Why aren't you all FURIOUS?!

(138 Posts)
NewNames Fri 05-Oct-12 23:08:06

And you thought the minister for women and equality was bad... Our HEALTH MINISTER wants to reduce the abortion time limit to 12 weeks!!!!

Front page of tomorrow's Times.

I am furious. I am furious all the time about the bullshit decisions this government makes. I am disgusted by the choice of health minister. I constantly rage at the lack of common sense.

This is the Times though.. it's not policy yet (and I will chain my self to number 10 before it becomes law), and I don't believe it will ever happen. It's a bandwagon for people to jump on. Interesting timing too, given the US perspective on this subject.

Sunnywithachanceofshowers Fri 05-Oct-12 23:19:36



ProudNeathGirl Fri 05-Oct-12 23:48:49

Why are you furious about lowering the limit for abortions? I'm not saying I agree or disagree, but I would have thought 3 months is enough time to decide whether or not you want to keep a baby.

threesocksmorgan Fri 05-Oct-12 23:49:38

they should raise it to up to birth for all babies

MayTheOddsBeEverInYourFavour Fri 05-Oct-12 23:51:20

Surely it's just a tactic to make lowering it to 20 weeks seem more reasonable

ProudNeathGirl Fri 05-Oct-12 23:51:36

Tend to agree Threesocks. Though I can see that there might be instances where exceptions could be made.

NewNames Fri 05-Oct-12 23:52:50

Proud And what if you don't find out until 9 weeks and then it takes a week to get an appt at your docs and then it's a 3 week wait?

What if your 12 week or 20 week scan reveals life threatening abnormalities?

12 weeks is a ridiculously low limit.

Startailoforangeandgold Fri 05-Oct-12 23:53:35

I am furious, but I'm also old enough to know it won't happen.

DuelingFanjo Fri 05-Oct-12 23:54:34

90% of abortions take place before 13 weeks, why does he want to stop the 10% that happen after when clearly many of them are necessary and most are not after 24 weeks. what a twat.

fluffygal Fri 05-Oct-12 23:54:41

proud eh? I read threesocks as saying there should be no abortion limit, so you can abort at 39 weeks. Although that isn't abortion at that far along. So what do you mean by exceptions?

12w is not three months. Plenty of women have zero symptoms well after that, so if you aren't actively ttc you might well reach 13w without noticing.

Health policy should be evidence based. If she were making this statement as a private individual or constituency MP that would be a different matter. But she is confusing her private opinion with her job.

onedev Fri 05-Oct-12 23:55:28

I agree with MayThe - it will make 20 weeks not seem so bad so I believe it's all tactical.

threesocksmorgan Fri 05-Oct-12 23:55:56

just to clarify
you can "abort" up to birth for disability
that is why I think the limit should be up to birth in all cases

ThatVikRinA22 Fri 05-Oct-12 23:56:09

what happens threesocks when a baby is aborted but lives, because its full term? what do you propose happens to full term babies? kill them at birth? i think that steps into a whole new territory that i for one would never be comfortable with.

i do not agree with a 12 week limit at all.

i would say leave it as is, or perhaps reduce the limit to 22 weeks, simply because many babies now live from 24 weeks.

MayTheOddsBeEverInYourFavour Fri 05-Oct-12 23:56:09

If there are abnormalities there is no upper limit

I would be hugely upset if they ever did reduce it to 12 weeks but I would be equally upset if they extended it to full term

FootLikeATractionEngine Fri 05-Oct-12 23:58:07

Agreed, they have caught onto to the power of the Overton Window

We are living in dangerous times in regards to the roll back of the gains that women have made.

threesocksmorgan Fri 05-Oct-12 23:59:08

VicarInaTutu sorry don't get what you mean

NewNames Fri 05-Oct-12 23:59:45

Wouldn't happen. They inject the foetus in the womb to ensure it dies.

ThatVikRinA22 Sat 06-Oct-12 00:04:46

so under what threesocks proposes, you could kill a baby by lethal injection up to the day its due?

jesus. really?

i think that having 24 weeks to decide if you want to be a parent or not is enough time.

i would never support a 12 week limit. but i would equally never support no limit at all.

threesocksmorgan Sat 06-Oct-12 00:14:56

no you would end discrimination before birth.

fluffygal Sat 06-Oct-12 00:15:13

Newname its not a foetus if the woman is 39 weeks pregnant.

fluffygal Sat 06-Oct-12 00:16:21

Newname its not a foetus if the woman is 39 weeks pregnant.

NewNames Sat 06-Oct-12 00:17:20

Abortion can be for many reasons. If you're going to give birth to a severely mentally and physically disabled child, that might kill you if it gets to full term, then YES, a woman should be able to choose to abort it at any point.

I wonder how people like Jeremy Hunt get elected and then I see dozens of stupid comments like that and then simply despair.

LynetteScavo Sat 06-Oct-12 00:18:21

I think lowering the limit to 20 weeks should definitely happen.

12 weeks won't happen. Although I wouldn't feel furious if it did.

NewNames Sat 06-Oct-12 00:18:50

fluffy Yes it is

Sunnywithachanceofshowers Sat 06-Oct-12 00:26:40

Tests for a variety of conditions aren't available until 20 weeks of pregnancy. It makes no sense to change the current law.

NewNames Sat 06-Oct-12 00:28:14

If only sense had anything to do with it sunny sad

CogitoErgoSometimes Sat 06-Oct-12 08:01:42

Maybe some of us aren't FURIOUS because it's a discussion point, not an announcement. Plenty find abortion distasteful and regrettable. 26 weeks is quite wrong today and the debate needs to start somewhere.

OrangeandGoldMrsDeVere Sat 06-Oct-12 08:16:08

I know what 3socks means
I agree.
Whilst I would hope that full term abortion never happens why is so appalling for one prenancy and just a bit sad (but for the best) for another?

These threads are always peppered with comments that are offensive to parents of disabled children and I expect that is why 3socks has posted.

None of it means that I am judging any woman who has to make the decision, that I am anti abortion or happy about full term abortions.

I am pro choice
I accept that every woman has to make a choice based on heat is best for them.

But perhaps this could be a thread where people were sensitive for a change?

Iggly Sat 06-Oct-12 08:18:17

I agree TractionEngine. Gawd and people fall for it.

OrangeandGoldMrsDeVere Sat 06-Oct-12 08:18:39

Your last post is a perfect example newname

A severely disabled child that might kill you?


Iggly Sat 06-Oct-12 08:20:12

Cogito it's 24 weeks or later but only if other flcobditions are met.

Zara1984 Sat 06-Oct-12 08:21:35

He is a total nob jockey - surely he will have to stand down for this??? Regardless of a debate of whether it would/could/should be lowered to 20 weeks (it shouldn't), WTAF does he think will happen to genetic screening?! Why bother doing nuchal fold test FFS.

This just rages me more because I currently live in the Republic of Ireland and the lack of access to this basic health service makes me sick. You do not want this twatface minister pontificating about what HE thinks is "morally right" for women's bodies. He can fuck right off, and when he gets there, he can bloody well fuck off some more!!!


/end 37 week pregnant hormonal rant

picnicbasketcase Sat 06-Oct-12 08:23:41

I don't understand about the disabled baby killing you at full term confused

I AM furious. For many reasons, some of which involve the govournment grin.

I don't think the 12 week limit will happen.
However, the trend from the States is terrifying sadangry.
I so hope that is one occasion where Britain will not follow, where the USofA are wanting to lead.

Zara1984 Sat 06-Oct-12 08:26:41

Yes some tests aren't available until 20 weeks. Also if nuchal fold wasn't available where you live in UK it would only be at 20 week scan you might get indicators for Downs.

Eg I had my mid-pregnancy scan at 21 weeks. If it was discovered baby had Edwards Syndrome (not compatible with life - baby dies before birth or shortly after), then with a 20 week abortion limit I would be out of time to make a decision.

QuickLookBusy Sat 06-Oct-12 08:27:20

I can't stand the man but he has said this is his personal opinion. He isn't going to try to make it law.

HondaJizz Sat 06-Oct-12 08:31:50

Time limits are not applicable if the baby is found to have abnormalities.

Zara1984 Sat 06-Oct-12 08:33:50

But quicklook it is highly irresponsible (at the very least) for the minister responsible for health to make such a divisive statement, which is not based on scientific evidence, on such an important women's health service.

