Sunday, 6 February 2011

Be Safe. Ensure You Have Evidence of your IQ Before Sex



I trust I'm not treading on the toes of my fellow blogger, who has professional experience in these matters, but I was angry when I read an article in the Telegraph this morning. 'Court bans man with low IQ from having sex' states the headline.

The Court of Protection, that little-known authority whose proceedings are secret, has judged, on a 41-year-old man with an IQ of 48, that he '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 Mental Capacity Act 2005, Court of Protection judges have the power to make life and death decisions for people deemed to lack the intelligence to make them for themselves.

The man named as Alan, had been in a sexual relationship with a man with whom he lived and told officials "It would make me feel happy" for it to continue. However, his local council disagreed and decided his 'vigorous sex drive' was inappropriate because of his IQ and he did not understand what he was doing.

Alan lived in a home provided by the council and was also accused of making lewd gestures at children in a dentists' surgery and on a bus, although no police action was taken.

In June 2009 the local authority began court proceedings to restrict his contact with his friend on the grounds that he lacked mental capacity and an interim order was made to that effect.  "Since then Alan has been subjected to close supervision to prevent any further sexual activity on his part," except when he is alone in his bedroom.

So masturbating doesn't carry health risks according to the judge.  I have a retired nursing friend who worked in A & E most of her career and she would firmly contradict that statement.  She could keep anyone enthralled for hours with her accounts of the amusing and more serious cases of male masturbation she treated in her days in the front line.

More seriously, surely if Alan was told he must use condoms that was all that was needed, but to deny him a sex life is appalling.  By all accounts he wasn't putting himself or the other person involved at any risk and the judge had obvious difficulty finding a reason to enforce this order.

The judge said it requires an understanding and awareness of the 'mechanics of the act'.  How many people, stoned out of their minds on a Friday or Saturday night, have a clue about the mechanics of the act?  But, because they have a higher IQ than Alan, they're exempt - for now. It won't be long though before this becomes commonplace.

It wasn't so long ago a bonny girl was stopped, by Fife social services, from marrying her boyfriend because they judged her 'too stupid' to understand the vows.  They didn't give up there though.  When she was breast feeding her three day old son Ben in the maternity ward, they came and took the child into care because they 'feared she lacked the intelligence to be a good mother'.  Of course this case was child kidnapping wrapped up in lies. Fortunately their story has a happy ending but it's not always so.

source

18 comments:

JuliaM said...

Monstrous. Truly monstrous.

Anna Raccoon said...

Not stepping on my toes at all Subrosa, wouldn't it have been nice if the Telegraph had given credit for the origin of that story.....
http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/too-stupid-for-sex/
- and this morning I see they have finally discovered the history of the Court of Protection and the same chap is sounding off as though he has been an expert of the subject for years. Can't think where he got all his information from.
And I am always so careful to show my sources, as are you......
Grrrr.

hatfield girl said...

'the man ... was described as “sociable” and “presented as an able man” but who was “seriously challenged in all aspects of his mental functionality”'

We all 'present as able' and there are times when we are all 'seriously challenged in all aspects of our mental functionality [whoever wrote that is, for instance, seriously challenged in their ability to write English].

McGonagall said...

I have worked for most of my life in the field of developmental disability. One thing the folks I support seem to have in common is an interest and enjoyment of sex. None of my business really.

An IQ of 48? And he was verbal? Hmm ...

JuliaM said...

"An IQ of 48? And he was verbal? Hmm ..."

Not exactly an accurate measurement of anything, is it, the IQ test?

Smoking Hot said...

I've had a few relationships with 'blondes' ... IQ certainly was not relevant! :)

RMcGeddon said...

You've got to wonder how the human species managed to become the most succesful on the planet without all these interfering busybodies to help us along.
I'd estimate that about half of all sex in the UK occurs when both partners are drunk and their IQ is temporarily suspended for the duration due to alcohol or drugs.
Even if Alan got the most dangerous form of STD it would still be better than the path the state are determined to go down.
Intelligence tests before sex.
Bio banks / genetic testing/ IQ and social function tests in order to record every citizen and determine their suitability for future careers.
Their plans for us are endless...

Apogee said...

Hi SR. Mention of the chaps IQ makes me wonder how it was assessed.
The way it was described to me inferred that it involved a lot of knowledge of the "civilization" you live in.
A person who had lived all his life in the African bush would not get a high IQ rating in this country, but a person from this country would do badly in a IQ test designed for the African bush. So what test was applied in this case? Remember reading not so long ago that an IQ 70 was the bare minimum to be viable. I could be wrong but something seems very wrong in this case.

Joe Public said...

If males have to pass a MENSA test before being allowed hanky-panky, what do women have to do?

subrosa said...

Horrendous Julia.

subrosa said...

Auch you're always kind Anna. I must have missed that post of yours or I wouldn't have linked to it.

Hope you dropped him a wee email.

subrosa said...

I think the people concerned were scrabbling about looking for adjectives HG. Anything to make the man sound a serious case.

subrosa said...

Exactly McGonagall. It's nobody's business.

subrosa said...

You wouldn't be blonde yourself by any chance SH? ;)

subrosa said...

Exactly RM. Their plans are frightening and to know that there's a secret court which can make these decisions behind closed doors is a disgrace to democracy.

subrosa said...

Well Joe, I've just spent a wasted half hour doing an online test only to find they want £5 for it - and only told once I finished.

RMcGeddon said...

" I've just spent a wasted half hour doing an online test only to find they want £5 for it"

I think that's a 'fail' SR ;)

Mind you I failed the RSPB spot the bird survey last week.
I naively thought they were interested in gathering information about birds in your garden but after half an hour of looking at the survey I realised it was just a massive data gathering instrument so didn't bother.

subrosa said...

He he RM. Very possibly. I was just avoiding a trip round Tesco. Goes to show the lengths I go to doesn't it.

If I had paid then I'm sure I would have been one of the most intelligent folk in the Scotland. I couldn't cope with that. :)

Related Posts with Thumbnails