S
SugarMagnolia
Guest
What am I suggesting?! I never said a word about sterilization. Read my post again and retract your statement above.
- Status
R
raggetyann
Guest
Hi Ellen, I agree with you, but there are some who slip through the cracks, and are without a home live on the streets, facilities are fulled, and it also depends on where you live. Alot of mentally handicapped are already abused when they were children, and now they might get someone to care for them, but the system has allot of faults. We have allot of people living in their cars, and might even do anything for a cup of coffee who knows. raggetyann, it is a real shame but God will avenge.
S
SugarMagnolia
Guest
You are misinformed about what a mental illness is. There are mentally ill people who hold PhD’s. There are mentally ill genuises. The mentally handicapped are those with severely low IQs (i.e. intelligence). The only relationship between mental illness and IQs is that statistically mentally ill individuals often have higher than average IQs.I think the problem stems in severe mental illness, Brain damage for instance, or not being able to distinguish between reality and fantasy, and not being able to eat on their own or function, (completely out of it.) I have seen handicapped people have children and they were perfectly ok. There is mental illness, and mental retardation. The mental illness come from different abuses and life horrors, these people cannot fit to well into society, and their are mental retardations, and those range allot, from blindness and deaf and dumb etc. there are so many different birth defects, but it does not mean these people cannot be useful in society, and gain valuable employment. This decision would have to be evaluated by a good physician and psychologist, even then they can make mistakes in evaluations. People are never useless unless they are born with all their faculties, and are holding a good job, and just screw up, because they can think and feel ,they can pull the wool over your eyes. Watch those who can watch you back.Be careful who you judge, and be very sure what you say about any of Gods creatures.They are all valuable to him! raggetyann
T
Timbothefiveth
Guest
Speaks of eugenics to me.
H
Holly3278
Guest
I find such a question to be extremely offensive. I am mentally handicapped and I do not believe that I should be prevented from procreating. This reminds me of eugenics.
J
Jermosh
Guest
Contraception is only an intrinsic evil when it pertains to marriage.
usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/ecfact.shtml
S
StillWondering
Guest
Rape is force or coercion I agree. However, the context does matter. If a person inticed another and put themselves into a dangerous situation they have to understand they put themselves into that situation that someone else can take advantage of.
“fully rape” is the wrong description; maybe actually raped would be the better situation.
I am not downplaying rape so the fact that you have been rape is not what I am talking about. We live in a world with horrible people who do rape. I am sorry you were victimized.
What I’m saying is when a person is raped, when do they have the option to ask the rapist to use a condom?
To be clear, form where I come from, the person that is raping another does not listen to reason nor stop to put on a condom.
S
StillWondering
Guest
Sugar Moagnolia, I owe you an apology. I improperly linked your post to the issue I am vehemently against, eugenics by sterilization. Unfortunately I cannot remove the post since the editing timer has past. My apologies.What am I suggesting?! I never said a word about sterilization. Read my post again and retract your statement above.
S
StillWondering
Guest
The page you linked does not say that contraception is limited to marriage only. In fact if that was the case then while fornication is wrong, contraception in fornication is allowed. This is not the case since using condoms – one form of contraception, in or outside of marriage, carries the same general level of responsibility for the action.
To be clear, the page talks about emergency contraception and only explicitly about under what situations it is not against God to use hormonal pills. The statement states clearly that it is against the authority of Catholic hospitals to administer these treatments if fertilization has occured. And the concluding theme of the document is:
S
StillWondering
Guest
The page you linked does not say that contraception is limited to marriage only. To be clear, the page talks about emergency contraception and only explicitly about under what situations it is not against God to use hormonal pills. The statement states clearly that it is against the authority of Catholic hospitals to administer these treatments if fertilization has occured. And the concluding theme of the document is: “[t]he law should not require hospitals to administer so-called “emergency contraception” when those drugs will end the life of a newly conceived human embryo.”
