Mumsnet Talk

Hole on the front of his stupid unqualified-to-be-health-secretary face, I mean. Grr. Too angry to type properly!

A few years ago i would have been livid - seriously and very upset. Now time has passed and I'm a bit older and wiser i realised they're just spouting crap as you say zara - makes some news for the day i suppose and gets them a bit of publicity....

Being pregnant now has made me even more pro-choice. With this statement he is ignoring the way the NHS works.

OK, so some people may not want a baby at all and abort at 8-9 weeks, fine. Lots of people find out terrible things at the 12-week scan that they'd want to terminate for. And this scan is not always exactly AT 12 weeks - mine was at 13. So if they want that as a cutoff, they should just stop doing the scans for medical purposes altogether, along with genetic screening. What's the point?

Same with the 20-week - mine wasn't until 23 weeks, but it's called the "anomaly scan." This is when a woman might find out a child is unable to live outside the womb. That is not a decision that anyone wants to make, but it should be available as a decision. The 24-week limit makes absolute sense because that is the point of viability.

Why they are worried about this now is beyond me. Surely they should be focussing on reducing total number of abortions than reducing medical abortion time limits? Time limits agreed on by medical professionals who know their field and their patients??

IMO it's barbaric. Fucking Jeremy Cunt.

Yes im completely furious that somebody wants to reduce the limit for killing an unborn baby. Disabilities aside i cant think of any reason to abort when there are other options out there.

I see it is pointless to even try and make the point I am trying to make.
People will bulldoze on making glib comments about 'healthy' babies and mother killing disabled babies.

Is it that hard for people to understand? Really?

If it is wrong to terminate a baby at a late stage it is wrong
Because you must have a reason why it is wrong.
Because it is cruel?
Because it is too late?
Because it is traumatic?

Why?

Because all of the above would apply to babies regardless of their condition.
They also apply to the women because women who terminate babies for disabilities do not do it merrily and without regret.

So conversely if you think it is acceptable it must surely be acceptable for all women.

Personally I wish that no woman ever had to make that decision.
I wish that all pregnancies could be happy.

But they are not and they never have been in the history of the human race.
So we must have abortion on demand for all women who need it.

I'm sodding angry. I suspect we're being softened up for a change to 22 or 20 weeks.

Abortion should be available as early as possible, as late as necessary, for any woman who needs one.

If you are against abortion because you ascribe personhood to the foetus, i.e. you view it as 'killing a baby', you cannot then discriminate on the grounds of disability, because they're babies, i.e. people, and people have equal rights under the law. Similarly, you cannot discriminate against pregnancies which are the result of rape. As MrsDeVere says, it's either always acceptable or always unacceptable.

Hello orange & peshwari - the well-articulated voice of reason shines through in your posts!!

slutty I'm pretty sure my friend who had an abortion at 14 weeks, who was battling alcoholism at the time and was on the cusp of homelessness, refusing all offers of help from friends & family, had a good reason for choosing to terminate her unplanned pregnancy. Which by the way she conceived with someone she didn't know the identity of because she was so hammered at the time. But better to let her have the baby, right? Moral hazard and all that

I agree with 12 weeks tbh. If there is abnormalities/health complaint then there should be exceptions.

Not really surprised to hear stuff like this from Jeremy 'nhs the 60 year mistake' hunt.

He should keep his politics out of such a painful subject.

You cannot tell other people what to think or feel, I am all for abortion up to a point for all babies, I am stuck at 20 weeks, but I think thats because I have 2 close friends who had babies before the 24 week cut off point and who are both beautiful - I wouldn't vote to change the current limit, I would vote against any change.

However, once a foetus reaches the point where it can survive outside with womb, and taking into account also it would have to be delivered one way or another, then other factors have to come into play, for me.

I don't expect anyone/everyone to agree with me, I do not understand how anyone can agree with aborting a healthy 40 week foetus, sorry.

it will be a real backward step if it actually gets passed.

Define 'healthy'

'disabilities aside'

My stomach just lurched.

Many people don't realise they are pregnant until after 12 weeks, because some of us continue having monthly bleeds. It then takes time to get the relevant doctors letters to arrange a termination. Then there is the issue of life threatening anomalies identified at the 20-22 week scan. Lowering the limit would be a terrible thing to do to women. I would be furious on behalf on every woman who needed the choice and was denied it.

He is a twunt. But it won't happen.

Exactly mrsdevere. There are so many ways to view healthy or a disability. Plus every pregnancy has its own circumstances.

It's not like abortions after 20 weeks are handed out no questions asked. Or any abortion for that matter.

I didn't phrase that well at all. Sorry. Yes people are people regardless of health and should be treated equally. But healthy however you view it often contributes to the question of abortion.

This bollocks just screams of someone who has no idea of pregnancy or the way the antenatal care system works.

The majority of abortions happen by this time anyway, and those that don't tend to be around the time of the 20 week scan. Any that happen after this point after for medical reasons - and isn't a choice which is taken lightly.

I do, however, disagree with full term abortion. Once a child is capable of living outside of the womb, it become more of a grey area. The 24 week mark is right, really.

zara yes that is what i am saying. Im not saying she needed to be a mother but that there are other options other than to abort. And i really dont see what " she conceived with someone she didn't know the identity of because she was so hammered at the time" has to do with anything.

OP, I am furious.

It is nobody but the pregnant woman in question's choice. I believe we should have autonomy over our own bodies.

I agree with the 12 week limit, except in extenuating circumstances.

And I am pro choice.

There can be complications which mean a woman could die while giving birth.

You are not pro choice cake

slutty what about the disabled children?
Are there not the same options?
I assume you are talking about adoption.
Have any idea how hard it is to place a baby of an alcoholic for adoption?
About the same or harder than a disabled child depending on the disability.

new, a serious question, because I really don't understand, what complications can possibly mean at 39/40 weeks, a woman is more at risk from a live than dead baby, surely by this point, birth, by whatever mean, is birth and has to be gone through?