Court bans man with low IQ from having sex

[nick]

A man with a low IQ has been banned from having sex by a High Court judge who admitted the case raised questions about “civil liberties and personal autonomy”.

The 41 year-old had been in a relationship with a man whom he lived with and told officials “it would make me feel happy” for it to continue.

But his local council decided his “vigorous sex drive” was inappropriate and that with an IQ of 48 and a “moderate” learning disability, he did not understand what he was doing.

A psychiatrist involved in the case even tried to prevent the man being given sex education, on the grounds that it would leave him “confused”.

Mr Justice Mostyn said the case was “legally, intellectually and morally” complex as sex is “one of the most basic human functions” and the court must “tread especially carefully” when the state tries to curtail it.

But he agreed that the man, known only as Alan, should not be allowed to have sex with anyone on the grounds that he did not have the mental capacity to understand the health risks associated with his actions.

Under the judge’s order, the man is now subject to “close supervision” by the local authority that provides his accommodation, in order to ensure he does not break the highly unusual order.

The judge concluded: “I therefore make a declaration that at the present time Alan does not have the capacity to consent to and engage in sexual relations.

“In such circumstances it is agreed that the present régime for Alan's supervision and for the prevention of future sexual activity is in his best interests.”


Source and full story here (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8301100/Court-bans-man-with-low-IQ-from-having-sex.html)

[Cosmic]

I'm curious as to how one determines when someone is incapable of giving consent to have sex. This seems almost as arbitrary as age laws regarding sex.

[UnknownError]

Of course we shouldn't let him have sex. He might have sex up the nose or something. :rolleyes:

Another example of the law being stupid.

[Iceman]

Oh, Connor why would you think of that?

[Cosmic]

Oh, Connor why would you think of that?

Personal experience, of course! :P

[UnknownError]

Personal experience, of course! :P

Shit, I thought I'd destroyed all the tapes. :O

[Magus]

Fertility and IQ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility_and_intelligence)

The less the IQ, the more instinctual a man becomes. And one of the most instinctual thing to an animal is sex aka the selfish gene.

[canyon]

How could someone ban someone else from having sex? I don't agree with this at all. Sure, he may not fully know what he's doing, but the other man agreed as well.
I guess I can see where it's a problem though. The other man might have been taking advantage of him because of his disabilities. I just thought of that.

Still, I don't think it's right for a judge to tell the man that he can no longer have sex..

[riczepeda]

im not an advicit of eugenics but the prevention of this individual reproducing is for the better of society. its a measurment of social responsibility , such as the condemtion of insest

[Limelight788]

(*I am speaking from an American perspective, but I do agree that everyone should enjoy full, equal rights, regardless of IQ, color, race, gender, religion, ethnic, etc.)

This really does ticks me off here. Do we seriously need another around of discrimination against a group of people? Before the 1920s, it seems as if you weren't a Protestant, straight, intelligent Anglo-American male, you were automatically less than the group described with the most value, which you can suggest, prejudices was downright extreme.

The prejudices issues is thankfully substantivity better now as womens and non-whites can legally enjoy equal rights as long as they are citizens of the United States and homosexuals are making great progress toward getting them as well, but I really do worry that soon, people may soon turn to discriminating people with mental disorders just to feel superior to them when they can't do so towards gays and lesbians anymore, which is really going to suck.

So who cares if that person has an IQ of 41? If he wants to have sex with his boyfriend, he has every right to and a judge should not denied him that right unless he was a sex offender, which he wasn't in this case.

I hope the Supreme Court is paying attention to this and overrides this. They need to show that stuffs like this should be unconstitutional.

[Memory]

Is this even constitutional?

[Camazotz]

It seems strange to me that I actually kind of agree with the judge. It definitely is unconstitutional, but all I can imagine is a grown man with the mental capacity of a normal five-year old being taken advantage of. I just can't convince myself that he's intelligent enough to fully understand the responsibilities he's taking in having sex. In the end, it's not age that should determine the "age" limit for sex, but the understanding of the participants of what they're doing and the consequences of their actions. I have a better time accepting a mature and informed teenager engaging in sex than an adult who has no idea what he's doing. If a better psych evaluation of him and his boyfriend is done, and they find they're both mature enough for sex, then I fully support their rights. But if he truly is incapable of understanding, then I might have reservations, but I could never stop them.

[ShaneK]

sex is da most natural thing in da world. but he doesnt have a full mental capacity so i agree wit da judgement. But aint we all been of diminished capacity when drinkin? (but not ta that extreme).

[TheMatrix]

a quote from andrew jackson:
John Marshall has made his decision....Now let him enforce it.

that adequetly sums up my response.

[Charleigh]

WTF. Poor guy. Cant even stick his meat where he wants.
Fucking law.

Are they afraid hes going to stick it in someones bellybutton or something :confused:

[Cosmic]

Are they afraid hes going to stick it in someones bellybutton or something :confused:

Right, good... lovely - thanks for that image. My (often scary) mind has managed to manipulate that idea into him mindlessly walking (penis erect, of course) into a bear in a toy store. The onlookers watch in horror as the only sound echoes relentlessly... "squeak... squeak... squeak" from the bear's inner squeaker.

Good, lovely. Excuse me whilst I pour myself an extremely strong drink.

[riczepeda]

like i siad before, obviously no one read my response, it a social obligation to limit such acts. its a preventitve measure to ensure that nothing bad happens out of his actions.

[HeroesAndCons]

Shit, I thought I'd destroyed all the tapes. :O

Noooooo i have a copy (reminds me of that ione episode of Panty and Stocking lol)

but for real
you cant ban someone from having sex
there is no way
unless you put a beeper on his dick of something