As for marriage and contraception, documents about contraception are in the context of marriage simply because the Church already stated that sex is only rightly ordered in valid marriages.
J
Jermosh
Guest
My point is that contraception is only an illicit act in marriage, if it was universally applied it would not be allowed in the case in link. The article speaks of only the moral use of contraception in the case of assault. Also contraception is the prevention of fertilization, once fertilization happens its abortive in nature but no long a contraception.
S
SugarMagnolia
Guest
Apology accepted. Thank you.
R
RobnBobA1
Guest
Why would I have or even want any control over your mothers pregnancy with you? I am not saying that to abort for serious genetic defects that simply it would be better for the world if we did not have those genetic defects and that we can in some ways avoid them by preventing a pregnancy to begin with. For example, if I knew that I had an increase chance of getting pregnant with a child with Trisomy 18 ( a serious life-threatening defect) because I or my husband carried the gene, I would work harder to prevent said conception to avoid the unneedless suffering and death of my future child. That does not advocate that people with Trisomy 18 should not live or that those born with it should be put to death…just that it can be avoided through prevention methods. The same way that I would protect my born child from unneedless suffering by preventing them from being hit by a car doesn’t mean that any child that is hit by a car is anyless deserving of life, only that it can be avoided and shold if possible.
Alot of what is touching peoples nerves is the form of handicapped or defect. For one with autism in a less than severe form, then coerced BC would not be ethical. My mother and sister both works with special needs children. Most of those children are severely retarded either because of drugs in utero, or genetic defects. My mother taught 1st grade. Most of those children will not get above a 1st grade education. When they grow up they will have the bodies of adults but the minds of 5 year olds. If the parents cannot watch them they most likely are in a group home where strangers do, and abuse of the helpless happens often, just like abuse of the elderly occurs more often than of the young. If it would be dangerous for such a person to give birth, either because of physically or because in the cases of mental instability the woman would have to come off her medication for the duration, thus potential for her to harm others or herself, then ethically I think that would be permissible with a guardians permission. I think that this question really pertains to those that are not able to make any rational decisions for themselves, rather than those that can work, or have physical disabilities, or those that through medication can function. If one does not meet the mental age of consent (in most states 16) meaning that their ability to mentally understand the consequences of their actions, then any sexual intercourse is technically rape. There was a case of a woman with severe downs-syndrome that said yes to sex, but the man was charged with rape since she legally could not consent to the actions which is the same as her sayign no, or having sex with a minor.
K
kage_ar
Guest
E
Eris_Discordia
Guest
This is an extremely emotional thing to talk about, but under what I have bolded, then I would not be, by those standards, “actually raped”. Not going into detail about what happened, but needless to say, to you, it would not be considered actual rape, when in reality, it has devastated me mentally, and affected my life. I’m not trying to get in a discussion, or chastise you, or any of that, but please just think about the words you are using, and how they affect those of us who have suffered sexual abuse. It doesn’t matter what situation the person was in, rape is still rape, and it isn’t the victim’s fault. I know your not trying to come off in this way, but the way you wrote the post does.
Also, in coercive sex, there is bargaining room to use a condom. Coercive sex isn’t just the use of violent threats, but lies, like lying about love, and threatening to leave, and other kinds of emotional abuse. Abusers will use all sorts of tactics to harm their victims, but they would still probably use a condom if asked.
Y
yellowdaisy
Guest
My daughter is the result of 2 mentally handicapped people, who lived in a psychiatric hospital at the time of her conception.
Institutionalization does NOTHING to prevent pregnancy, as the director of this very well known psychiatric hospital told me at our first meeting.
Her mother has suffered brain damage as an infant, and funtions at a very imparied cognitive level. She also suffers from PTSD, bipolar disorder, depression, personality disorder and a few other things.
Her hospital wanted her to abort my daughter. She refused, and an ombudsman helped her get the right to make the decision to give birth. Now, after she gave birth, her options were either to place for private adoption, or to have the state take custody of the child and forcibly terminate her rights. She chose private adoption. The hospital helped her contact an agency, which is how we met.
