In all 50 states, there are laws providing for judicial supervision of people who are not legally competent (e.g., severely retarded, mentally ill, in a coma, etc.). The court can either appoint a guardian for the person, or the court itself can make major decisions for the person (authorizing surgery, authorizing the filing or settlement of a lawsuit, making investments, etc.)
The concept itself is neither new (it goes back to English law) nor controversial in theory. It becomes controversial in a few cases (this one and Terry Schiavo come to mind), but judges in every state every day are making medical and other decisions for incompetent people.
My two brothers, my sister and myself would not be alive if babies were killed because their mother was mentally ill. We are all in our sixties and seventies and yet we have had good lives, nice kids, and no sign of schizophrenia. Our mother lived with my sister and later myself and died at the age of 76. Sometimes things were strange but she wasn’t a bad mother in many ways. We were the people she trusted and no one else.
The judge has rendered a decision that is cruel and ignorant. We have become a society that calls right wrong and wrong right. God help us.
The concept itself is neither new (it goes back to English law) nor controversial in theory. It becomes controversial in a few cases (this one and Terry Schiavo come to mind), but judges in every state every day are making medical and other decisions for incompetent people.
Do you consider that forcing a mentally ill person to abort her child falls under such laws that provide for "juditical supervision"?
You haven’t answered my question, I and some others are waiting for it. Hope you check in.