This man has the power to start the ball rolling to change the law, THAT'S why it's right to be furious even if he is just voicing his opinion and doesn't plan to take things any further.

threesocksmorgan Sat 06-Oct-12 08:36:36

op can you explain how a disabled baby could kill you if it goes to term, that post makes no sense at all.

hmc Sat 06-Oct-12 08:37:07

12 weeks! 12 weeks!!!!!

threesocksmorgan Sat 06-Oct-12 08:37:37

HondaJizz Sat 06-Oct-12 08:31:50
Time limits are not applicable if the baby is found to have abnormalities.

my point exactly
so there should be no time limit in any case

DinosaursOnASpaceship Sat 06-Oct-12 08:37:50

I think as a lot of problems aren't picked up until 20 weeks then lowering the limit for abortion is wrong.

needanswers Sat 06-Oct-12 08:42:51

I am not furious because it is simply his personal opinion and will never happen.

I am not comfortable with the current limit for a healthy foetus, in the case of severe disability I accept late abortions can and will need to happy.

That said, I would never support aborting a healthy foetus past 24 weeks, and I consider full term abortion, (excepting severe life threatening situations for child) nothing short of murder, I don't see the difference between killing the foetus in situ, and killing it outside of the womb.

If the health of the mother is at risk from delivery - well at that point, the baby has to be delivered one way or another regardless.

QuickLookBusy Sat 06-Oct-12 08:47:02

Zara I agree with you. I was just making it clear that the govt are not making this law. I was trying to reassure people.

Teresa May had just been on Radio 4. She said the govt has no plans to change the law. That her personal opinion was the limit should stay as it is.

mrsmoodypants Sat 06-Oct-12 08:54:37

When I first heard this on the news i was furious - had the same experience as zara described sad

I have then assumed that they mean the general level being reduced eg for unwanted pregnancies and that the rule for serious abnormalities would remain the same.....otherwise it's just total nonsense and wouldn't get passed in a million years.

TooMuchRain Sat 06-Oct-12 08:58:43

Theresa May said her personal opinion was that the limit should be 20 weeks but she agreed with govt policy

Zara1984 Sat 06-Oct-12 08:58:51

mrsmoody I'm really sorry that happened to you sad

Unfortunately when fools like Jeremy Hunt open the hole on the front of the fact and let garbage tumble out, he doesn't think first about WHY the law is the way it is, and for people who have gone through the very difficult situation of a second trimester/post-20 week termination, and why they did it.

Zara1984 Sat 06-Oct-12 08:59:49

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

mrsmoodypants Sat 06-Oct-12 09:05:57

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....

PeshwariNaan Sat 06-Oct-12 09:16:38

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.

OrangeandGoldMrsDeVere Sat 06-Oct-12 09:20:43

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?


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.

Zara1984 Sat 06-Oct-12 09:43:05

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 hmm

LST Sat 06-Oct-12 09:45:53

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

tilder Sat 06-Oct-12 09:49:00

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.

needanswers Sat 06-Oct-12 09:49:08

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.

FunnysInLaJardin Sat 06-Oct-12 09:50:31

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

OrangeandGoldMrsDeVere Sat 06-Oct-12 09:52:27

Define 'healthy'

OrangeandGoldMrsDeVere Sat 06-Oct-12 09:54:43

'disabilities aside'

My stomach just lurched.

panicnotanymore Sat 06-Oct-12 10:01:44

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.

catgirl1976 Sat 06-Oct-12 10:03:28

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

tilder Sat 06-Oct-12 10:10:56

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.

tilder Sat 06-Oct-12 10:13:52

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.

SirBoobAlot Sat 06-Oct-12 10:15:26

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.

Paiviaso Sat 06-Oct-12 10:33:50

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.

CakeBump Sat 06-Oct-12 10:34:20

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

And I am pro choice.

NewNames Sat 06-Oct-12 10:34:36

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

NewNames Sat 06-Oct-12 10:34:59

You are not pro choice cake

OrangeandGoldMrsDeVere Sat 06-Oct-12 10:35:24

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.

needanswers Sat 06-Oct-12 10:36:14

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?

blonderthanred Sat 06-Oct-12 10:36:29

I'm furious.

