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

[BertrandRussell]

...you can only ban safe abortion.

*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.*

They don’t learn because they hate women. They want to control them, to stop them having reproductive choices and to limit them to their reproductive capacities.

theres no such thing as a safe abortion a child dies every time

Born without lungs... survived without medical intervention... okay.

Yeah- he just spontaneously mutated into an amphibian and breathed through his skin- simples!

Glad you find the rolling back of abortion rights in America so funny

You are an extremist, that’s what I find funny. You are being unhelpful by arguing for a legal situation that doesn’t exist anywhere. And, by your own admission, change in the law is not really needed in the UK (other than NI) as no one dies for want of a 30-week abortion. So why argue for it on any grounds other than ideological?

For any reason, at any time, is not going to convince normal people of the merits of abortion, and will actually drive people away. I find it really distressing that extremism on both sides fuel this debate.

I think they should be entirely left to the individual woman concerned

Naive. Do you really think that a doctor would take any and every case that comes through her door? Instead of a legal standard, or a standard set by medical ethics, an individual doctor would decide whether the patient’s reason is “good enough” for them.

Do you actually think a doctor would perform an abortion on demand for a woman for any reason at any time? Or do you think doctors should be legally compelled to provide this service?

If you think that what’s happening in America could’t happen here you are dangerously naive.

Do you actually think a doctor would perform an abortion on demand for a woman for any reason at any time? Or do you think doctors should be legally compelled to provide this service?

No one has argued that a doctor would or should be forced to perform abortion (at any gestation). Doctors would have to decide for themselves whether carrying out the procedure was the correct decision - just like they do in every other area of medicine. I had an operation recently and two doctors disagreed on whether it was best to perform the operation or wait or see, so a third become involved. That's normal. No one said to the first surgeon 'you must do this because it's legally allowed and the patient wants it'; they got to use their professional judgement.

All anyone's asking for is that that decision is made by medical professionals (probably a team of them - that's what they do in other cases where the judgements are very tricky) who actually know the details of the patient and the situation, not by a blanket ban that makes it a-ok at 23+6 but not at 24+1.

@greenlloon
theres no such thing as a safe abortion a child dies every time

ODFOD

Also in the case of a woman kept alive artificially to incubate a foetus (Dublin 2016) her doctors testified they knew EXACTLY what to do exactly and exactly what was best for their patient and her family but were prevented from doing so due to the law which might’ve seen them open to prosecution for murder.

They were forced to keep her alive until the courts ruled they could do exactly what they had known was best for 123 days.

There is also no way to stop doctors having to make hard choices unless you institute a ban on abortion after a certain gestation with absolutely no exception for threat to maternal life or a condition incompatible with life. Both of those are judgement calls too (see the Savita Halappanavar case, and incompatible with life is often a case of probabilities not certainties). Doctors have to make difficult choices. That's very hard, and they should be well supported to do so, but the law shouldn't be centred on preventing it.

Doctors make choices to end life every day, particularly in the elderly so I don’t understand the mistrust really

The most premature baby to EVER survive : Mom of miracle Lyla, who was born at just 21 weeks and weighed less than ONE POUND, breaks her silence and reveals how she had to beg doctors to resuscitate her daughter, who is now a thriving 4-year-old

Lyla was kept at the NICU for 126 days before her parents, Courtney and Paul, could take her home

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-6497947/Smallest-preemie-baby-survivor-Lyla-Stensrud-born-21-weeks-one-pound-look-now.html

2014, and Female, with 126 days of medical assistance - so not a strapping male teenager, who had no medical assistance for the first 24 hours ??

@Oliversmumsarmy - your friend would have been all over the news, especially so long ago, got a link?

LisaSimpsonbff

“I would indeed support the 24 week limit (which is entirely arbitrary anyway) being removed”.

Is it? I’ve always understood it to be based on generally agreed viability? (Viability was considered to be 28 weeks when our daughter was expected but it’s now 24?).
That’s where it becomes a more difficult question for me, beyond medical need.

You can always count on Oliver for amusing bunkum. The other one is a 'friend', female, of course, who pursued a career after having 3 kids and now, of course, they don't talk to her much because she didn't stay at home like a good little Gileadean wife.

Is it? I’ve always understood it to be based on generally agreed viability?

It is in theory based on viability, but viability is a spectrum, not a line in the sand at 24 weeks. As you say, it's moving earlier. I just don't see any underlying logic to saying abortion is ok at 23+6 but not at 24+0. I also don't really see why the odds of survival outside the womb are particularly relevant to what happens within it.

