We’re on the road to hell

image_pdfimage_print

The Daily Mail

 

You all know me, I like to be methodical.

However, making head nor tale of this  article is nigh on impossible.

On the one hand we have a 36 year old fella with a mental age of 6-9, being forced by a court of law to be sterilized.

The decision was taken by his carers with the backing of his parents, whom we are told the fella is totally dependent on.

So why the need for a court order?

By that, I mean that numbnuts mustn’t be in agreement then? I mean, you can bribe a 6 -9 yr old to do almost anything can’t you?

So where’s the problem?

why does he need to be sterilized?

Does he have a tendency to stand naked on the sofa and wank over Great Aunt Nelly’s blue rinse?

Actually, no… Thinking about it, that would need castration to cure that problem.

So why the need?

“Well he got his bird pregnant actually Spiv”.

Ohhh, I see. Well that’s alri… WHAT!

He got his fucking bird pregnant?

What kind of sick fuck has sex with a 36 year old fella who still claps when the Tweenies come on?

“His mental bird Spiv”.

Ohhhh. For a minute I thought that someone ha… WHAT!

Well why don’t they just keep the pair of randy sods separated then. Problem solved. Easy?

“Because, those in favour of the sterilization think that the pair should  also be allowed to keep up their games of naked leapfrog. The parents and carers just don’t want any more unwanted pregnancy’s Spiv”.

Ohhhh. That would make sense I suppo… WHAT!

So! Let me get this straight.

This soft lad is viewed as being mentally mature enough to have a long term sexual relationship? … And, no amount of Freddo the Frog chocolate bars could persuade him to walk voluntarily into the vasectomy clinic? … So a court has ordered him to be strapped down for the job if necessary?

“Yes Spiv”.

Okay, exactly when can we expect to see goose stepping Storm-troopers on the streets?

And, lets be very clear here. Anyone who thinks that this ruling is a good idea, clearly isn’t  aware of the implications.

For a start, the story certainly doesn’t add up. 

It does however, absolutely fucking stink.

However, if you are one of those who is a bit slow on the uptake and still unsure why forced sterilization is a bad idea, a bad idea, and a bad idea in general … Google Councillor Colin ‘steptoe’ Brewer. 

.

High Court judge makes legal history after sanctioning sterilisation of a disabled man, 36, because it is in his ‘best interests’

  • Man, referred to as ‘DE’, and his girlfriend already have a son born in 2010
  • Case launched because 36-year-old incapable of making the decision himself
  • Justice Eleanor King agreed another child could cause ‘psychological harm’
  • First time in British legal history sterilisation has been ordered in this way

By STEVE DOUGHTY, SOCIAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT

PUBLISHED: 12:23, 16 August 2013 | UPDATED: 01:26, 17 August 2013

Historic: Mrs Justice Eleanor King has sanctioned the first sterilisation of a man in this country because it is 'in his best interests'Historic: Mrs Justice Eleanor King has sanctioned the first sterilisation of a man in this country because it is ‘in his best interests’

A disabled man will have to be sterilised because it would damage his life to have any more children, a judge ruled yesterday. 

Mrs Justice Eleanor King said the man, who has a mental age of between six and nine years, was deeply distressed when his girlfriend became pregnant four years ago.

The child is now being looked after by his grandmother.

However the judge decided sterilisation ‘was in his best interests’ as he could not be relied on to use condoms or other birth control methods to prevent another pregnancy.

The 36-year-old, who can only be referred to as DE, is in a long-term relationship with his girlfriend – who also has learning difficulties. 

While he is dependent on his parents, the court heard that he had got to the stage where he could catch a bus, go swimming, or go and buy a coffee by himself.

The judge made it clear that DE’s relationship with his girlfriend, which was disrupted by her pregnancy, should be supported and the couple ‘should be permitted to resume their sexual relationship’.

But she said that having another child would threaten his hard-earned independence. 

And she insisted that the vasectomy would let him have ‘as normal a life as possible as soon as possible’.

‘DE is unequivocal in expressing his wish not to have any more children,’ she said.

The application to Mrs Justice Eleanor King, sitting in the Court of Protection, was made by DE's local NHS Trust with support from his parents, his GP and the local authority involved in his careThe application to Mrs Justice Eleanor King, sitting in the Court of Protection, was made by DE’s local NHS Trust with support from his parents, his GP and the local authority involved in his care

Claiming the ruling would be in his best interests, she added: ‘DE’s hard-earned achievements, whether they are learning to swim by imitation as he can’t process spoken instruction, or getting a bus on his own, must be treasured.’

The application to sanction a vasectomy had been made by the man’s NHS trust, supported by his parents, GP and the local authority that organised his care.

 

The ruling in the Court of Protection is the first that has seen a judge order a man to be sterilised.

The decision is the latest in a series of controversial judgements made by the court, which has been criticised for making secret rulings about people who are unable to manage their own affairs.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2395596/British-legal-history-sterilisation-sanctioned-man-severe-learning-difficulties.html#ixzz2cCojdIYy
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook