny medical treatment?
Within that context, I am aware that there have been cases in the US in regards to sterilization of the mentally ill. I also know there are cases of people with other disabilities who succesfully defended their right to marry and have children.

I had hoped I might find some assistance to guide me in my research.

Oh.

**************....

 

[Silverplum]

And THAT is where I'm calling BS on this. No doc would perform the abortion if the woman was begging him not to...just not gonna happen.

I'd agree 1000%, but that would be illogical.

I'll settle for 110%.

 

[Zigner]

Actually, the OP has never stated a personal opinion on abortion.
The OP is an advocate for the rights of the mentally ill, with a personal interest in those that are victimized because of their illness.

I do have a point.
To what extent does a mentally ill person have the right to accept or deny medical treatment?
Within that context, I am aware that there have been cases in the US in regards to sterilization of the mentally ill. I also know there are cases of people with other disabilities who succesfully defended their right to marry and have children.

I had hoped I might find some assistance to guide me in my research.

You objected when somebody said there was nothing wrong with abortion. Since there is nothing LEGALLY wrong with abortion, I can only assume you were objecting to it from a moral position.

You are here merely to argue for what YOU feel is correct, NOT to hear what others have to say. Since you are NOT here looking for legal advice, or even legal reality, I'm done.

 

[Ma.TC]

Testify to what and where?

How she felt about having had an abortion does not mean anybody committed a crime or tortiously wronged her.

Ok look at it this way. Say the person, consented to donating a kidney in an altered state of mind.

 

[Silverplum]

Ok look at it this way. Say the person, consented to donating a kidney in an altered state of mind.

We don't "do" hypotheticals.

Do your OWN "research."

 

[xylene]

Actually, the OP has never stated a personal opinion on abortion.
The OP is an advocate for the rights of the mentally ill, with a personal interest in those that are victimized because of their illness.

Abortion is a medical procedure.

She was not victimized because she had an abortion.

You'll need more than that she was traumatized by the experience.

You have used the word forced - you have not presented any evidence of that.

 

[Ma.TC]

You objected when somebody said there was nothing wrong with abortion. Since there is nothing LEGALLY wrong with abortion, I can only assume you were objecting to it from a moral position.

You are here merely to argue for what YOU feel is correct, NOT to hear what others have to say. Since you are NOT here looking for legal advice, or even legal reality, I'm done.

I objected to an implication that the woman was given a choice, in her state of mind, under the influence of a sedative she signed a consent form. She believed if she did not that she would be forced to anyway. THe man directly threatened her.

Legal reality is exactly what I am looking for.

 

[Ma.TC]

Abortion is a medical procedure.

She was not victimized because she had an abortion.

You'll need more than that she was traumatized by the experience.

You have used the word forced - you have not presented any evidence of that.

Having a medical procedure performed on you against your wishes is illegal.
I believe by definition that makes her a victim.

I am not trying to prove the trauma. I am trying to prove that a person of authority and knowledge of the law used this to intimidate his girlfriend.

At the time she believed she had no choice. She believed he had the power to force her if she refused to sign.

 

[xylene]

I objected to an implication that the woman was given a choice, in her state of mind, under the influence of a sedative she signed a consent form. She believed if she did not that she would be forced to anyway. THe man directly threatened her.

Legal reality is exactly what I am looking for.

Prove, that she was under such a heavy dose of sedative that she could not give informed consent, but was able to function well enough to convince an experienced gynecologist that she was fit.

Define exactly the threat. Telling you girlfriend "If you don't have an abortion I'm out." is a massive richard move but not illegal.

 

[Ma.TC]

Prove, that she was under such a heavy dose of sedative that she could not give informed consent, but was able to function well enough to convince an experienced gynecologist that she was fit.

Define exactly the threat. Telling you girlfriend "If you don't have an abortion I'm out." is a massive richard move but not illegal.

The dr only walked in told her that the HcG/progesterone levels were in a range where they could safely proceed. He did not examine her, (it was a medical abortion)

The nurse was the only other person in the room, she ignored the fact that the patient was crying and repeating to her boyfriend, "Please don't do this, make them stop."

I see your point,
if one can prove diminished capacity
then PERHAPS it can be proven that a procedure was performed on her without consent.

In other words the only possiblity of inpropriety would be concerning consent, not necessarily the her civil rights?