To have just emailed Jeremy Hunt

(64 Posts)
Ponyofdoom Sat 06-Oct-12 01:16:39

and told him exactly what I thought of him and his anti choice views on abortion, using the word 'disgusted' far too many times for someone not from Tunbridge Wells...then to have emailed Dianne Abbott and thanked her for standing up for women's rights. Even though I am a Tory.

seeker Sat 06-Oct-12 13:55:37

It might be an ethical debate for individuals- but it's a medical debate for legislators. Or should be.

SmokyClav Sat 06-Oct-12 20:39:42

of course the decision should be made on medical evidence- it is a medical procedure.
What other procedure would you base on ethical debate? Oh, is it right or wrong to perform back surgery on this woman with scoliosis? hmm

DawnOfTheDee Sat 06-Oct-12 20:45:13

Jeremy Hunt also believes in homeopathy. So if you do have an unwanted pregnancy, just swallow a tiny amount of baby & it'll clear right up.

FreudiansGoldSlipper Sat 06-Oct-12 20:50:24

good on you

i do not want any changes to be made as the reasons why women have late terminations are very varied and it is not because they have had a change of heart often these women have to make a heartbreaking decision. sadly at times it is needed for them and imo women should always always have full control over their OWN body

piprabbit Sat 06-Oct-12 20:53:46

The difference between Jeremy Hunt and the rest of us is that he is in a position to potentially turn his weirdy beliefe into legislation.

It reminds of the South African politician who didn't believe that condoms helped to prevent STIs such as HIV - and who actively worked to prevent people having the information and protection which might save their lives.

Surely this is just a ruse to soften us all up for when they cut it to 20 weeks, hence the PM responding "oh nonsense nonsense... But now i come to think of it 20 weeks seems about right".

Ponyofdoom Sat 06-Oct-12 21:30:01

Like your post Dawn smile
Think you are right Harpie I am rapidly going off the party I have supported for many years

bissydissy Sun 07-Oct-12 04:53:04

It weeks is clearly conservative nonsense and yes we need to beware of the example set by the US. To clarify a point made earlier the cut off for resuscitation in neonatal intensive care is 22 weeks (Not 24 as suggested earlier). surely it is an ethical debate based on the medical evidence. We have the science to do abortions at whatever date, the science to resuscitate after 22 weeks (although outcomes clearly not great) - surely we need to decide where we feel comfortable as a nation on an ethical level. But that is a debate which, if held, needs to be held openly, with the scientific evidence, evidence from those involved. Not one mans private opinion thrown out there willy nilly. I often have a private opinion about matters at work but I keep it to myself.

bissydissy Sun 07-Oct-12 04:54:00

A rouge weeks seems to have snuck into my post.....

bissydissy Sun 07-Oct-12 04:56:04

Rogue

I absolutely agree with what Fork said earlier - the abortion cut off date should not be linked to the fetus's potential to survive outside the womb if it's wired up to enough science. If we make that link, then as medicine advances, the window for abortion will reduce in parallel, until it might not exist at all, and women would have to carry babies to term from conception, regardless of the phsychological, physical, financial or social consequences, on the basis that with enough intervention, the newly implanted blastocyst could feasibly survive and develop in a mechanised womb.

bissydissy Sun 07-Oct-12 08:59:52

smoky chav
Of courses doctors and hospitals have ethical debates about whether to perform certain procedures. That's why hospitals have ethics committees.

Panzee Sun 07-Oct-12 09:11:37

Well said leftwingharpie. Most pregnancies that are allowed to go to term result in a healthy baby. So by that reasoning no abortions should be allowed at all. It's really not the point.

AuntieStella Sun 07-Oct-12 09:20:47

To answer the poster above: no he has no power to change it (it would require a change in the law). It is very unlikely that any one person could have sway over every single MP, especially on what would be an unwhipped vote. And more importantly, no, it's no part of the coalition Government's policy to make any changes to this law (no sign of any proposals, disavowed by those who matter, despite a couple of ministerial comments).

And the Health Service is about far more than the dates within which one procedure can be carried out, isn't it?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now