Yesterday I brought you the unfortunate story of a Canadian turned away from our borders not because she was a terrorist or criminal — but because she simply had a diagnosis of depression and, more than a year ago, was hospitalized for treatment of it.
Just to show you that the United States isn’t the only backwards country in the world when it comes to discriminating against those with a mental illness, I bring you the much sadder story of an Italian woman who had bipolar disorder, went to the UK for a training course, and wound up being forced to have a C-section without her consent. Wait, what?
Worse, this woman’s forced C-section was approved by a UK court. Apparently, in the UK, having a panic attack is sufficient to remove most of your freedoms and rights.
The Italian woman suffered from bipolar disorder and was visiting the UK in July 2012 for a Ryanair training course. She apparently suffered a panic attack while there because she missed a dose of her bipolar medication.
Despite the woman’s mother explaining her daughter’s condition to police over the telephone from Italy, she was taken to a psychiatric hospital and sectioned under the Mental Health Act. Five weeks later, her daughter was removed from her womb without her consent. […]
After the C-section, the woman, who has two other children and is divorced, was sent back to Italy without her daughter. She returned to Britain in February to request the return of her daughter, who is now 15 months old, but was told at Chelmsford Crown Court that she was to be put up for adoption in case her mother suffered a relapse.
So apparently a court in one country can determine you’re somehow an unfit mother — without, you know, actually talking to you — and take away your baby. After the same court ordered it removed from your womb without your permission.
This story sounds like something out of Soviet Russia, not a modern-day first-world country such as the United Kingdom. How could a court in any country order the removal of a fetus without the mother’s consent if it wasn’t a medical necessity? Why wouldn’t they just release her and let her travel back home? Is this another example of discrimination against those with a mental illness, just because it’s easy to do so?
While there may be more to this story than we know, on its surface it appears entirely incredulous. And it should serve as a warning to anyone who travels to the UK — your freedom and your future child’s life may be at stake if you should happen to relapse or have a momentary episode while there.
Editorial Note: Please see this important update in the comments section. It clarifies the truth of this story, which is not as what it first appeared.
Read the full article: Forced C-section was ‘the stuff of nightmares’: Social Services condemned for forcibly removing unborn child from woman
4 comments
http://purplepersuasion.wordpress.com/
Another take on this case is included within the link above, definitely worth a read if wondering what the other sides to this story may be (written with the knowledge of personal experience too).
I disagree, Mrs. S. This woman wasn’t even a UK resident! At worst, she should have simply been sent home to Italy.
What I don’t understand is why this person even allowed a c-section to be done against her will.
The thing this case highlights is a gross lack of press responsibility.
Try: http://pinktape.co.uk/cases/never-let-the-facts-get-in-the-way-of-a-good-story-eh/
And also:
http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2013/12/03/lessons-learned-from-the-forced-c-section-case/
There’s more legal links out there.
True, here’s a good (if not lengthy) summary of the reality of the story:
http://www.headoflegal.com/2013/12/04/booker-hemming-and-the-forced-caesarian-case-a-masterclass-in-flat-earth-news/
Some important points:
1. The woman didn’t just have a “panic attack” as the original newspaper story claimed. According to the court documents, “the mother has not taken her medication is that she has had a number of very intrusive paranoid delusions.” That’s a pretty big difference.
2. The mother’s other children weren’t just waiting for their mom to return home. “It seems the Italian courts have placed her two other children with their grandmother because the mother is unable to look after them. ”
3. The mother wanted to return to Italy, even without her baby. “It seems (paragraph 9) that the mother was escorted back to Italy because she wanted to go there. The judge was critical of doctors for that, because in his view that she was still too mentally ill at that stage, and because her return to Italy reduced the chances of her getting the baby back.”
4. The government didn’t order the C-section based upon some testimony of social workers. “it was an urgent application first made at 16:16 on 23 August 2012 by the NHS Trust, supported by the clear evidence of a consultant obstetrician and the patient’s own treating consultant psychiatrist, seeking a declaration and order that it would be in the medical best interests of this seriously mentally ill and incapacitated patient, who had undergone two previous elective caesarean sections, to have this birth, the due date of which was imminent (she was 39 weeks pregnant), in the same manner.”
We stand corrected.