Mom forced 14-year-old daughter to bear children

Jill Lawless, from NBC, writes about a woman who was so desperate to have more children that she forced her young daughter to bear them.

In a ruling reported for the first time Monday, High Court judge Peter Jackson said the mother had behaved in "a wicked and selfish way" that almost defied belief. The judge said the woman, an American divorcee living in Britain with three adopted children, hatched the plan after she was prevented from adopting a fourth.The scheme involved getting her oldest daughter to inseminate herself with syringes of sperm purchased over the Internet from a Denmark-based company, Cryos International.


  1. what the F?   this is just,    wrong on so many different levels.   why?  my faith in our race diminishes daily.

      1. It may actually be a case of life imitating art.  SVU Season 4, Episode 10, “Resilience”, back in 2002, revolved around a father obsessed with raising children.  When his wife could no longer bear children, he had her sleep with other men, sucked their sperm out with a syringe, and inseminated his teenage daughter with it.

        Yeah, creeped me out then, too.

  2. Between this and the occasional ‘non-pregnant woman hacks open pregnant woman to steal the baby inside’ story, I’m beginning to think that ‘baby crazy’ needs to be an actual psych diagnosis…

    1. Please be careful with that. As good as it sounds it actually has been considered as such and has led to abuse and even murder of childless women in the past, and also misdiagnosis of other conditions in women who don’t have children or whose children have died. 

      Besides, in this case, I don’t think it would apply. If the woman loved anything she would not abuse her child like that. I don’t think anything would be enough for a person like that, the illness is much deeper. I think maybe it is just shocking because we are so conditioned to think only of men as these kind of abusers, but I’m convinced time and study will eventually expose that women are as often sociopathic, psychopathic, narcissistic, and just plain cruel as men.

      1.  I think there’s a difference between recognizing that this is a specific kind of pathology (perhaps related to animal-hoarding), and claiming that it’s anything more than a rare aberration. The latter would be overreaction, the former may be useful in recognizing and interceding in such cases before they get out of control.

        First step toward solving a problem is recognizing that it exists and trying to understand the triggers.

        1. At least when I was thinking about it, the fact that it’s a rare aberration is what qualifies it for ‘specific kind of pathology’ status.

          People whose enthusiasm for babies drives them to collect creepy amounts of reborn ultra-realistic dolls don’t have a pathology, they have a hobby. People who are just selfish assholes have something too common and diffuse to meaningfully characterize as a specific condition.

          People who commit outrageous crimes(notably, often without much consideration of ‘not getting caught’) in order to obtain a baby? That’s a pretty specific flavor.

    2. Not necessary.  I’m pretty sure either of these cases would fall under the diagnosis of bat-shit crazy

      1. Why, you’ve cut the Gordian knot of psychology in one fell swoop! Munchausen-by-proxy? Bat-shit crazy! Schizophrenic? Bat-shit crazy! Manic-depressive? Bat-shit crazy! Studying how to prevent danger to children is for chumps. Wait for ’em to fuck up their kids, then toss ’em in the nuthatch and throw away the key.

        The great psychologists of yesteryear are looking down from above and saying, “My God, if only we’d had Bradley Robinson around to guide us.” I salute you, sir.

        1. I think resistance to a diagnosis of anything but die fledermaus scheisse verruckt stems from concern that she might skate by claiming mental illness instead of being punished for her evil actions. Studying mental illness is well and good, as long as those mentally ill people who are definitely a danger towards others are kept away from the rest of us while studies are being conducted. And returning to normal society after being ‘cured’  should be at least as difficult as being paroled from prison.

    3. It just sounds like they are addicted to welfare. This older couple abducted a baby from a shopping centre car park here a few years back. It turned out the child’s father was on trial for organised crime related offences at the time. Police let that slip and the baby was dumped and recovered fairly quickly.

      These people are calculating. How much money was the mother going to lose when her daughter turned 18? How could the daughter replace that money for her?

      1. Is the UK welfare state really so generous that “pump out a baby with donor sperm” is actually the most lucrative sex crime a hypothetical calculating prole could come up with? Really?

          1. I have read plenty of articles…

            I’ve read Moby Dick. That doesn’t qualify as quantifying your assertion any more (or less) than your response.