OrangeandGoldMrsDeVere Sat 06-Oct-12 10:36:51

What ones are caused by a disabled child newnames

Zara1984 Sat 06-Oct-12 10:37:20

Slutty Her option aside from aborting was, in all likelihood, to be homeless and pregnant. And given how much she was drinking, that poor baby could well have also been affected by FAS. What a great start in life, I'm sure s/he would've had no problem finding adoptive parents. And we all know that being homeless and pregnant would be a walk in the park, right???

I gave details of the conception to give a wider background of how awful the situation was for her.

I would love for you to have looked my friend in the eye, after hearing her story (after the fact of it happening, because she had isolated herself from friends & family at the time), and told her she shouldn't have aborted. I would seriously like to see if anyone anti-choice would have the balls to tell her that her choice was wrong.

CakeBump Sat 06-Oct-12 10:37:52

Yes, I am OP. But there should be a cut off limit, and if a foetus can survive at 24 weeks, then that limit is too late.

My opinion remains the same whether for disabled or non disabled babies, btw

for those saying 12 weeks is long enough:

my cycle can be 52 days long. it is quite possible therefore that i would not even be late till i was 8 weeks pregnant and quite reasonable to wait a week to see if your period comes. therefore 9weeks at the point i find out. i can't be the only one with long cycles.

that leaves 3 weeks to get a gp appointment, be seen, be referred and get an appointment and have the abortion.

that is not plenty of time.

MadBusLady Sat 06-Oct-12 10:45:27

Sorry if anyone's already said this, not read whole thread.

I think it's a stalking horse for a lesser reduction, that more people will accept as "not so bad". You've got to have the nutters like Hunt (and that ghastly Dorries woman) to make people who want, say, a reduction to 20 weeks appear moderates.

Orange, i believe disabled children have the right to not be aborted either. However if there was no chance whatsoever that the baby would live and the mother could die then that is (in my opinion) the only time abortion should be an option. I know my opinion is not popular but getting pregnant is a result of having sex and nothing other than abstinence is 100%. So if you have sex then there is a chance you could get pregnant.

threesocksmorgan Sat 06-Oct-12 10:46:11

come on newnames back that up please with fact

i recently had a really interesting conversation with a gp who used to work in an abortion clinic. what surprised her most were the women who had unintentionally gotten pregnant whilst married/cohabiting with a man and their shared child/ren only to tell him and have him completely scarper off the scene leaving her facing single parenthood, financial implications, caring for existing children and trying to explain daddy's disappearance, as well as being pregnant and having to decide what to do in light of his disappearance and all the new and extra stress upon her.

she said this happened so frequently and it was what had stunned her the most of all the stories she heard - stunned that it was so common.

so this woman's husband has buggered off when she's 11 weeks pregnant and her world has totally turned upside down, the wellbeing of her existing children is in question as it is let alone if another baby comes along and you'd want her to work out what the hell to do, make the decision, see the doctor and get an appointment, arrange childcare and time off work and have an abortion in a week?

i sometimes think people lack imagination let alone empathy.

slutty by that rational you should never, ever have sex unless you want a child. i look forward with hearing how it goes when you tell your husband about this.

NewNames Sat 06-Oct-12 10:51:03

Just Google 'death in childbirth'!

Women should not be forced to continue a pregnancy they don't want full stop!

Zara I was dealing with my own issues and had a 1 night stand with a man who i had met for about an hour. I now have 2 year old twins. I have a friend who was raped at 16 and she now has a 16 year old daughter. She chose to seek help to get rid of the baby but not to sort herself out. That was her choice and yes her choice was wrong

needanswers Sat 06-Oct-12 10:54:25

Newnames, but that doesnt explain why aborting a full term baby prevents those risks, the baby still has to be birthed.

SirBoobAlot Sat 06-Oct-12 10:59:20

Newnames but a full term aborted baby would still have to be delivered.

I don't understand the point you are making.

There are always risks in childbirth - you can't avoid that fact.

kdiddy Sat 06-Oct-12 10:59:22

I'm not furious, because it's his opinion, and he is perfectly entitled to it. If I got angry with everyone who I disagreed with it would be a phenomenal waste of my energy.

I don't share his view but I am glad I live in a country where it's acceptable for people to differ in their beliefs and voice them.

I would be furious with any policy that enacted his view - but that's not what has happened here.

