Abortion approved for woman badly injured in attack (PA, London)


A woman who suffered brain damage after being attacked is expected to have an abortion soon after a judge in a specialist court gave doctors permission to terminate her pregnancy.

Mr Justice Baker ruled an abortion would be lawful because evidence showed the woman had not wanted to keep the baby.

He also said it would be lawful for medics to use “proportionate force” if necessary.

The judge made the ruling late on Friday after analysing the case at a public hearing in the Court of Protection - where issues relating to sick and vulnerable people are considered - in London.

He decided the woman lacked the mental capacity to make decisions about medical treatment.


The judge said the evidence was clear and he was “quite satisfied” a termination was in the woman’s best interests.


I’ve no idea if this should be in News or Prayer Requests. It is news I suppose and I’m thoroughly appalled. I highly doubt this is something any prayer can now stop - but I do beg anyone who reads this to remember this woman and her child in your prayers.

I’ve always felt that the UK, compared to the United States, had a slightly more sensible (though only marginally less-abhorrent, really), stance on abortion; while it is certainly and horribly common enough it’s not a purely elective procedure and at least formally there has to be determined medical grounds for one to take place. Plus abortion here, unlike in the US, is in no way a political issue of any merit, in the sense that you have to get a very very long way into tiny minority party territory to find people advocating against it (a few conscientious MPs from the major parties excepted) - so I have never felt that in contrast to other social justice issues that it is something sadly worth spending all that much time on, because to campaign against it would have precisely no impact and take time, funds, etc away from other issues where Christians or Catholics or just those of any or no faith with a conscience about life matters, might make a real difference.

And then a story like this comes along and one is forced to question everything about those assumptions. Even if it’s a fight which in the short or medium term here (probably at least within my lifetime; and I’m only 26!), which we are not realistically going to win short of a miracle - in the UK we have to do a lot more.

I can understand (even if every fibre of my being disagrees with) many motivations for abortion. But there is something so sickening about this particular story. I’m not sure if it’s the assumption that killing this poor woman’s child is in her best interests (ignoring, obviously, the interests of her child but I’m not sure we could expect otherwise sadly), or that it would be lawful to use “proportionate force” (ie restraining her in some way, presumably medically rather than physically but I’ve no idea) in order to administer it.

I can get on board with the idea that it might be in this woman’s interests not to be pregnant (that’s fair enough I think); and I can understand this motivating a decision that it’s in her interests to have an abortion (even if I heartily disagree with it).

I’m sorry but I do not want to live in a society which for however benevolent a reason forces women to have abortions regardless of their mental capacity to agree to one (or, in this case, an acknowledged prior statement from her before the attack saying she did not want the child). It’s horrible. It’s a mess.

God have mercy on us all.


I sympathize with your feelings about this. Prayers for them.


It is a sad story, I wondered if the lady is able to look after herself in her current condition, it doesn’t say. She may have said while able to make the decision that she didn’t want to keep the child, but we can’t know for sure she would have gone through with it, even if she had terminated in the past.
But if she is mentally unable to carry a child…well…

It’s horrible…:frowning:


There are so many loving married couples who would like to adopt a child.


There are so many loving married couples who would like to adopt a child.

And in this case, the baby did no wrong and loses.

But one can certainly appreciate this difficult situation.


Two or three times in my nursing career I’ve taken care of pregnant women who suffered permanent brain damage from either an accident or a stroke. Now this article does not say how far along the woman is, but in the cases I took care of, the babies were far enough along to survive premature birth. Twice the babies were twins. They were extremely emotionally exhausting experiences for all concerned, including staff, but when the babies were delivered (by C-section) doctors and nurses were crying with joy at their first cries.

It is not always possible to keep a severely brain damaged person alive long enough to get the babies to a deliverable stage, although I’ve read that this occurs. Why they did not let nature take it’s course and if the baby was too premature to deliver, it would die with it’s mother naturally, or if it could be brought to a viable age, do a C-section and then put the baby up for adoption when it can be done? This abortion decision makes no sense whatsoever, because how could someone really determine the mother’s feelings? Someone saying she didn’t want it is not proof. (Besides the fact that abortion is an abborhent practice)


This is the scary part of the story : “He also said it would be lawful for medics to use “proportionate force” if necessary.”

Evidently since she is “brain-damaged” the judge has declared she can be forced to have an abortion even if she now objects to it. So how long before another judge declares that poor women are incapable of making rational decisions concerning their unborn child and proportionate force can be used to make them have an abortion “if necessary”?


Yes, things can go down such a slippery slope!

I see that as such a good reason to obey the Church’s authentic teachings. Our Lord’s available grace can make that happen. it is best to obey.


This, above everything else in this story, is exactly what disgusts me the most.

The slippery slope of this legal reasoning patently is:

“Oh, you only have just-below-median IQ/income/other arbitrary factor? Sorry, you clearly aren’t capable of determining your best interests, so we will for you.”

Even if this wasn’t implicated in the (potential) murder of children, I would be thoroughly disgusted. And it’s not merely disgusting but patently absurd as well.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.