Judge says man having sex with wife is a human right

[Niv]

oh my beautiful thread

I'm reading it whilst trying to swerve past the fuckwittery.

The topic has saddened me, tbh. It kind of makes my mind veer towards envisaging someone who's helpless/vulnerable as a result of deteriorating mental health, being caused visible distress by someone else's sense of 'entitlement' ...

Social services have obviously stepped in for a reason. There are very few facts mentioned in the article in relation to what brought it to light. It all centres very much on the judges crass comments. As the case unfolds hopefully it will bring clarity. It's a case that could potentially set a very dangerous precedent if rulings are made on his views as they stand.

[Vam]

oh my beautiful thread

I'm reading it whilst trying to swerve past the fuckwittery.

The topic has saddened me, tbh. It kind of makes my mind veer towards envisaging someone who's helpless/vulnerable as a result of deteriorating mental health, being caused visible distress by someone else's sense of 'entitlement' ...

Social services have obviously stepped in for a reason. There are very few facts mentioned in the article in relation to what brought it to light. It all centres very much on the judges crass comments. As the case unfolds hopefully it will bring clarity. It's a case that could potentially set a very dangerous precedent if rulings are made on his views as they stand.

Exactly. And that's what set my mind to wondering ...

[HobbitFeet]

oh my beautiful thread

I'm reading it whilst trying to swerve past the fuckwittery.

The topic has saddened me, tbh. It kind of makes my mind veer towards envisaging someone who's helpless/vulnerable as a result of deteriorating mental health, being caused visible distress by someone else's sense of 'entitlement' ...

Social services have obviously stepped in for a reason. There are very few facts mentioned in the article in relation to what brought it to light. It all centres very much on the judges crass comments. As the case unfolds hopefully it will bring clarity. It's a case that could potentially set a very dangerous precedent if rulings are made on his views as they stand.

Exactly. And that's what set my mind to wondering ...

they would most likely always have been involved as the woman has a learning disabilty

now she also appears to have something that diminishes her capabilities further, hence the inability to give consent, when consent could be given previously

it doesn't follow there is any question of an abusive relationship

[Vam]

oh my beautiful thread

I'm reading it whilst trying to swerve past the fuckwittery.

The topic has saddened me, tbh. It kind of makes my mind veer towards envisaging someone who's helpless/vulnerable as a result of deteriorating mental health, being caused visible distress by someone else's sense of 'entitlement' ...

Social services have obviously stepped in for a reason. There are very few facts mentioned in the article in relation to what brought it to light. It all centres very much on the judges crass comments. As the case unfolds hopefully it will bring clarity. It's a case that could potentially set a very dangerous precedent if rulings are made on his views as they stand.

Exactly. And that's what set my mind to wondering ...

they would most likely always have been involved as the woman has a learning disabilty

now she also appears to have something that diminishes her capabilities further, hence the inability to give consent, when consent could be given previously

it doesn't follow there is any question of an abusive relationship

Until more details come to light, as Niv said, there can only be conjecture. But yeah, it's no surprise she would have Social Services monitoring her. Maybe in a prelude leading up to her current inability to give consent, she may have indicated that sex with her husband was causing her some distress. Who knows?

To me though, the Judge's comment was, well, ill-judged really.

[Niv]

oh my beautiful thread

I'm reading it whilst trying to swerve past the fuckwittery.

The topic has saddened me, tbh. It kind of makes my mind veer towards envisaging someone who's helpless/vulnerable as a result of deteriorating mental health, being caused visible distress by someone else's sense of 'entitlement' ...

Social services have obviously stepped in for a reason. There are very few facts mentioned in the article in relation to what brought it to light. It all centres very much on the judges crass comments. As the case unfolds hopefully it will bring clarity. It's a case that could potentially set a very dangerous precedent if rulings are made on his views as they stand.