SirBoobAlot Sat 06-Oct-12 11:01:51

Buttons, you are massively over simplifying. I was pregnant at 17, disabled and in a very volatile relationship. I continued with my pregnancy, because it was the right choice for me. Doesn't mean it would have been the right choice for everyone.

blonderthanred Sat 06-Oct-12 11:05:35

Those who are saying it's his private opinion, he wasn't being interviewed as Jeremy Hunt, Private Citizen; he was being interviewed as Jeremy Hunt, Health Secretary.

Tuttutitlookslikerain Sat 06-Oct-12 11:08:25

It says at the bottom of the article "he stressed the government had no plans to change the law".

Theresa May said there were no proposals to change the law!

I think 12 weeks is too low, but 24 weeks is too high. However, I do wish people would read articles and listen to the news before scaremongering!

OrangeandGoldMrsDeVere Sat 06-Oct-12 11:12:01

I just googled it. There was no mention of fetal disability in causes of death.
Bungled abortions featured quite heavily sad

I am pro choice newnames so do not misunderstand me.

I am asking that people examine their attitudes towards disability before asking 'except disability' on the end of their pro choice statements

Tuttutitlookslikerain Sat 06-Oct-12 11:14:58

91% of all abortions in 2011 were carried out before 13 weeks, so perhaps the limit could be lowered.

BoffinMum Sat 06-Oct-12 11:16:09

I am completely furious, I tell you. There's no scientific basis whatsoever for their bungled assertions.

piprabbit Sat 06-Oct-12 11:19:09

I am very, very shocked that the health minister is making this sort of statement (and yes, I realise it is his personal belief not a govt. policy) not based on the science, the way outcomes have improved for the most premature babies etc. etc. but because he "thinks" that a baby's life starts at 12 weeks.
Not 11 weeks 6 days, not 12 weeks 1 day but like a magic light switch at 12 weeks exactly.

BoffinMum Sat 06-Oct-12 11:19:25

Pretty balanced article here

BoffinMum Sat 06-Oct-12 11:22:15

We would save many more babies if we concentrated our efforts on reducing infectious disease rates amongst pregnant women during the first trimester. Every year, gynae wards are full of pregnant women arduously losing their babies in the aftermath of having flu in early pregnancy, for example. But addressing that wouldn't give many opportunities for moral posturing, would it now?

madmouse Sat 06-Oct-12 11:24:34

disabilities aside sluttybuttons?? What a disgusting comment.

My ds is perfect, clever, loved and absolutely wonderful. He also has cerebral palsy.

Look at my profile, I know the pics are out of date, ds is 4 now.

But many parents to be would have chosen to abort him if they at 20 weeks got the prognosis we got in NICU when he was 5 days old (cp, blindness, epilepsy, specific learning difficulties). Now here is the rub - even though the very good doctors had my baby right in front of them and did all the clever scans and tests they still got it wrong. He sees, he has no epilepsy, he has no learning difficulties.

A baby is a gift, and not one to be rejected if not '''''''''perfect'''''''''

Kaloobear Sat 06-Oct-12 11:24:48

So if you get to 12 weeks and you haven't been able to get an abortion for whatever reason (no time, NHS being slow, health problems, didn't know about the pregnancy etc etc etc) then according to Jeremy Cunt the right thing to do would be go through with the pregnancy, possibly at massive risk to your own mental health, go through labour and the trauma of giving your baby up for adoption, rather than having the option of aborting while you're 13, 14 etc weeks pregnant. For what?! To teach the mother a lesson?

This isn't directed at anyone in particular. It makes me very sad and very angry.

5madthings Sat 06-Oct-12 11:30:16

Everything that mrsdevere has said and actually i thank her and others who have posted on threads like this over the years as they made me stop and think and re-evaluate my thoughts.

Current abortion laws are disabilist. If anything abortion needs to be easier to access.

The quote 'as early as possible, as late as necessary' sums up what i believe. I am very grateful that its not a choice i have had to make and i dont think its one that women take lightly. We (as in women) need the right to autonomy of our bodies.

threesocksmorgan Sat 06-Oct-12 11:50:57

oh in answer to the op
I am furious, at the obvious diablist discrimination shown on all the threads on this subject

Pozzled Sat 06-Oct-12 11:59:19

I understand why people feel so strongly about the different treatment of disabled vs 'healthy' foetuses, and I am glad there are MNers who can explain the issues so clearly.

