This seems nuts:
A man with an IQ of 48 has been ordered to stop having sex by a High Court judge.
Known only as Alan, the 41-year-old was in a relationship with a man he lived with and said he wanted it to continue. However, his local council said his ‘vigorous sex drive’ was inappropriate so started legal proceedings to restrict the relationship…. Despite his fears for interfering in a person’s sex life, [the judge] agreed that he did not have the mental capacity to know about the health risks and should be banned from having sex.
His council will now monitor him closely to make sure he doesn’t breach the order.
Local councils in the UK monitor sex drives? Someone is going to get paid to make sure that Alan doesn’t sneak out and have sex? At what point does someone’s IQ drop so low that they can’t legally consent to sex? Is this a case of a developmentally disabled person being taken advantage of and the state stepping in to stop the abuse or is it a case of a disabled person being stripped of his right to have a sex partner—being pulled away from the lover with whom he lives—because some people are uncomfortable when the disabled have sex?
WTF?
@48: Reading into the details of the case, it appears that Alan has had sexual relations with both men and women. In any case, the judgement wasn’t based on potential harm to future progeny; it was based on an assessment of his capacity to give meaningful consent to sexual activity.
@49: I think the lack of outrage may be because this isn’t necessarily a black-and-white case. Yes, we’re all (trolls aside) typically sex-positive here, but we’re also generally opposed to sexual abuse and sexual assault. The question at the core of the case was Alan’s ability to consent to sex. The judge determined that he did not have the capacity for consent due to his intellectual disability.
Depending on the details of their conditions, persons with intellectual disabilities can have a lot of restrictions placed on them. They may not be allowed to drive, or to handle their own financial affairs, or to live on their own. Restrictions aren’t just placed on “higher-order” functions either; persons with Prader Willi Syndrome, who can have uncontrollable urges to eat, may have their access to food strictly controlled. Society already accepts that it is possible for a person to be unable to give meaningful consent to sex; this is just an extension of that principle.
The problem, of course, is that typically the inability to consent is a temporary condition which eventual maturity (or sobriety) will eliminate. In Alan’s case, he may never have the capacity to give consent.
I’m not at all comfortable with the decision in this case. Reviewing the judgement, I don’t think the judge in this case was entirely comfortable with it either. It’s a tough situation.
Just an addition. Someone with an IQ of 48 will have extremely poor understanding of social mores and very limited control of his behaviour. Whilst I imagine that this person is in some sort of secure or supported living arrangement, the inappropriate aspect of the sexual behaviour may be to do with the way they (Alan and his lover), behave in public. If him and his partner are having sex in a public place, then it becomes a criminal case (like it or not), therefor falling into a legal situation.
My first inclination reading this is to question your source.. However, being English I don’t know all that much about Fox News except that they have a pretty bad rep over here. It seems, in the English press that this is a story only really being given attention by tabloid newspapers, which makes me think it’s part of a much bigger story and facts are being omitted for the convenience of sensationalism. If it was extraordinary even with all the facts attached, it would be BBC news, Times, Independent… It just doesn’t sound like we’re getting all of it here.
@53: Up at post 17, Gus provided a couple of links that provide a lot more detail about the case. It is definitely part of a bigger story. If you are interested in the case, the links are very much worth reading.
This is great news, eugenics is making a comeback!
@55: Go fuck yourself, asshole.
I think the crucial point here is a question of consent. Is the sex partner at a great enough difference of intelligence to take advantage of Alan? I don’t think its impossible of people of lower mental capabilities to have sexual relationships, but the relationship would have to be monitored for abuse. I don’t like the idea of someone being deprived of a sexual relationship because of their mental status, but having a lowered mental status puts one at a disadvantage. I’ve read too many horror stories of people with Down Syndrome or other mental disabilities being raped–I can understand the cautious measures.
#53 Here it is in the Telegraph*:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/l…
*note for non-UK readers – right-wing but slighly less sensationalist than either the Mail or Fox.
IQ is a dicey way to measure his ability to understand his relationship. If he’s impaired enough to need a guardian, maybe, but it doesn’t sound like he is.
I’ve got a kid who had his IQ tested and we were told it was 41, and a few years later we mentioned that to his new school and they burst out laughing. It’s really not a perfect measure of understanding.
OTOH, my kiddo would not be capable of giving informed consent, and he does need a guardian. He’s awesome, but an appropriate romantic relationship, based on his understanding and his stated desires, is a girl to have hot cocoa with and maybe hold hands.
I have no idea how one decides, however, that a sex drive is “inappropriate”. Hopefully this ruling will be appealed.
Being disabled shouldn’t stop someone from having a sex life if they so choose, but this man seems to believe storks actually bring babies, according to the article linked by suebailey (#58). I would heartily endorse some appropriate sexual education for this man. What appropriate means is difficult to determine without knowing the man in question; I assume you could do like you do with kids and teach basic safety (FWIW, even though my kiddo can’t really give informed consent, he knows about condoms and being safe and what to do if he doesn’t feel safe – shit happens and while his cognitive development is far behind his age, his body is that of a nearly 20 year old young man.)
@59: You should read the full judgement, linked to in post #17 above. It goes into a lot of detail regarding how the judge made his decision, which was based on a lot more than an IQ measure. The judge also recognized the need for sex education and recommended it.
It is an interesting exercise to read the different levels of coverage on this story – it really makes you wonder how much we don’t know about other things that we glance at in the paper every day.