I'm not sure I agree on doctors opting out actually. Where I live there is only one doctor in a nearby region willing to perform abortions. All others have opted out for ethical reasons - although this is actually often a career move or, more shockingly, so that they can force women to pay for a private abortion with them.

@soulrunner

LisaSimpsonbff

Yes I can see that factually you’re right but to me it’s a visceral thing I suppose, hard to define. if theres a very good chance that a foetus could survive independently outside of the womb, that’s to me when I stop considering it a foetus and begin to see it as a person in its own right. That’s the difficulty for me, rightly or wrongly.

(If a serious medical issue is found, for the mother or foetus, that to me overrides all other considerations).

That’s interesting Ces6.

I would not say that viability is a spectrum, but it is as much if not more dependent on extrinsic factors such as the proximity of specialist medical services as it is on the physiological condition of the foetus.

Much like death. So many 'Dead' people have been 'brought back to life.' This linguistic nonsense is an attempt to accomodate an outdated paradigm of death.

“that’s to me when I stop considering it a foetus and begin to see it as a person in its own right. That’s the difficulty for me, rightly or wrongly.”

That’s the difficulty for me personally too. However, I do not think I have the right to impose my views on other women. I want to be able to choose for myself-and I want them to be able to choose for themselves.

I think it's totally ok to have emotional and even instinctive reactions to when abortion is and is not 'alright', I just don't think they should have any place in policy. I have never had an abortion, and after several early miscarriages of much wanted pregnancies and the absolute delight of seeing the flickering heartbeat on a screen at 6 weeks gestation that became DS, I find abortion a considerably harder and more upsetting idea than I once did and find it emotionally harder to commit to the 'it's just a bunch of cells' argument. I also know intellectually that that's irrelevant. I also can't see any way of arguing that a woman stops having control over her own body at 24 weeks (or whenever you pin 'viability' at) that doesn't have very alarming implications for all pregnant women. Women either retain bodily integrity or they don't.

LisaSimpson I was responding to another user, who wanted the decision entirely in the patient’s hands. That would, in effect, compel the doctor to perform a termination at any gestation, for any reason.

There is also no way to stop doctors having to make hard choices unless you institute a ban on abortion after a certain gestation with absolutely no exception for threat to maternal life or a condition incompatible with life

I’m not talking about these cases, which are not terribly controversial. I’m talking about the “any time, for any reason” ones. In the documentary, I recall the doctor having to choose whether or not to give a late-term abortion in these cases:

1 A single mother who struggled with putting food on the table and caring for her current child. She couldn’t make a previous abortion appointment due to a sick kid. She was at 26 weeks-ish iirc

2 A woman from France was desperate for an abortion. France only allows abortions on demand up to the 12th week, so she looked to the USA for treatment (ironic, isn’t it). She didn’t know she was pregnant until late in the second trimester.

The doctor ended up performing the abortion for the lady in the first situation, but not the second. They were both requested for social reasons, i.e. not for a fetus incompatible with life, or for the health of the mother. So the doctor had to determine whether or not she would provide that service.

Honestly, I would trust a lot of doctors to make that determination. But there are definitely ones who aren’t trustworthy, and that’s why we probably need strong legal guidelines, based on good evidence. Dr Gosnell (he of the row of severed baby feet in jars) comes to mind here. The abuses at his clinic will make you sick and underscore why we need strong legal and ethical standards.

I think the current 24-week viability cut off is a good standard, and I have yet to hear a good reason why not.

Although I like France’s 12-week standard better, but realize this is currently impossible in a country like America, or even the UK, where access to abortion is spotty and uncertain, particularly for those who need it most. I wouldn’t want to change it until this improves, which won’t be anytime soon.

Why are the reasons that are good enough at 6 weeks,8 weeks,12 weeks etc suddenly not acceptable at a different arbitrary number of weeks?

Doctors can make decisions about their own behaviour- that is they can have their own personal ethical objections to performing abortions. But it is not up to them to decide whether it’s a good reason or a bad one. If they feel ethically compromised then they should immediately refer on-as they do now.

Doctors make choices to end life every day, particularly in the elderly so I don’t understand the mistrust really

The problem with that is, doctors may let their personal feelings away their decision, wether they mean to or not.
Not all doctors are wonderful people who have their patients best interest at heart.
I can't really think of any other situation in life where a stranger would be allowed to make such a life changing decision for an individual. It's shouldn't be allowed for a decision of this magnitude.