There is one aspect I don't understand though, and it's about conditions incompatible with life. Isn't it generally quite clear at a scan when a foetus will not be able to survive outside the womb? Or are there grey areas? Because I do think that a baby who could never survive is a very different case from one who is disabled, even if the disability was severe.

tilder Sat 06-Oct-12 12:01:51

The early as possible as late as necessary is very valid.

I appreciate that Jeremy hunt is entitled to a private view but presumably he is aware that comments made by the health Secretary have a certain amount of significance. I also find it disturbing that another minister ignores official scientific advice, made and given by experts in the field. I would be interested to hear his reasoning behind his view on 20 weeks.

Raspberryandorangesorbet Sat 06-Oct-12 12:03:26

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

madmouse Sat 06-Oct-12 12:06:32

Pozzled if there is one thing every experienced paediatrician can tell you it's that babies have infinite capacity to surprise you. People overestimate what can be seen clearly and definitely on a scan. So yes there is a large grey area. There are people alive today whose parents were told they would not live.

My ds has a little friend at school who had part of his brain growing outside his skull. Abortion failed, he was born early and alive, was left to die but didn't, so they operated and placed the brain tissue inside his skull and repaired his face. He has lots of issues, but he walks, loves his ipod and generally loves life.

threesocksmorgan Sat 06-Oct-12 12:08:52

doctors get it wrong alot.
they are not always right about disability.
they tell parents that a disabled baby will never be able to do any thing and will be a vegetable...
the baby goes on to have a very good life and surprises everyone.
it is never cut and dried

blonderthanred Sat 06-Oct-12 12:12:12

I think I lot of people don't really understand what it means to be "12 weeks pregnant". I'm 35w pg with my first child and I never knew before that it was measured from the last period, not ovulation or positive test - I never really thought about it.

Explained this plus lengths of time before a woman is likely even to know she's pg to someone on Twitter earlier and I think they actually listened. A small step but I think it's a starting point, if people understand that 12 weeks doesn't mean that women have "three months to do something about it".

Zara1984 Sat 06-Oct-12 12:19:04

slutty you made the decision that you felt was right for you. As I am sure did your friend. That's the point of the law giving women a choice. It's all well and good to say other people's choices are wrong - if you know your choice is the one that wouldn't be made illegal.

BoffinMum Sat 06-Oct-12 12:39:50

I am tempted to start a campaign to get Hunt and Miller out. They should not be voicing somewhat extreme personal views in these positions of authority.

JaffaSnaffle Sat 06-Oct-12 12:51:46

I have often wondered why the UK has such high abortion rates. I am also aware that we have very high 'cut off limits', in comparison to other 'liberal' European countries. For example, in Germany, the cut off is 12 weeks for any reason, but is open to later abortions for medical reasons. But I also know that in Germany, an average pregnant woman has many more scans as standard, and the general gynaecological treatment available to most women at any time, had more emphasis placed on it as part of her general health.

Does anyone know the abortion limits for other western European
countries? Obviously there are the extremes such as Ireland etc, but I mean the Scandinavians, France, Italy etc...

I ask because I think that this is a cultural issue as well as a feminist one. And I don't think we are honest in the UK, about abortion on demand, whether we have it in reality or not, and what termination for medical reasons means. (the differentiation between a conditional fatal to life vs a disability, severe or otherwise...)

It is no coincidence that high termination rates in the UK co-exist with rubbish sex education, early sexualisation of children, a significant stress on gender differences ("DS4 (2.6), do you have a girlfriend in nursery yet?" - said with a fnar snigger by neighbour - FFS!) from an early age, poor self-esteem of many teenagers etc etc. I could go on.

There is also a mistaken belief in 'withdrawal'as a method of contracpetion, lots of myths (you cannot get pregnant the first time or doing it standing up or having a shower afterwards), or (my favorite) people who 'do not believe in contraception' but don't have a problem with using termination as a means to plan their family.

I am entirely pro-choice. I don't have to agree with somebody else's decision what to do with their pregnancy. But that's the point: it is THEIR pregnancy, their decision. It is a huge feminist issue. Much as I on an emotional level feel queasy at the thought of late term terminations, I still think they should be legal. I think rather than investing a lot of time and effort in discussion the legal framework for termination, money, effort and training should go in to looking after our young people and enpowering anybody in a sexual relationship to take responsibility for what they are doing.

madmouse Sat 06-Oct-12 13:29:11

Brilliant post Pacific - dh and I moved here from Holland and were shocked at the percentage of teenage pregnancies and the unwillingness of parents to educate their children. 'No that's the school's job' WTF?

