- Joined
- Sep 16, 2012
- Messages
- 49,506
- Reaction score
- 55,155
- Location
- Tucson, AZ
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
There's an awful lot of hysterical fits being thrown by people here who don't know any details of the case in question. And we probably won't know the full details because the public does not always have the right to know them.
She may have been given a C-section because there was no way to stop the baby coming and yet she was in a state of severe bipolar mania. The C-section may well have saved her life and that of the baby. She may well have been in no mental state to make a decision, so one had to be made for her.
Her baby may have been taken into local authority care because the mother represented a severe threat to herself and the baby. That might well have been the correct decision.
She may have lost her court case because she did not demonstrate that she was no longer a threat to her baby. In order to rpove that she was not, she'd have to provide expert witnesses and testimony that her condition was no longer precarious. Perhaps she didn't do that.
Before people jump to conclusions they should get the facts. If they can't get those facts, they'd probably be advised not to comment as they make themselves look stupid.
Let's try another few "maybe's":
1. Why was her physician in Italy not contacted?
2. Why was her family in Italy not contacted?
3. Why was an adoption by her extended family not allowed?
4. Why was she not offered the opportunity for third party representation during this whole process and in particular BEFORE the decision was made to take the baby?
I would suggest that this incident was the result of a gross breach of public trust and an absolutely inhuman abuse of government authority.