          2. Small but reliable living?  Seriously?  Yeah, if you consider constant poverty “reliable living”.
            Don’t you think, perhaps, it’s a bit more complicated and nuanced than just wanting to make a buck by scamming the welfare system? 

  3.  “We don’t want any of that attachment thing.”
    OMG. This poor girl. So not only was she forced into the pregnancy (and if you ask me I would argue that forcing a girl to stick syringes in herself should be considered rape), then forced into having the baby (and undergoing miscarriages which are sometimes painful in their own right depending on the circumstances), then she was forced to ignore her urge to care for the child she just gave birth to? The mother/grandmother is truly a person without a shred of love or empathy in her. Makes me wonder how she treated the adopted children too. A part of me hopes they don’t separate the baby from the natural mother though, as crazy as that sounds. If my intuition is right (and it could be totally wrong here) that baby is the only source of love that young woman has had in her life and she is probably very attached to it despite the difficulty of having a child so young.  I’m saying that because of what little of the behavior of hers and the family dynamics I pick up from the article, not because I believe ALL women have a natural maternal urge, or would rather keep a child they were forced to have. It may be me projecting too because certain aspects hit close to home in weird ways.

    It just seems to me from what I read that this girl probably has been forced into being the “real” mommy already (if her own mother is that incapable of empathy and affection, she surely could not have been the source of love for the other siblings and now her baby). God what a horror.  I just hope they are all able to heal. 

    IMO though child endangerment is a bit light. I don’t know UK laws but if this were a man force impregnating his wife with a syringe wouldn’t the penetration aspect make it a rape? Or I think in UK rape technically is only with a penis, but I think there is a corollary law for other objects IIRC? (What I know of English law would not take up the back of my hand). Still it seems a light sentence for what amounts to ongoing and extreme abuse of a child.

    1. Is that all you got?  Well, the Democrat Party has kept their slaves on the Big Government plantation of welfare dependency and murders black babies by the millions via Planned No-Parenthood.  You can’t show me one 14 y.o. that Repubs FORCED to bear a child, but I can show you a Democrat horror show going on in Dr. “Baby Hands & Feet in Jars” Gosnell’s murder trial.  Democrats are disgusting creatures.

  4. And with that, the last vestiges of my faith in humanity are burned away.  Come, everyone, and warm yourself by the cheery glow.

    Oy. Vey.

    1. Really?  Because of this?

      This just makes me shake my head and laugh more than anything.

      1. Shaking your head in cynical dismay, sure, but LAUGH?  What the fuck, dude?  While I also find Nathan’s reaction maybe … dramatic, yours is the complete opposite.  I’d rather have Nathan’s reaction.

        1. Yes, laugh.

          As one who finds children detestable, I find this particularly amusing.  

          There is humor in everything, friend.  

          And we could all stand for a little less drama.  A healthy dose of stoicism is good for the soul.

  5. Why couldn’t she just hoard cats, like most wackos with hypertrophied nesting instincts?

  6. In my haste I read

    “Mom force fed 14-year-old daughter to bear children”

    My bad.  What a sick puppy.

  7. I found this quote particularly telling/sad:

    “In his ruling, the judge quoted the teenager as saying said she was shocked by the suggestion, but thought, “If I do this … maybe she will love me more.””

  8. I never take strange tales on the Internet at face value: so, I wondered on reading this whether the child had instead blamed the mother once it was discovered that she’d got herself pregnant. However, reading TFA, this seems really NOT likely to be the case.

    Certainly, no “force” seems to have been mentioned in the original article: “Abusively coerced” might be a more accurate term to use here, though if the stepmother ever used the syringe, then I think it actually would be a rape under UK law, which (if I remember right) correctly counts rape with an object as rape.

    For me, “We don’t want any of that attachment thing” was the most saddening line, and somehow feels like an even larger abuse than convincing her to do it in the first place.

    1. Yes, because teenage girls are all lying whores, amiright?  Seriously, dude?

      “Certainly, no “force” seems to have been mentioned in the original article: “Abusively coerced””

      As someone who has been “raped by abusive coercion”, it’s the same fucking thing.

Comments are closed.