My mum helped me to decide to go on the pill when I was almost 17 and in a stable relationship. Looking back I was too young, but I would have done it anyway and by talking to mum I stayed safe.

madmouse (were you away?? In that case, I'm glad you're back; if you weren't, ignore me), my opinions on the subject are seen as very suspect by some of my sons' friends' parents and are likely to be heavily influence that I am German.

To my parents', well my mother's, eternal credit, I cannot remember every being sat down and told about the birds and the bees; my brother and I always simply had things explained as questions came up. Although once I knew all about eggs and sperm and had seen some piglets being delivered grin, I had to ask how the sperm got to the egg and my mum told me how the man's penis gets hard and it fits in the woman's vagina etc etc - I was MOST taken aback that we, as PEOPLE, did it in just the Same Way as animals shockgrin!!

by the fact that I am German

I should just give up - 8 boys vs me!!

or preview blush

madmouse Sat 06-Oct-12 13:42:59

Pacific I left yes, and not even sure I'm back. Just once in a while a friend tells me about a thread and then I can't help myself blush

<<whistles Hotel California>> grin

OrangeandGoldMrsDeVere Sat 06-Oct-12 14:06:57

Doctors are medics.
Therefore the overwhelming majority are heavily influenced by the medical model of disability.

I.e. disability = broken
Broken things need fixing
If you can't fix it, it is better off not being at all.

This is why we have such a huge amount of pressure to screen for certain abnormalities. To get rid before they become a real, live problem.
If a woman decides to terminate a pregnancy because she feels that is the right thing for her I will not judge her. That is 100% genuine. I would support her in the same way I would support anyone else who had lost a child (if they wished it)

I DO judge the society that creates the fear around disability, the stigma and the impossibility of getting the support needed if you do have a disabled child.

This Hunt bloke, the one who wants to force women to give birth to children, remind me, is he part of the very government who is stripping families of their buffer against poverty, disability and illness?

BoffinMum Sat 06-Oct-12 14:45:52

That crossed my mind too, Orange

madmouse Sat 06-Oct-12 16:43:47

Well said MrsDeVere x

slug Sat 06-Oct-12 17:20:09

Interesting isn't it? On a week where it was revealed that 20% of NHS hospital wards are to close the govt slip this little thing into the mix. Not that I am suggesting that they are trying to divert attention mind hmm

And in a week where we discover that a child has starved to death in the UK because of falling through the benefit gaps the govt seems determined to force the birth of more children into poverty.

tilder Sat 06-Oct-12 18:19:56

I reread my posts as u was really worried about the comments about people being disabilist (sp?). My comments weren't meant to be. If I offended am really sorry.

Tryingtothinkofnewsnazzyname Sat 06-Oct-12 18:25:53

I am furious. He has said it's not down to his Christian beliefs. How can he have any, given the slimy and unethical way he behaved in his last job?

Haven't read all of thread so this has probably been said, but read today that 91% of abortions in the Uk happen before 13 weeks anyway. Stop persecuting the small number of women faced with making that decision later on. Try, I don't know, bringing more kids out of poverty instead or something.

NewNames Sat 06-Oct-12 18:50:05

I don't think Jezza Cunt is smart enough to employ diversion tactics.

And yes, he doesn't 'think' he feels the way he does because of his religious beliefs.... I wish he friggin knew for sure! A man trusted to oversee lots of science and evidenced medical stuff is a homeopathy loving moron who thinks abortions should be lowered to 12 wks with no evidence. sad

Oh, flip, I typed a terriffically considered and articulate post about how I agreed with MrsdeVere about this obsesssion with perfection and fear of disablitly, whilst at the same time suggesting this was more society driven rather than led by the medical profession (I have a vested interest in that position wink), but cyberspace ate my post and now I have had too much wine to make much sense.

Wrt to Jeremy Hunt, never was a mispronounciation of a name more apt!

