I am not opposed to libertarianism in principle, in the abstract. (The devil is in the details.) What I am opposed to is, that if someone has gone nuts, presuming to stick Caesar jackboots-and-all into that someone’s mind. That is a very anti-libertarian move if anything. Maybe they had to lighten her beneficial medication a bit for the sake of the unborn baby, but it didn’t sound like she was in danger of a suicide, and when the pregnancy is complete they can put her back on her medications and hopefully she will regain some sanity. I could see maybe also putting her on a birth control pill, but a permanent sterilization? No way.
“Maybe they had to lighten her beneficial medication a bit for the sake of the unborn baby, but it didn’t sound like she was in danger of a suicide, and when the pregnancy is complete they can put her back on her medications and hopefully she will regain some sanity.”
I was thinking more along the lines of commitment until the baby is born, then put her back on her meds. Interestingly, something that hasn’t been discussed on this thread is the romneycare angle. How much did economics come into play in the initial decision? After all, it would be cheaper to abort and sterilize than to provide 24/7 care throughout the pregnancy.