The hospital director told us that people become pregnant in the hospital ALL THE TIME. Even on lockdown wards, such as the one this woman was living on. Usually, family members step forward to take custody of the child, or the child goes into fostercare. My daughter waas the first ever private adoption handled by this hospital in it’s 150 years.
So what is my point–
Institutionalization does NOTHING to prevent pregnancy, as the director of this very well known psychiatric hospital told me at our first meeting.
Her mother has suffered brain damage as an infant, and funtions at a very imparied cognitive level. She also suffers from PTSD, bipolar disorder, depression, personality disorder and a few other things.
Her hospital wanted her to abort my daughter. She refused, and an ombudsman helped her get the right to make the decision to give birth. Now, after she gave birth, her options were either to place for private adoption, or to have the state take custody of the child and forcibly terminate her rights. She chose private adoption. The hospital helped her contact an agency, which is how we met.
The hospital director told us that people become pregnant in the hospital ALL THE TIME. Even on lockdown wards, such as the one this woman was living on. Usually, family members step forward to take custody of the child, or the child goes into fostercare. My daughter waas the first ever private adoption handled by this hospital in it’s 150 years.
So what is my point–
- Institutionalization does NOT prevent pregnancy among the mentally disabled.
- My daughter is her mother’s biggest blessing! Her conception was not ideal, and her mother can NOT raise her, but we visit many times a year, for an hour or two at a time, and they TRULY love each other! They are family, as much as my daughter and I are family. We are not co-parenting. The two parents are my husband and I. But J, my daughters first mother, is an extra person in life to love her. They are a family, and J is a part of MY family too, now.
- We should NEVER forcibly sterilize any person. It is an affront on human dignity, and even in “bad” situations, blessings can be found!
L
Lauds
Guest
My wife worked with the mentally challenged in group home settings , & with those higher function who lived in their own apts, but were supervised . Also with the blind. These people were very sexually active, & would always find a way to sneak off & have sex, it was very hard for them to control these people . A lot of the people from the group homes would go to workshops etc, & always found a way to have sex, many rapes were happening too. It is very hard to monitor them as they need to be monitored except for keeping them in barred cages, which we know we can`t do. They were even taken advantage sexually by their counselors. Sad, YES!
T
tweetymom
Guest
Yes, it is very sad and in my opinion they should hve some sort of birth control. My nephew did and much better for him and the family.
L
Lauds
Guest
I agree, & if it is birth control, which in most cases it is, then so be it!
Y
yellowdaisy
Guest
Well, I know in our case, our daughters bio mom DOES have access to birth control-- but they cant force her to use it, and neither do I think they SHOULD be abel to force her.
Also-- the sex that she was having was consensual, just between two mentally handicapped people. It’s nto always a case of someone being “taken advantage of”-- in our instance it was a case of two people who have limited reasoning skills / ability to control themselves, much like younger teenagers.
But just as I wouldnt force BC on a young teenager, I would never force BC on this population either. I think it would be more appropriate to discuss abstinence, AND what is not appropriate touching from othe rpeople, so that they arent so easily taken advantage of, you know? (Notabene-- I knwo this doesnt solve the problem).
I dont think BC will solve ht eproblem either tho. BC doesnt stop you from getting raped?
Also-- the sex that she was having was consensual, just between two mentally handicapped people. It’s nto always a case of someone being “taken advantage of”-- in our instance it was a case of two people who have limited reasoning skills / ability to control themselves, much like younger teenagers.
But just as I wouldnt force BC on a young teenager, I would never force BC on this population either. I think it would be more appropriate to discuss abstinence, AND what is not appropriate touching from othe rpeople, so that they arent so easily taken advantage of, you know? (Notabene-- I knwo this doesnt solve the problem).
I dont think BC will solve ht eproblem either tho. BC doesnt stop you from getting raped?
- Status