Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Aeolienne

Autistic woman allowed to have sex with numerous men 'despite not being aware of dangers'

Recommended Posts

Aeolienne

(Not written by me)

Autistic woman allowed to have sex with numerous men 'despite not being aware of dangers'

Patrick Sawer, Senior News Reporter

18 October 2018 • 5:03pm 

Social workers have defended their handling of a case in which a young woman with autism was allowed to have sex with several men despite not always being aware of the potential dangers.

There were fears the woman, who has severe learning disabilities and an IQ of 52, was repeatedly exploited during a two-month trial period this summer in which random men were permitted to visit her Manchester home between 10am and 4pm each day.

She was also taken to shisha bars and on numerous occasions had sex in public, including in a taxi and at the back of a bowling alley, because the carers paid by Manchester City Council to look after her would not intervene.

The arrangement only came to an end last month when Manchester City Council returned to the Court of Protection to alter the terms of her care plan.

In a report to the court last month a psychiatrist warned that allowing her to continue to be exposed to such a “high level of risk” was unacceptable, unprofessional and might lead to “sexual abuse, violence, injury or death”.

The National Autistic Society has called for “urgent lessons” to be drawn from the case, saying that while autistic people have a right to a sex life, “the responsibility to keep people safe falls on those in positions of care, like the courts, councils and support providers” and that “its essential safeguarding measures are followed meticulously”.

In a statement Manchester City Council said: “Various parties have had to weigh the young woman’s freedom against the need for restrictions in the interests of her safety. Our priority has been to keep her safe from harm, acting in her best interests.”

But relatives of the 23-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, have accused care authorities of approving an “experiment” that led to the “pimping out of a highly vulnerable young woman”.

The young woman had a history of running away from home from the age of nine and was reported missing ten times in five years.

Court papers obtained by The Times newspaper state that “significant concerns arose that [she] had been subjected to sexual activity with men, particularly Asian men”. This included “sexual violations and rapes” while she was still a child.

When she became a teenager, she developed an “obsessional interest” in men, particularly “from different ethnic or cultural backgrounds”.

Following her 18th birthday in 2013 the woman’s care has been determined by the Court of Protection, whose role it is to safeguard vulnerable adults who lack the mental capacity to make decisions for themselves.

In 2015 a judge ruled that she was able to consent to sex, but because it was feared she would be “at significant risk of sexual harm if she was allowed unescorted access to the community” a specialist company, Engage Support, was employed by Manchester City Council to provide her with 24-hour support.

The same year the woman met a restaurant waiter of Bangladeshi nationality and the pair married in 2016.

However, 12 months ago the woman is said to have embarked on a series of risky attempts to have sex with men she barely knew, sending them dozens of nude photographs of herself.

The local authority told the court that a psychologist employed by the company believed that giving her “unsupervised contact with men” was in her best interests.

But when she began to undertake sexual encounters in public, Engage Support is understood to have threatened to terminate its contract with Manchester council unless the restrictions on her freedom were reduced.

A psychologist employed by the company said that giving her “unsupervised contact with men” was in her best interests, but council social workers argued that to withdraw her support in the community would leave her at “risk of sexual harm, violence, abuse and trafficking”.

However, in June Judge Jonathan Butler gave Engage Support permission to leave the woman alone at home “to have sexual relations with others during daytime hours [10am to 4pm]”.

If she sought sex in public, carers were “not expected to intervene physically”, nor to “remain present during such acts”.

Over the next few weeks she had sex with at least six men in her bedroom and continued to seek sex in public. On one July night alone she left home and had sex with three men before police brought her back at 4.30am.

The woman’s husband was not informed of the court’s decision to allow his wife to have sex with men when he was not at her home and was said to have felt “devastated and betrayed” by the decision.

In late August Engage Support said it would no longer allow men to visit her home after concerns were raised over her sexual behaviour and the welfare of its staff, who were present.

It withdrew from the contract early last month and the woman has been moved to a different location, run by a new care provider.

Lucy Powell, the MP for Manchester Central said:  “This is an appalling case which raises serious questions about the care system for vulnerable adults. The decision by the judge and care provider, against the wishes of the local authority charged with this woman’s care, beggars belief.”

Manchester council said it had gone to the court to consider how best to manage the risks to the young woman.

