Elisa Bauer, a mentally handicapped woman in Nevada, is approximately thirteen weeks pregnant. While Amy and William Bauer, her adoptive parents, are her legal guardians, she lives in a group home which does not keep very good tabs on her. It is evidently well-known that she wanders off to nearby truck-stops and casinos where sexual encounters with her occur. Elisa has the mental capacity of a 6-year-old.
When Judge Egan Walker learned from doctors that she was pregnant, he immediately began "investigations" into whether she has the mental capacity to "consent to pregnancy and childbirth." Let's stop right there. What? In other words, even though she is now pregnant, pregnancy and childbirth are deemed by the liberal mind of this judge to be things she has to be separately capable of "consenting" to. Since an abortion is the obvious alternative the judge has in mind, we have the bizarre situation of a judge who may conclude that a pregnant disabled woman is not mentally competent to "consent" to pregnancy and childbirth but is mentally competent to "consent" to an invasive medical procedure! Or perhaps that her capacity to consent to the medical procedure is irrelevant. This is legally completely upside-down. It is well-known that Elisa is not mentally competent to consent to anything related to her medical well-being, which is why she has legal guardians. She has the mental capacity of a 6-year-old! Her legal guardians are her parents, and they do not consent to her having an abortion. Moreover, the court has not had their guardianship removed. It is highly questionable whether the court has any standing in this matter at all.
The Bauers' attorney has petitioned the Nevada Supreme Court to intervene, and that court has agreed and has requested the local court to respond to the claim that it is meddling where it presently has no standing.
To make matters even weirder, Judge Walker also plans to hold hearings on whether Elisa would choose to have her baby or to abort her baby if she did have more mental capacity. At this point, we are moving into the realm of utter fiction and projection. This is not a case of a person who was formerly mentally competent and left behind, say, verbal or written instructions. Elisa has never been mentally competent to make such decisions. Trying to decide what she would do if she had a different mental capacity from the capacity she has had throughout her entire life is an exercise in epistemic chaos. Or, to put it more bluntly, it's a stupid pretense. The judge has no right to be engaging in it, any more than he would for anything else--other medical decisions, a vote for President, or anything else. This is why Elisa has guardians.
Elisa's parents have indicated that she wishes to carry her pregnancy to term. Her abortion-minded caregiver and doctor (in the home that has let her wander about and have sex at truck-stops) claim that (obviously under their influence) she has said that she wants to "have the baby taken out." In either event, anyone knows that a six-year-old child can be influenced to say a great many things, which is why six-year-olds are not given standing to decide on their own medical care. More about that later.
Meanwhile, one of her major caregivers, Allen Whitenack, has charmingly dismissed the six sets of adoptive parents offering to take Elisa's baby at birth by saying that allowing the baby to be born and adopted would be making her "a surrogate for white people." If we can infer from this that Elisa is black, evidently Whitenack would rather have a black child killed than have him given in adoption to a white family. It rather reminds one of PETA killing animals rather than letting them live as pets.
Judge Walker, undeterred by the Nevada Supreme Court's tacit rebuke, has now asserted that he does have the authority to order an abortion for Elisa. (Some reports have also said a sterilization.) It is unclear whether he intends simply to carry on with his "hearings" on the assumption of his own power to decide the fate of Elisa's child (note here that the Bauers still are Elisa's legal guardians), in essence daring the Nevada Supreme Court to stop him, or if he intends to wait for word from the Supreme Court as to whether he is to be allowed to proceed. Given his arrogance thus far, I suspect the former.
The Bauers report that Walker spontaneously called them in concerning Elisa's pregnancy after hearing about it from social services and, when they told him that they did not plan to take her for an abortion because of their religious beliefs, told them that their religion had no place in his courtroom! That's what is known as chutzpah. He initiates court proceedings sua sponte and then tells the guardians, who are making a private medical decision on the basis of their own total beliefs, including their religious beliefs, that their religious beliefs have no place in his courtroom! But his religion-chaste ears wouldn't have to be offended by hearing religious beliefs in the courtroom if he hadn't dragged them into the courtroom to account for their private medical decisions for their daughter! By this reckoning, no Christian parents have a right to take their Christian beliefs into account in any medical decision for their children, because under some hypothetical circumstances some judge might call them to account for that decision, at which point their religious beliefs would have "no place in the courtroom"!
From what I have seen as a court-watching layman with an interest in such family law issues, such proceedings for a court to order some medical treatment would never normally be undertaken without a move to terminate guardianship or question parental fitness, unless there were a threat to the child's or incompetent person's life--as, for example, if the parents were refusing some lifesaving or allegedly lifesaving treatment for the child.
One irony here is that Walker has also refused to allow Elisa to return to live with the Bauers, thus leaving her in the very home that has so neglected to supervise her as to allow the pregnancy in the first instance. If anyone's fitness should be called into question, it's that of the caregivers in this home, but that's obviously not how Walker thinks.
It is instructive to notice how leftists (and I do not hesitate to call Walker and Whitenack leftists here) think about this sort of thing. When it comes to things like death, even children and those with the mental capacity of children must be given the "opportunity" to have this option. Indeed, Walker's question as to whether Elisa can consent to the pregnancy implies that abortion is the default position! Whitenack says that he's fighting for the right of the developmentally disabled to "have a choice in their life." Walker, more suave, admits that Elisa may not actually have the present capacity to choose an abortion but gets around this by the elaborate and ridiculous legal fiction of holding hearings to decide what she would choose if she were a person with entirely different capacities! Either way, the concept is very clear: If you lack the mental capacity to choose the thing we think is a Good, we will invent some claim or myth according to which this Good is really your choice. In that way we can carry out our own wishes upon you without your giving any meaningful consent while claiming that we are upholding your choice and your freedom!
The implications of such an approach are fairly drastic. For example, assisted suicide ("suicide") could be carried out upon children or the lifelong mentally disabled by claiming that this is what they would have chosen if they had had the relevant capacities! Or the little ones could be induced to say whatever their manipulators want them to say, like, "I want to go to heaven," whereupon the death masters could come in claiming to uphold their right to "have a choice." And one doesn't even want to think about the implications such thinking could have regarding child prostitution or other sexual issues.
If this were a matter of, say, the wisest long-term treatment for epilepsy, from which Elisa also suffers, nobody would be playing these kinds of games. The whole thing would be carried out in a more orderly fashion, and the decisions of the guardians would be prima facie controlling. But because it is abortion, the left believes that there must be a special opportunity presented, even by rogue court proceedings, for Elisa's child to die.
We must pray for Elisa, her baby, and the Bauers. At this point the Nevada Supreme Court seems the best hope for stopping Judge Walker.
Update: Bad news. According to this story, the Nevada Supreme Court has affirmed Walker's authority to carry on.