MPs vote to decriminalise abortion

Who doesn’t have a “vested interest in abortion?” Its not the drug trade its an extremely necessary part of women’s health care. An enormous proportion of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion. Women rusk their lives in oregnancy. They will always be gaving abortions and needing abortions. Thank god public officials are not ashamed to support them.

Those are women’s health specialist medical services. How on earth do they have a “vested interest” in abortion? That’s like saying that colorectal specialists have a “vested interest” in giving people colostomies.

Organisations with a vested interest in abortions are pro abortion.

You do realise they are not necessarily very well educated on every subject - they are briefed by their staff, they are lobbied by special interest groups. They usually hear from constituents too but this has been so rushed through that has barely happened.

Imo they have been fed one line and there simply hasn't been debate. This wasn't in any manifesto.

There is no reason to think that the legislators haven’t thought this through. On the contrary the people weighing in on this legislation and the legislators are probably better informed on the pros and cons than random blog commenters.

The amendment was supported by a coalition of relevant professional bodies:

The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Health, British Pregnancy Advisory Service, BPAS, and MSI UK have issued statements urging MPs to back amendment NC1

From https://www.bpas.org/about-bpas/press-office/press-releases/coalition-of-medical-bodies-and-healthcare-providers-welcomes-abortion-law-amendment-tabled-by-tonia-antoniazzi-mp/

Are you suggesting that they haven’t properly considered the issues?

Ok thanks.

I disagree. Women with children and chaotic lives are still subject to the law. Its not an excuse. And she was organised enough to go online, research abortion pills and order them illegally from India.

I dont like the way that women who have late abortions are being portrayed as desperate, vulnerable and clueless. Some may be. But this is an easy stereotype.

Babies are being ordered by rich women through surrogacy, then abandoned when these women change their minds. Babies can also become suddenly unwanted in other ways like this. We dont know enough about it - imo mps have seized an opportunity to legislate but on something they actually haven't properly considered.

@Viviennemary Given she was sentenced in 2012 she's been out for 5 years even if she served the full eight years.

So will she now be acquitted and set free because what she did is no longer a crime

@Arran2024 nobody is saying that that’s fine. But is the criminal justice system really the place for a woman whose life is apparently so chaotic- or coerced- that she can neither prevent pregnancy, nor care adequately for her children if she has them? The situation you describe here smacks of desperation rather than malice.

This woman decided to terminate her pregnancy in the 39th week, using pills she bought online from India. She was having a long standing affair and had already had several previous unwanted pregnancies - one child was adopted, there was a previous termination.

She had kids too.

She was sent to prison for 8 years. Do you really think what she did is now fine?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-19621675.amp

Even rare situations need to be clear when we’re talking about what’s decriminalised and what’s not.

I have said we’ll have to wait for the official guidelines for clarity.

My, the straw-manning on this thread is unreal.

Making up hypothetical, highly unlikely and incredible scenarios to 'prove your point' does the exact opposite.

None of us know how this will pan out in the UK long term.

I’ve said all along that we need clear details on what’s decriminalised and what isn’t, as the situation isn’t clear cut otherwise.

So would you measure whether it’s decriminalised or not by how dilated she was at the time? How would this be proved?

There could be a woman who does this not realising she’s actually in labour and thinking it’s decriminalised, only to be told it is in fact a criminal act as she was in labour at the time. Is that fair?

Obviously many carrying out an abortion after 24 weeks without medical need won’t be going down a legitimate route as it’s not legal for registered providers to do so.

You do keep bringing up abortion during labour, where is your evidence that this happens more once abortion is decriminalised?

Maybe just wait until you have seen the full details rather than getting into the far fetched what if scenarios

Because the definition of abortion is the termination of a pregnancy, i.e. the abortion has to prevent the continuation of pregnancy. Once a woman is in labour her pregnancy is already terminated. She can't continue being pregnant. She can't take action to terminate the pregnancy itself.

And truly, TRULY, where do you think a labouring woman is going to get a lethal injection from? Do you think that kind of thing can be picked up in Boots??

I was the one who initially didn’t even want to mention methods until I was asked repeatedly!

You seem obsessed by women using lethal injections to terminate a pregnancy, where do you get your information from @Lilac90 ?

Because the woman is in labour? So lethal injection without reason before contractions start at 40 weeks is fully decriminalised from the woman’s perspective, but lethal injection once contractions started at say 37 weeks isn’t? What’s the deciding factor here, how dilated she is at the time?

I honestly do hope there is never a case to test this but all I’m saying it’s not necessarily clear cut and any high profile cases have the potential to try and push back against women’s rights again. Perhaps more guidance will come out about what methods are decriminalised (eg pills only)

BUT THAT WOULDN'T BE AN ABORTION SO IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LEGISLATION, DOES IT????

You are entitled to your opinion that no woman would ever try and end their pregnancy at the stage they could be in labour. However that still doesn’t make it fact and the decriminalisation needs to cover all these possibilities, however uncomfortable they may seem.

From a woman’s point of view, she deserves to be clear on whether what she’s doing is a potential criminal act or not.

I don't understand what point you're making in your first paragraph. Women who undergo abortions outside the legal framework (i.e. not performed in a medical setting for one of the designated exceptions etc etc) will not face criminal prosecution. What's confusing about this?

As for the rest - fine, of course. You're entitled to your opinion and you don't have to change it for anyone. But the absolutely insane and nonsensical hypotheticals you were posing as though they legitimately undermine the purpose or validity of the this change in law deserved to be challenged.