Generally confusing.

Judge rules to keep mom from reproducing.

Of course, thing is, there should be an idea of reproductive responsibility. The woman already has children in foster care, being raised in effect by my money and your money (ie, taxes). Now, in regard to the abortion debate, is this a situation where unbiased, good information on contraception, birth control, and abortion, be taught in schools, instead of the current 2-1 support in favor of abstinence education. (source: 2004 Budget, GPOaccess.gov)

Although, from another angle, how out of line is the Judge, and is this in anyway different than suspending a drunk's license? If she can't keep her legs crossed until her little brats get adopted, is threatening her with jail to keep her from having more children than she can handle and care for, or that the state can handle and properly care for for that matter, necessarily a bad thing?
I am not sure, but someone has to look at the Chinese model of reproductive, um rights, and wonder, maybe they do know what's going on?
Remember, there is no such thing as living in harmony, and if you've heard mogwai, harmonious sounds can be very noisy and loud.