It was June last year, an Italian woman eight-months pregnant with her third child was in the UK for a two-week training course with a budget airline.
It was meant to be a routine trip.
It ended up as a nightmare, with the woman being detained in hospital and her baby forcibly removed whilst still in her womb.
The baby is now 15-months old and has never been allowed to live with her mother.
The details of how the woman ended up detained in a mental hospital are sketchy, and the woman’s identity is withheld.
The British press report that she was staying in a hotel when she had a panic attack. She called the police as she couldn’t find some lost passports belonging to her other children. When they discovered that she suffered a ‘bipolar condition’ they took her to hospital to check on the condition of her baby.
It was only when she arrived at then hospital that she realized it was a psychiatric institution.
Under the UK mental health act she was sectioned and kept in hospital for five weeks.
The UK Sunday Telegraph describe the day her baby was taken:
“Five weeks later she was told she could not have breakfast that day. When no explanation was forthcoming, she volubly protested. She was strapped down and forcibly sedated, and when she woke up hours later, found she was in a different hospital and that her baby had been removed by caesarean section while she was unconscious and taken into care by social workers. “
She did not know it was going to happen. She had not planned on a caesarean.
The first time she knew she had given birth was when she woke up from the general anaesthetic.
It has been reported that there was nothing to stop the woman from having had a natural birth.
She was not allowed to see her baby daughter.
The woman later learnt that a High Court judge had given the social workers permission to arrange for the child to be delivered.
The mother returned to Italy in October without her baby after a hearing determined that the newborn should remain in foster care.
The UK Sunday Telegraph reported yesterday that the mother took the case all the way to the High Court in Italy, before it then hit the courts again in the UK.
“The High Court in Rome expressed outrage at what had been done to an Italian citizen “habitually resident” in Italy. But the judge there concluded that, since she had not protested at the time, she had accepted that the British courts had jurisdiction – even though she had not known what was to be done to her, was deemed to have no “capacity” to instruct lawyers because she had been sectioned, and had only been represented by solicitors assigned to her by the local authority.”
By now the case was being fought internationally, with the mother returning to the UK earlier this year for a court hearing.
The judge said this time, that whilst admitting the woman was again on her medication and ‘articulate’ that “he could not risk a failure to maintain her medication in the future.” Again she lost.
The baby girl was placed for adoption. The case here gets complicated, as it seems that even this process could have gone more in the favour of the Italian mother.
The British press report that there has been an offer of foster care from a family friend in the US.
However the UK social services ruled that this was unacceptable because, even though she was the aunt of the baby’s stepsister, the American family had no “blood” tie to the baby.
The adoption process is now underway in the UK with a family unknown to the baby, and unknown to the mother.
Brendan Fleming, the woman’s British lawyer, told The Sunday Telegraph: “I have never heard of anything like this in all my 40 years in the job. I can understand if someone is very ill that they may not be able to consent to a medical procedure, but a forced caesarean is unprecedented.”
“If there were concerns about the care of this child by an Italian mother, then the better plan would have been for the authorities here to have notified social services in Italy and for the child to have been taken back there.”
A British MP, John Hemming, a Liberal Democrat has taken up the case. He said: “I have seen a number of cases of abuses of people’s rights in the family courts, but this has to be one of the more extreme.”
“It involves the Court of Protection authorising a caesarean section without the person concerned being made aware of what was proposed. I worry about the way these decisions about a person’s mental capacity are being taken without any apparent concern as to the effect on the individual being affected.”
The matter will be raised in the UK parliament this week.
Top Comments
This is appalling, and just another clear sign that mental health is unfairly judged and not cared abot nearly as much as it should be. TO in effect punish this women in this heartbreaking way is disgusting and makes me feel negatively to the UK health system, how many people saw this women or were involved and not one said anything or thought geeze is this going a bit far.
As for Molly's comments below, I am from Australia and have never ever heard of this, nor am I aware of "laws" allowing late term abortions legally especially specific to mental health. Sometimes I wonder about humans in general, just how naive, stupid, judgmental, unkind as a species we can be. Sometimes I think humans are all in some way mental, whether it be simple insecurities to strong thoughts of entitlement or actual medical - chemical or nurological conditions, from small to large it all affects how well we function as a collective on this world!!!
Tessa as I mentioned above, it varies from state to state. In Victoria you can abort up to birth if you claim it will effect your mental health. In other states like Qld, it is far more strict.
I
wasn't aware of that Jay, we are in QLD but since we desperately wanted our
baby I never looked in to that side and didn't realise in this area it differed
state by state. I am surprised actually, but I guess with how some things go in
this world I'm not surprised of what we are capable of, and some situations
genuinely are difficult and complex I imagine, it's hard to judge without
having experience or full knowledge.
So
I have to be fair that I don't know all the facts of this article or just in
general for the laws - it would be very individual and case by case. My initial
reaction as above was shock.
I
am thinking personally though that there obviously needs to be a lot more care
and effort around these case by case situations anywhere and everywhere, and
who governs them and if there is support and a multitude of other things, as
these tough times or situations can be easy to interpret differently by
different people who have had different life experiences, beliefs or even
judgments. It is one of those sensitive areas both with a life unborn but also
the womens rights and the intricacies of mental illness, it would be an easy
area to regret a choice at the wrong time or with the wrong pressure (either
way).
Once
someone is helped and treated for mental illness first it may at least help
decisions be more certain. It is just such a hard thing to be sure and
sometimes in general I think humans are too rash or the system is too
"loose". It must be hard for all involved and as in any "system"
I think abuses of power or mistakes are made and it's just sad on many levels,
for mothers and or babies and families too.
I
guess we all wish things could be more perfect in this world, but then who is
to say what is or isn't perfect........maybe my final thoughts are of just
sadness that people face these decisions and difficulties in their lives at all.
Caesareans are operations and all operations come with risks-high or low. If there was no reason the woman couldn't have the baby naturally why put the mother and baby at risk for no reason.. Where is the baby?