UK man with low IQ banned from having sex
 

LONDON — A man with a low IQ has been banned from sex by a judge who said the case raised questions about civil liberties, The Telegraph newspaper reported.

The 41-year-old man, known as Alan, has an IQ of 48 and a moderate learning disability, the newspaper reported. Alan was living with a man and having sex with him.

His local council decided that his "vigorous sex drive" was not appropriate and he didn't understand what he was doing, the Telegraph reported.

High Court Justice Nicholas Mostyn agreed that Alan did not have the mental capacity to understand the health risks and should not have sex with anyone. The judge's order put Alan under the local authority that provides his housing.

Still, the judge called the case "legally, intellectually and morally" complex and said the court must "tread especially carefully" when the state tries to curtail such a basic human function as sex.

The case began in June 2009, when the local council started court proceedings to restrict Alan's contact with the man, identified as Kieron. Alan has been prevented since then from sexual activity, except when he's alone, the Telegraph's report said.

In Britain, the Court of Protection can make decisions for people deemed to lack the intelligence to make them themselves. These people can be ordered to undergo surgery, have abortions, be forced to use contraception — even have life support switched off.

Alan was described as "sociable" but “seriously challenged in all aspects of his mental functionality.” He had been accused of making lewd gestures at children, but no police action was taken, the Telegraph said.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41476929...d_news-europe/


Do you agree with this decision?:shocked:

Sounds like a good idea, also I think you should have to get a license to have a baby.

poor Zee.

I hope he gets help with his learning difficulties. Maybe he needs rehab to cure his addiction to sex :love:

Zee?

No, I dont think the state has any right to forcibly ban someone from having sex

Although LOL at the posts above me :laugh:

There should be a "driving test" for potential mothers and fathers, too .....

:shocked: That would be pretty much something called progressive eugenics hitler was a fan of eugenics and purifying the human race by selective breeding.http://www.prometheism.net/index2_files/eugenics.jpg
http://www.insidesocal.com/tomhoffar...er_Yesweca.gif

I just wikied eugenics, it's pretty interesting.

Yes it is interesting they put forward a good case for it and i know where your coming from with the making sure people are fit parents before they are allowed to breed but its when it comes down to implementing it that it doesnt work it just goes against all human rights (and probably messes with evolution)

The guy has a low IQ and a high sex drive and has apparently made lewd gestures towards children. It is probable that he is considered a risk towards children and women, since he does not possess the mental capacity to understand the boundaries or health risks of unprotected sex. However, I am wondering how on earth they intend to implement a ban.

I note that he is allowed sex when he is "alone" so why not just buy him a blow up doll, since it seems it is the sexual release this man craves NOT emotional attachment or a relationship?

If Children are at Risk
if he is about.

So in that case - it is the right move.

No-one is saying he can't have sex - just not with another person! There's more than one way to skin a cat, as they say.

I go with your comments as to his need of sexual release rather than emotional commitment or relationship Angus58, it does sound a really complex case but if he doesn't really understand fully sex and likely other things then anyone engaging in sex with him is abusing him.
Also his engaging in such with children if it happened is the same vice versa but it would be claimed if that happened that he didn't know what he was doing them either
.
As you say unless he is going to be supervised(and that's a whole new problem) 24hours all the time then how its going to be able to make a ban work is debatable.
For me if there's any possibility of children being harmed then action has to be taken to prevent that.

As you say, the concerns could be as much about him being vulnerable to abuse as to him being the abuser - it really is a tough one to call. If it is suspected that he could be a danger to children then there is always chemical castration.

Yes I would totally agree with you on that too.

I dont think people should be allowed to e told that they are banned from having sex :/

Edit. Though some of the teen mums would do well to be banned...

Well, something really strange must have been going on for the council to notice and take action against the man, there is probably more to this story than we know.

Bunch of funny buggers.. :laugh2:


Meh, if he has no idea what he's doing in any capacity, maybe it's for the best...

I'd rather die than not having sex. I mean, seriously....

I heard somewhere that the average Victorian man's IQ would have been about 50, because of the relative lack of daily problem-solving.

I'd be interested to hear more detail on this. Isn't 'assortive breeding' common among people with severe autism? I don't see anybody banning them from having sex and there is a big 'mental capacity' issue there. Plus what health risks are we talking about? Sex is perfectly safe with the right precautions. Oh well, I didn't know abstinence was the new condom. :conf2: Plus are we forgetting he is only sleeping with one partner?

The fact that this case was been brought forward by a local authority (no doubt following the mediation of meddling social services) gives me serious reason to suspect that this has fuck all to do with Alan's best interests. Here's why.

http://exlaodicea.wordpress.com/2010...ith-aspergers/

:shocked:

This.

Sex, Drugs, Drink, Driving, Parties.

5 Things people love doing, take one of them away and you've drove the bloke to suicide. :bored:

Why do you type like that, and can't you form complete sentences?

If this guy is such a risk, you lock him up. How can you stop someone from performing a basic human function? It's impossible, and dangerous. The state shouldn't be able to tell you when you can crap or sleep.

"letmein
Senior Member


arista is nothing more than a troll. Ignore. "




You posted that on this section
I ain't no such thing
But since your line says 'Ignore'
You Best Stick To It.