Jailing a mother of three - WTF

So? What does that have to do with anything? So women should only ever have sex if they plan to keep a resultant pregnancy? Thank goodness the law disagrees with you.

disagree if you like, I couldn’t give a monkeys.

I am militantly. pro choice and the mother always comes before a child in utero for me. So I don’t think she should have been jailed. I think her mental health must have been incredibly poor to have made the decision. She obviously had a lot to deal with and didn’t feel she could cope with anymore. Perhaps her alternative was killing herself and her child along with her?

She knowingly broke the law, and lied to obtain drugs to induce the stillbirth of a viable 32-34 week foetus. She had even googled whether you could go to prison for aborting a 30 week foetus. She knew what she was doing. She had known she was pregnant since the previous December and this was in May. She had sought an abortion before lockdown but did not go through with it.

I'm pro-choice, but she had had her chance to choose and did not take it, then chose to do something she knew to be illegal later on. It's not an impulsive decision - she didn't buy the drugs and take straight away, she had to wait for the post etc.

At the stage she was at she had to give birth. There was no alternative at that size. She chose to make sure it didn't come out alive.

Do I think a custodial sentence is helpful? No. Is it right for her kids? Of course not. But the judge followed the law, which she knew when she broke it. The judge can't let someone who broke the law off freely just because she has kids. That isn't how it works. Judge gave her what they could given the sentencing guidelines.

What does “innocence” have to do with anything?

late term abortion is actually legal in this country in some circumstances. It has nothing to do with “innocence”.

And if the baby is “innocent” do you somehow think the mother is not innocent? On what basis do you think that, if so?

Personhood doesn’t begin legally until birth. There has to be a line somewhere.

Sure, but what is your point? Do you think that no woman should ever have sex unless they actively want a baby? Or do you think they should be forced to carry a foetus against their will should contraception fail?

She didn't though, she went into labour which has been clearly reported. So no, the child wasn't torn limb from limb.

The saddest part is if she was struggling then late term abortions can be legally approved if there is a risk of severe harm to the mental health of the woman in continuing with the pregnancy, this could have been an option.

@TooOldForThisNonsense I disagree entirely.

In the vast majority of cases where an abortion happens, the woman had the choice before she had sex. Everyone knows that sex can result in a pregnancy.

So women who have children should never be sent to jail? The "poor woman" killed her baby at an unacceptably late stage. Maybe she should have thought about her children beforehand.

I don’t pretend anything. I don’t care about the unborn baby as much as the mother. It’s as simple as that. She’s more important.

Your agenda is still showing.

It's absolutely not torn limb from limb! You take pills to kill the baby/ foetus and then they induce you. I had a VERY late term abortion of a very much wanted, very much loved child- he had a condition that was not compatible to life (he'd have died within hours of having him, if he'd have lived to full term) which doctors failed to pick up on in early scans. It was awful and obviously traumatic, but I laboured and birthed him dead. I couldn't have coped mentally with carrying him another two months knowing he was not going to live anyway. My child was aborted but certainly not torn limb from limb.

Personally I do think this woman deserves sentence. And jail time

It is in public interest to treat this criminally as she has put at risk the already much debated abortion laws in this country, which if changed would mean women like me being forced to carry to term (I'd have killed myself . I'm certain I would have) the to term abortion laws are not to support what she has done. They are for cases (vanishingly rare) that are justifiable and desperate. Through this woman's actions once more there is public debate which will potentially undermine women's currents rights and access.

Does anyone know if it's still possible to get abortion pills via an online consultation or was that only a lockdown thing? It does seem risky for them to be prescribed just taking a woman's word for the date of her last period and no physical examination or ultrasound.

I wish people would stop using the emotive and misapplied term “forced birth”. The baby was close to full-term and would have to have been born one way or the other. The only question was whether it would have been a live birth or a stillbirth.

@MakesMeFeelSad What agenda?! The truth?!

It's not try at all, you are showing your agenda here

@Isthisexpected

Tragically yes it's true. A Google search will confirm if you doubt me.

That's not tue! The majority of late term abortions they induce , I had one at 20 weeks . I don't know anyone who was given surgical intervention for a late term abortion other than when the placenta doesn't come away naturally.

The women in this case brought on a stillbirth, what tissue do you think remained other than possibly retained placenta that would mean she needed surgical intervention

Late term abortions are really a very different deal from early ones (before 12 weeks). If you ever find yourself pregnant and aren't sure you want to be, please get advice and make a decision quickly. The 24 week legal limit isn't something you want to get anywhere near if you can possibly help it. People should be aware of that.

I have heard everything people like you have to say on this issue too. And I'm not interested either.

But you don't get to pretend that a late term abortion is anything other than barbaric.

Is this true? That's a horrible shock to me to read.

I think in this case the woman didn't need further intervention once the baby had died (due to the pills) as her body went into labour. It's my understanding that this doesn't always happen so for late term abortions that usual procedure is to physically remove the baby (in parts) after it has died.

But why is it ok to remove personhood from an innocent baby and not a woman?

One life doesn't outweigh the other. Both lives are precious.

It's not the best out of a very very bad set of options, it is by far the worst given that other options allow the innocent life to live and strive.

@TooOldForThisNonsense

"Really. Can you explain how taking an abortion tablet removes the limbs of a foetus."

Late term abortions are not carried out by taking an abortion tablet like this woman did. They're surgically removed using instruments - literally limb from limb.

The woman in this article would have had to have further surgical intervention to remove any remaining tissue.

Thanks for explaining that @MakesMeFeelSad . So the judge didn't have much choice about sending her to prison them.

Iirc sentancing starts at 3 years for what she was charged with, which seems right as the reporting had mentioned 3 years if it had gone to trial. She had time taken off for a guilty plea before the trial starting but it wasn't early enough for a suspended sentance