Woman with mental age of child can give birth after court-ordered abortion is overturned

The woman’s mother won an appeal after arguing she could care for the child instead

Three Court of Appeal judges overturned the decision to terminate on Monday (PA)

A pregnant woman with learning disabilities who was ordered by a judge to abort her baby will now be able to give birth after an appeal.

The woman, who is in her twenties and 22 weeks pregnant, has the mental age of a six- to nine-year-old, a court heard.

She also has a “moderately severe” learning disorder and a mood disorder.

Last week, a judge gave specialists permission to terminate the pregnancy over fears expressed by doctors that her behaviour could pose a risk to the baby.

But the woman’s mother, a former midwife, appealed the decision – arguing she could care for the child instead.

Three Court of Appeal judges on Monday upheld her appeal and overturned Justice Nathalie Lieven’s earlier decision.

They said they would give reasons for their decision at a later date.

Ms Justice Lieven had analysed evidence at a Court of Protection hearing in London on Thursday and Friday.

She had considered the terms of the 1967 Abortion Act, which says termination may be performed up to the 24th week of pregnancy, and the 2005 Mental Capacity Act.

Bosses at an NHS hospital trust responsible for the pregnant woman’s care had asked to let doctors perform an abortion.

An obstetrician and two psychiatrists said this was the best option because if the child had to go into care, taking the baby away would cause greater psychiatric harm than an abortion.

However, a social worker who knows the pregnant woman, who lives in the London area, said the birth should go ahead.

Ms Justice Lieven said a balance of evidence showed that termination was the best option. She said she had to make an “enormous” decision on the basis of what was in the woman’s daughter’s best interests – not on “society’s views of termination”.

She argued the woman “would like to have a baby in the same way she would like to have a nice doll”.

But in the appeal hearing, barristers representing the pregnant woman, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, successfully argued that Ms Justice Lieven’s decision was wrong.

Additional reporting by PA