“We took the case back to the court in September precisely because the situation which arose was so concerning and we felt it needed to stop to protect her from harm,” it added.

Source:The Telegraph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Miss Chief

While I strongly believe anyone who is capable of giving informed consent (which apparently she was assessed as being able to do) should be allowed to have sex with whomever they wish, I do feel like this isn't a particularly good story. 

Surely steps could have been taken to carefully and thoroughly inform her about sex, protection, consent and even abuse, once she fully understood what is ok and what isn't and how to be safe then it's fine if she wants to have sex, even if she wants multiple partners as long as she truly understands what she is doing and what risks are involved. I know it can be difficult to get her to understand this information if she has learning difficulties and a low IQ but there are ways to do it, even acting it out with props if necessary, discussing different situations, how to get out of a situation if you are uncomfortable, how to get into a kinky one if you want to, how to communicate what you do and don't want, how to use protection, a condom in particular since others generally only protect against pregnancy.

Also some time should have been taken to explain the repercussions of promiscuity, being the centre of gossip, being ostracised, being taken advantage of, being abused or even just not having the most satisfying experience, the more you 'practice' with one person the better you both get to know each other and what works between you.

Certainly she should have had a lot of stuff explained to her before she got married, like this means you shouldn't have sex with other people unless you have discussed it with your husband first and he is ok with it.

I also wonder where her husband is... Does he live with her? Is he around her level intellectually? Did he take advantage of her? Why isn't he around? Why isn't she getting satisfied with that relationship? How can she be staying out, sleeping with multiple men in public and brought home by the police at 4:30 AM without him having any idea what is happening?

I assume she likes either the attention or the sensation of sex itself and there is nothing wrong with that but I can't help but feel she has been taken advantage of by the men and at the very least the carers were negligent. It feels like she was assessed, found capable of consent, introduced to men and left to get on with it if not outright pimped out.

It's a sad story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myrtonos
1 hour ago, Miss Chief said:

While I strongly believe anyone who is capable of giving informed consent (which apparently she was assessed as being able to do) should be allowed to have sex with whomever they wish, I do feel like this isn't a particularly good story.

This is widely believe in affluent western societies today, but it wasn't always. For an example:

1 hour ago, Miss Chief said:

I also wonder where her husband is... Does he live with her? Is he around her level intellectually? Did he take advantage of her? Why isn't he around? Why isn't she getting satisfied with that relationship? How can she be staying out, sleeping with multiple men in public and brought home by the police at 4:30 AM without him having any idea what is happening?

Suppose she lived in the middle ages and a priest heard about her lying with numerous men. The priest would tell her and the men other than her husband that what they did was very evil and they will go to hell for that, because God thinks it is evil, because it says in the bible that one shall not commit adultery and that a man shall not even covert another man's wife. And if all involved parties told the priest they felt very good about it, then the priest would give a talk about how God judges them on accomplishments, their feelings being unimportant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Miss Chief
1 hour ago, Myrtonos said:

This is widely believe in affluent western societies today, but it wasn't always. For an example:

Suppose she lived in the middle ages and a priest heard about her lying with numerous men. The priest would tell her and the men other than her husband that what they did was very evil and they will go to hell for that, because God thinks it is evil, because it says in the bible that one shall not commit adultery and that a man shall not even covert another man's wife. And if all involved parties told the priest they felt very good about it, then the priest would give a talk about how God judges them on accomplishments, their feelings being unimportant.

How does that have anything to do with this conversation? What on earth does the bible, god(s), or the middle ages have to do with a vulnerable adult living in Britain in the twenty first century? You already have a topic discussing this exact thing and I think you are better off keeping that kind of comment in that topic. Not everyone is religious (in fact I would hazard a guess that the majority of logical thinkers on the spectrum aren't), and posting this kind of judgemental comment is not helpful to anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RiRi

Wow, such a weird story this is. I only skimmed through but I wouldn't imagine something like this is actually happening and that the law has been involved in this. My IQ isn't that far from hers, so I wonder if her intellectual is a bit higher than the IQ they tested her. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Miss Chief
10 hours ago, RiRi said:

My IQ isn't that far from hers,

Are you sure you didn't misread the first post? I know the US and UK can use different metrics for measuring IQ but the 50's is very low indeed in both? I am not trying to be mean to you, quite the opposite... I don't believe for a moment your IQ is anywhere near the 50's :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RiRi
13 hours ago, Miss Chief said:

