Just a reminder- you can’t ban abortion..

[BertrandRussell]

...you can only ban safe abortion.

It's not even as if their legislators understand the fundamentals of what happens in a woman's body and what medical science can do. This idiot in Ohio thought after an ectopic pregnancy the pregnancy could continue with what was removed from the Fallopian tube being implanted in the womb.

www.washingtonpost.com/health/2019/05/10/sponsor-an-ohio-abortion-bill-thinks-you-can-reimplant-ectopic-pregnancies-you-cant/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.4ebe44afc67d

Just to be clear, btw: I favour a totally pragmatic approach to abortion. It happens, so it should be as safe as possible. It doesn’t really matter what I personally think about the rights or wrongs of it.

But I do think that catchy slogans don’t work in what is a complex and difficult debate.

“I do not think a woman being coerced into an abortion by an abusive partner is a good thing. And that would still fall within ‘any circumstance’.”

But that would be a natter for the law on coercive control, not the law on abortion.

Bertrand you are so right.

the number of women who will die as a result of this is really depressing. makes me wonder if that lot all own a knitting needle manufacturer together.

It shouldn’t be up to the doctor. It should be entirely up to the woman.

I have little faith in the law on coercive control. And I can envisage circumstances where there could be pressure that falls short of the legal definition of coercive control.

Anyway the issue is less the law, than the slogan. Because ‘my partner wants me to have an abortion’ is not, IMO an acceptable circumstance for an abortion (if a woman does not genuinely feel the same way).

As soon as possible, as late as necessary, for all women, in any circumstance.

I’m not comfortable with it either- but i’m even less comfortable with the alternative.

Absolutely this. I hate the idea of late-term abortion for anything other than medical necessity. I hate the idea of women being forced to have children they don't want or don't feel able to have even more. I'd like to live in a world where the former didn't exist, but the latter isn't a viable or acceptable route to that.

I wasn't comfortable with it, but I was less comfortable with googling the easiest ways to kill myself.
I now know, with 12 years behind me, that I was always ok with my decision, it was the judgement, the people who have a problem with what I did that bothered me.
It was necessary for me, Im here, I'm alive because I was it was available.

Apologies I don’t mean the dr should decide the law. I mean the dr should be able to decide whether they are willing to perform it, and that should be the only concern.

There was a wonderful AMA from an abortion midwife and she said she had denied women very late abortions and been frequently terrified they would immediately go and commit suicide. The medical staff are best placed to judge those risks; not law makers.

I’m not convinced by ‘in any circumstance’ because, setting aside any other issues I might personally have, I do not think a woman being coerced into an abortion by an abusive partner is a good thing. And that would still fall within ‘any circumstance’.

This is like saying you oppose bank transfers because an abusive partner might force a woman to give him all her money using one.

They never fucking learn.

There's plenty of proof,testimonies and harrowing accounts from countries that had or have abortions illegal. Dire consequences for women and babies. Poverty,abandonment,trauma,injury,infertility and death. None of which will be something that affect the men that made these decisions.

You can buy a (or ten) gun to kill someone and no one bats an eye, but god forbid we'd allow abortions..won't someone think of the children?!?(unless they're being shot down in their classroom)

The clinic I went to was very, very clear that you had to go into a room for a "chat", and to sign the forms and you absolutely had to do that alone.
That's not to say some weren't coerced, but this part they'd have to do alone.

“Because ‘my partner wants me to have an abortion’ is not, IMO an acceptable circumstance for an abortion (if a woman does not genuinely feel the same way).”

What if, like many women in abusive relationships, she is not ready to leave and he will kill her if she carries in with the pregnancy? It’s the same with sex selective abortion. There are women who are in circumstances where carrying the wrong sex baby to term will result in hideous consequences- including death. Until there is a radical change in society, pragmatically, the woman has to come first.

Apologies I don’t mean the dr should decide the law. I mean the dr should be able to decide whether they are willing to perform it, and that should be the only concern

Seriously though, watch After Tiller to see doctors making those decisions. It is very stressful for them to decide if a woman’s reasons for a late-term (we’re talking 26 weeks here) are “good enough” reasons for them to personally take the case, because the law, or lack thereof, has left them in limbo. They are the gatekeepers because of lack of clarity, which is a position they don’t seem to relish. Having a legal standard seems a more practical way to go about things.

It is very stressful for them to decide if a woman’s reasons for a late-term (we’re talking 26 weeks here) are “good enough” reasons for them to personally take the case, because the law, or lack thereof, has left them in limbo

But that's partially because it is possible that it will be declared that they have performed an abortion illegally if they get the decision wrong (or are deemed to have). The pp was advocating a system where this could not happen, and their own conscience/professional judgement would be the only factor, so there would be no legal ambiguity - it would be 'it is absolutely legal for you to do this, but obviously no one can make you do it if you think it would be harmful to the patient (as in any other area of medicine)'

But after tiller is simply following doctors who work within a legal framework. There may be a lack of doctors unwilling to fufill the law but they’re not deciding it.

There would be no stress for doctors if the decision was entirely the woman’s.

To go further, another problem is that any sensible limits seem to have the perception of being “anti-choice” or placing an “undue burden” on women seeking abortion. No one wants to give up ground to pro-lifers, which is understandable. They are extremists, who don’t care at all about women facing unplanned pregnancy. But this shouldn’t mean we don’t talk about what a good policy would look like. Beyond slogans that is.

Limits is why things like this can sneak back in.

“But this shouldn’t mean we don’t talk about what a good policy would look like. Beyond slogans that is.”

The thing is, for me “As early as possible.....etc is a good policy.

The thing is, for me “As early as possible.....etc is a good policy.

I would argue that it's not that it's a good policy, it's that any other policy is actively harmful. There is no way to set limits that doesn't leave women very dangerously on the wrong side of it.

But that's partially because it is possible that it will be declared that they have performed an abortion illegally if they get the decision wrong (or are deemed to have)

There is no gestational limit on abortion in New Mexico, which is where these particular doctors work. There is no ambiguity, it’s up to the medical doctor whether she will accept the patient. So she must hear the details and decide for themselves whether they take the case.

I don’t understand that mango, if that’s the case why did you say:

“No civilized country would allow abortion without limit to whenever term for whatever reason. Viability has always been a good standard in the US.”
And
“Don’t lose sight of this for some dumb slogan that doesn’t describe any current law or legal situation on the planet. Well, maybe just China”

Yet there is no time limit on abortion in New Mexico and you’re fairly familiar with that?

There is no way to set limits that doesn't leave women very dangerously on the wrong side of it

Are you saying that the 24 week limit in the UK is not enough? Do you often hear of women dying in back alley abortions here?

The problem in the UK is access, not the gestational limit (with the key exception of NI).

We should have compulsory screenings of the last series of Call the Midwife for Alabama (and all other backward states / countries for that matter). Women who are pregnant and don't want to be find ways to rectify the situation, rich people have always been able to pay drs, but the poor go to a lady whose name is passed on in hushed voices, alas some women then die because of infection or bleeding. The way the story line developed over the series was an excellent way to demonstrate why we need safe legal abortion that can be accessed as required