Exactly. And that's what set my mind to wondering ...

they would most likely always have been involved as the woman has a learning disabilty

now she also appears to have something that diminishes her capabilities further, hence the inability to give consent, when consent could be given previously

it doesn't follow there is any question of an abusive relationship

That's it exactly, if there were any issues in relation to abuse within the relationship they would remove her from the situation. It's the judges comments that are a concern in general, not necessarily directed at this case. The sad thing is, many think that when somebody becomes ill or disabled in anyway that they don't want sex. It must be very difficult when that decision is no longer yours to make, and the decision made for you.

[Fletch]

The case had been brought to the court of protection, which considers cases where people lack the mental capacity to make their own decisions, by lawyers for a council’s social services after the condition of the woman, who has learning difficulties, began to deteriorate.

Social service officials believe there is evidence that she no longer has the capacity to make decisions about whether she wants to have sex and therefore cannot freely give her consent. Lawyers have suggested that a judge might have to bar the husband from continuing to have sex with his wife in order to ensure that the woman is not raped.

Hayden considered the issue at a preliminary court of protection hearing in London on Monday, in which he was told that the man had offered to give an undertaking not to have sex with his wife.

However, the judge said he wanted to examine the evidence in detail – and hear arguments from lawyers representing the woman, the man, and the council involved – before making any decisions.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/ap ... uman-right

From Hobbit's original link.

[Rolluplostinspace]

... with anyones wife?

[Dean]

... with anyones wife?

Not yours, hopefully...

[Rolluplostinspace]

... with anyones wife?

Not yours, hopefully...

Well the guy down the road has quite a nice one.

[Guest]

How long before some moron reckons his 'fundamental human right' is being violated due to his partner finding him increasingly obnoxious and runs to court.

Seems women's rights are taking 1 step forward and 5 back at times.

[Guest]

oh my beautiful thread

Especially when it’s the only one you’ve ever started

[Guest]

So again 'but Dean' is the counter argument to this? No wonder the guy thinks he's superstar here!

it's just one or two obsessed guests who don't seem to grasp that he doesn't give a fuck, actually I think maybe they do, and that winds them up more

but yeah, a serious legal issue that affects women across the country and all we get here is 'but dean'

Can't it be argued that like Dean, the Husbands don't give a fuck about the wife's feelings when they want sex. If you think little of women that you would abuse them anonymously on a random forum. What makes you think they treat their spouse any different?
An Abuser/bully doesn't change because a victim is in front of them

[Guest]

So again 'but Dean' is the counter argument to this? No wonder the guy thinks he's superstar here!

It’s not really a but Dean thing though is it.

If you all happily post alongside a guy who threatens to drug and overpower a woman and don’t have a problem with it, threads like these will always get the eye-rolling. Hardly consistent is it. Seems insincere.

Can you provide the links to the ‘threats’ please...

Dean mate, you made the same comment on this very thread, which no female poster actually called you out on it so far as I've read.

[Rolluplostinspace]

So again 'but Dean' is the counter argument to this? No wonder the guy thinks he's superstar here!

it's just one or two obsessed guests who don't seem to grasp that he doesn't give a fuck, actually I think maybe they do, and that winds them up more

but yeah, a serious legal issue that affects women across the country and all we get here is 'but dean'

Can't it be argued that like Dean, the Husbands don't give a fuck about the wife's feelings when they want sex. If you think little of women that you would abuse them anonymously on a random forum. What makes you think they treat their spouse any different?
An Abuser/bully doesn't change because a victim is in front of them

Well the evidence would show your post to be wrong.
Most abusers are someone's dad mum brother son and the family involved never ever suspected because the abuser changes personality and appearance to suit any and every situation.
The abuser could be your dad but you'd never think it .....

[Dean]

So again 'but Dean' is the counter argument to this? No wonder the guy thinks he's superstar here!

It’s not really a but Dean thing though is it.

If you all happily post alongside a guy who threatens to drug and overpower a woman and don’t have a problem with it, threads like these will always get the eye-rolling. Hardly consistent is it. Seems insincere.

Can you provide the links to the ‘threats’ please...

Dean mate, you made the same comment on this very thread, which no female poster actually called you out on it so far as I've read.

So a link to these ‘threats’ shouldn’t be a problem then...