Judge in UK orders forced late term abortion for developmentally disabled women, despite pleas by the woman and her family not to do so... Update: Decision Reversed on Appeal!

Does Justice Nathalie Lieven (above, who ordered the forced abortion) have a bigger agenda? 

I understand concern about a developmentally impaired woman getting pregnant, but if she and her family want to raise the baby (her mother specifically said she would do so) why the intervention?  Apparently Justice Lieven has decided it would be less traumatic to the woman to be forced to have an abortion than to give birth and have the baby taken away afterwards. Even though the family in question is Catholic and pro life (which of course raises the question: wouldn't a forced abortion of a 22+ week baby be traumatic too).  

The woman is believed to have the mental capacity of a grade school-age child. She is reportedly Catholic, and her mother is Nigerian. It is unknown if the pregnancy was conceived consensually, and police are investigating the circumstances of conception. 

The woman’s mother, reported to be a former midwife, registered her absolute opposition to the abortion citing the Catholic faith of herself and her daughter. A social worker who cares for the woman also disagreed that she should be forced to have an abortion. The judge said she did not believe the woman understood what it meant to have a baby. 

“I think she would like to have a baby in the same way she would like to have a nice doll,” Lieven said. Lieven also said that she did not believe the woman’s ongoing mental health care needs would permit her mother to assist in raising the child. Allowing the child to be born and then removed from the woman’s home and placed into foster care or adoption would be against the woman’s own interests, the judge concluded.

Justice Lieven acknowledges a forced abortion is an "immense intrusion" by the state, but she said she has to act for the best interests of the mother. Slipperly slopes? Wow. I thought fears of forced abortions was just hysteria (well except for China and places like that). Not any more. But when you get centralized government socialized medicine, like what they have in the UK, you get the state making decisions of what care you need. Or as Justice Lieven acknowledges: "immense intrusions." 

When Kirsten Gillibrand says she will only nominate "pro choice" judges, it would be enlightening in the Democrat debates if this case (even though it was in the UK) was brought up as an example. Who gets the choice?  

Update:  Instapundit: U.K. appeals court reverses decision that would have forced a mentally disabled Catholic woman to have an abortion

Hot Air:  British Judge Orders Abortion of Developmentally Disabled Catholic Woman Over Families' Objections

Washington Examiner: UK judge ordering mentally disabled woman to have an abortion against her will

The Bridgehead: UK Judge forcing disabled mother to have an abortion

DaTechGuy: You can still abort your baby during labor amendment

Instapundit: Fiat justitia, ruat caelum Not any more in the UK