Are you sure you didn't misread the first post? I know the US and UK can use different metrics for measuring IQ but the 50's is very low indeed in both? I am not trying to be mean to you, quite the opposite... I don't believe for a moment your IQ is anywhere near the 50's :) 

I only skimmed but saw her IQ is 52. I believe my IQ is 65 (if I'm remembering correctly). I think it used to be 74, but I got tested recently and got a 65 I think. Maybe my judgment is a bit far from it but 52 and 65, I believe are not that far off. Like a person with an IQ of 85, I believe would still be considered normal intelligence as a person who got 100 points (normal intelligence), 15 point difference. I personally don't think I am as dumb as the IQ says I am, although sometimes I think I am. I think IQs have some truth to it because having a high IQ, I believe, is related to how social you can be. I think I'm very low on the social part and that is why my IQ is low. I have had various instances where I acted like a dumb person. I seem to always be a couple of steps away from normal intelligence. It's sad. It feels like some part is missing in my brain. I think you're correct and an IQ of 65 is borderline intellectual disability or something so a 52 would probably be in the range of intellectual disability. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Miss Chief

Hmm the average IQ in the US is 98, 70 or below is considered low and apparently the US military won't accept volunteers or conscripts with an IQ below 85 (or possibly 83 sources vary).

To join Mensa in the UK you would have to do one of the following tests Cattell III B test or the Culture Fair III A test and get a score in the top 2% (98th percentile or above). The Culture Fair test is specifically designed for people who's first language is not English. An adult can only get a maximum IQ of 161 on the Cattell III B test and 183 on Culture Fair. A top two per cent score on Cattell III B would be 148 or over, while for Culture Fair it is 132 or over. This is why I find it weird when people say Elon Musk has a 250 IQ score... so far as I know NO ONE, ANYWHERE, EVER has had a score over 190. Einstein had an IQ in the 160's (as did Hawking).

A proper IQ test will test for mental agility, it does not test your knowledge, wisdom, memory or emotional intelligence... it doesn't test what you know but rather your ability to learn. Modern tests include a section for verbal intelligence (although not on the one aimed at people for whom English isn't a first language). 

I think that either you were measured on a special test that isn't standardised or you scored below what you should have... this could be for a number of reasons, firstly if it wasn't in your first language or if you have dyslexia that would be one barrier, another can be if you are from a different culture to the country where you were tested, for example African people can score badly on American/Western tests... this does NOT mean that African people have a low IQ but it does mean that the test itself has a cultural bias. Also if you are struggling physically (e.g. money worries, physical pain) or emotionally (e.g. depression, anxiety) this can have a negative impact on your results too.

Your IQ score should NEVER go down, in fact being tested repeatedly should show a few point increase.

It is true that in reality our IQ's drop as we age but this is NOT because our IQ drops but rather because humans are constantly getting smarter so older people are ranked lower in the percentages, however, age is usually accounted for so in reality your position remains stable for your life. To understand this you have to understand how the scoring works... even though people are getting smarter the score is not going higher, it was decided that the maximum score is and always will be 161 (I'm specifically using the Cattell test for this example but the same applies for the other standardised tests it's just the numbers are a little different) and the top 2% are the people who score over 148, what this translates to is if you have a score or 148 - 155 you will be in the 98th percentile (top 2%) and if you have a score of 156+ you are in the 99th percentile (top 1%). Because it's done on percentages of the whole population they take an average of all scores and working out what results qualify as what percentile so the scores remain the same even though people are getting smarter with each generation. Also each year the IQ test gets harder to try to overcome people getting smarter and people 'practicing' for the test. 

Basically if you have a score of 100 (which is the average worldwide) and your mother also had a score of 100 you would technically have a higher IQ than her because she is older than you. Although you should understand that IQ does not mean you are smarter, it's just your ability to learn and mental agility, your mother would also have life experience and wisdom and so on on her side ;) 

Hope that helps... I still think your score is either very wrong or it wasn't one of the standardised tests. I do not think you are below average at all, you have two languages and attained a degree in your second language... I don't think that would be possible for someone with an IQ under 80 on a standard test.

Edited by Miss Chief
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myrtonos

Speaking of I.Q, a higher score in the standard I.Q test doesn't mean being more intelligent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.