Shocking History Of Anti-Family Rulings Are A Cautionary Tale For The U.S.

A tidal wave of progressive propaganda is crashing over our nation and threatening the destruction of the family.

And we are not alone – perhaps the best example of what happens when the left works to eradicate the traditional family can be found in the U.K.

The family courts of the U.K. have been ruling against the family at every turn, with radical progressives at the helm.

Unlike in the U.S., British judges are not elected, nor subject to recall at any level – giving the government an iron-clad grip over its families.

And once one delves into the dark history of the U.K.’s Family Court’s previous rulings, it becomes apparent that they have appointed themselves to destroy families in any way they can.

In 2014, Sir James Munby, the Family High Court’s President, made the news for forcibly ordering an underage girl – only 13 years old — to have an abortion.

She had consensual sex with a 14-year-old boy and wanted to keep her child, but the judge had other ideas.  Little information was given on the girl’s background at the time or whether she had the support of family, but Munby callously disregarded the testimony of several experts who vigorously opposed the idea.

He had determined that the girl was “mentally incompetent” to make decisions for herself, but her court-appointed advocates disagreed.  Several experts warned the forced abortion would cause lasting trauma and would be viewed by a child her age as a physical assault.

Mommy Underground recently reported on Sir James Munby’s anti-family stance after he issued a statement that “the collapse of the nuclear family should be welcomed and applauded.”

LifeSite News reported at the time:

In spite of the fact that the court was informed that she “had set her mind against a termination,” …Munby responded that, “Leaving to one side her own wishes and feelings, the preponderance of all the evidence is clear that it would be in her best interests to have a termination.”

“It was clearly appropriate for me to supply the necessary consent to enable the termination to proceed.”

Also in 2014, another Family Court judge, Justice Hayden, ordered that a 32-year-old Italian woman suffering from bipolar disorder must undergo a cesarean section. 

She was visiting England at the time when she went to the hospital for a panic attack and complications with her diabetes. 

The woman, Alesandra Pacchieri, was then “sectioned” – a mandatory holding period in a mental health ward — under the U.K.’s Mental Health Act.

Giving the reason that the woman’s life was in danger because her mental illness precluded her from properly managing her diabetes, a cesarean was forcibly ordered at 32 weeks of pregnancy.

The baby girl was immediately placed in foster care, then placed for adoption against the mother’s wishes, all under the supervision of the Family Courts.

The High Court was set to preside over the mother’s fight to get her child back, but in the end, she did not contest the process and the adoption went forward.

And in 2010, a Family High Court decision rejected a couple’s petition to become foster parents or adopt children because of their “religious beliefs.”  Their “crime?”  They refused instructions that mandate that adoptive parents teach that alternative lifestyles such as homosexuality are acceptable and normal.

In recent statements, U.K. judges have also expressed that divorces in the U.K. should be handled as an “administrative matter” by a registrar and that they should be expedited as quickly as possible to benefit everyone involved.

Time and time again, judges in the U.K. have issued statements that Christian values are part of a bygone era, and that secularism is the only option for a modern society.

Sir James Munby also made headlines in the U.K. recently when he ruled the number of government-paid lawyers and other professionals assigned to assist children in family cases should be cut.

While he states that each child must be properly represented in court, Munby wrote in a memo to other judges and lawyers in the Family Court offices that “we need to remember this all costs money,” according to the Daily Mail.

And above all, the anti-life rulings by U.K.’s High Court cost infants like Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans their lives.  They are far from the only ones, as the costs associated with medical care under the U.K.’s socialist healthcare system are the bottom line when deciding who lives and who dies.

England and Wales share the same legal system, separate from Scotland and Ireland.  They do have an appeals court system, including their variation of a Supreme Court.  However, for family legal issues and cases involving innocent children, Munby is head enforcer.

This should serve as a cautionary tale to us here in the States.  As the left continues to take over our courts and the halls of Congress, we may find ourselves in the same frightening scenario as families in the U.K.

And with their socialist system where the government is in charge of the people – instead of the other way around — more and more freedoms are disappearing for Britons every day.

While the radical left fights to take away our Constitutional and God-given rights, as they bully legislators and judges, and as they take over our schools and corporations with their threats and intimidation tactics, we are foolish to believe we won’t experience shades of what is occurring in the U.K.

The radical progressives in the U.K.’s judicial system have wreaked havoc on dozens of innocent lives in an attempt to rid the U.K. of any means of protection for traditional families.

We must remain vigilant and fight for our rights – especially our rights as parents – and lead the charge to preserve our freedoms and keep overreaching government in check.

The results otherwise are frightening, indeed.

What do you think of the U.K.s High Court’s history of anti-family rulings?  Do you fear the traditional family in America is going down the same road as the U.K.?  Leave us your thoughts.