TeaAndHugs Sun 07-Oct-12 02:47:49

I am furious. It feels like every time I turn on the radio or look at a newspaper I end up angry about some inane anti-abortion statement that's been made by someone who knows nothing about ordinary women's lives. I'm hoping that one of the pro-choice campaign groups is going to come up with a comprehensive plan of action for tackling this anti-choice government that we can all get behind.

i haven't seen recent stats but when i used to teach about abortion in medical ethics the vast majority were of older women - say 25-35 which often suprised students because the way the topic is discussed people assume the numbers are big because of teenagers. a surprising number of abortions are for women who are married and already have children also.

so whilst i totally agree we need to be better at sex education and teen pregnancy is an issue to be addressed it really isn't a major player in abortion numbers.

have just looked it up - 64% of abortions are upon women aged 20-34. teen pregs are a drop in the ocean. also 51% of abortions are carried out on women who have already given birth in the past (live or stillborn).

these are women who know how pregnancy comes about and how to prevent it. so as interesting as the points on sex ed and teenagers are they're really not of significant impact to the figures.

it is odd actually that something that is legal in this country is discussed in terms of the numbers must be brought down. it is a legal medical procedure with criteria that must be met to access it and procedures to ensure the people who qualify for the procedure and choose to go ahead with it are well informed in their choice.

the numbers are what the numbers are. muddling moral angst with a legal procedure is a nonsense really. if you think abortion is morally wrong then it would be wrong whether ten people did it or ten million. it is legal - there are criteria - as many people will have one as qualify and choose to do so.

i'm tempted to say 'get over it'.

i personally think that taking vast profits whilst raising prices on essential products and services is hugely immoral and should be illegal. sadly society and government disagrees with me.

OhBuggerandArse Sun 07-Oct-12 11:49:18

Slug, thank you for that - I'd missed both stories. Both shameful, both tragedies. How wrong must we be going, that one has to be so careful not to be caught up in other tragic stories because things like this get slipped out when nobody's concentrating?

Saralyn Sun 07-Oct-12 12:02:43

You asked about the abortion laws in Scandinavia. Here is the situation in Norway:

Here, the law is more liberal than in the UK until the 12th week (abortion is then solely the womans descicion), but stricter afterwards, and abortion is very difficult to get after the 18th week.

In 1978 women themselves were granted the right to decide whether to terminate their pregnancies or not. This right is limited in time, and is valid until the end of the twelfth week of the pregnancy.

To have an abortion, the woman must herself fill out a form at a doctor’s office, whether that be a general practitioner’s office, or at a hospital. She does not need to justify her decision. The doctor shall, as soon as possible, forward the woman’s request for abortion to the hospital. The abortion is carried out at a hospital, and the procedure is free.

The Abortion Act also regulates what happens if the woman requests an abortion after the twelfth week of the pregnancy. The woman may apply to terminate the pregnancy, either through a doctor, or directly to the hospital. A committee consisting of two doctors makes the decision about so-called late abortions. The committee is obliged to consider the woman’s reasons. If the application is denied, it is automatically re-evaluated by a new committee, called an appeals committee.

According to the law, abortions between the twelfth and the eighteenth week of the pregnancy may be granted under certain circumstances. These include the mother’s health or her social situation; if the baby is in great danger of severe medical complications; or if the woman has become pregnant while under-age, or after sexual abuse. After the eighteenth week the reasons for terminating a pregnancy must be extremely weighty. An abortion will not be granted if the foetus is presumed to be viable at the time that the abortion is carried out."

more here www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/hod/Documents/Veiledninger_og_brosjyrer/2000/About-the-Abortion-Act.html?id=419252

BoffinMum Sun 07-Oct-12 22:15:38

Maybe numbers are going up because we've have significant inward migration of women of childbearing age into the UK in the last decade ...?

NewNames Sun 07-Oct-12 22:56:43

Are numbers up?

If they are maybe it's because we can't afford to have these accidents any more like we used to.

from what i could work out they're up since 2001 but down since 2007. as are teen pregnancies. and the percentage of terminations carried out before ten weeks and before 13 weeks is also up.

it's pure moral posturing rather than reacting to any real event i think.

BoffinMum Mon 08-Oct-12 12:11:17

Thought so.

ttosca Mon 08-Oct-12 15:05:10

What do you expect from a government which wants to turn Britain back to the Victorian era?

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