Mum sentenced to 28 months in prison for abortion pills

[mumoftwobarnyboys]

Used after the cut off point of 10 weeks.

Regardless of how far gone she was, surely this isn't right?

It is her body, despite me morally really thinking what she did was very wrong.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/12/woman-in-uk-jailed-for-28-months-over-taking-abortion-pills-after-legal-time-limit?CMP=twtgu&utmmsource=Twitter&utmmedium=&s=08#Echobox=1686577294

It was the term “get rid of” that I found abhorrent, not your use of the word foetus.

Apologies you didn't like my turn of phrase @MyTruthIsOut - I wasn't looking to offend in that way & should have said abort the foetus.

I feel like I'm repeating myself re HCPs - I'm not about compelling anyone to do anything so if people don't want to do an aspect of their role, they shouldn't be forced to. There are enough who are willing to make it viable for the woman to be properly looked after.

If a woman has full bodily autonomy, that would give her the right to remove the foetus from her body. But would it give her the right to make the child not exist any more? Even if that child didn't need her.

I don't follow @Itisyourturntowashthebath - if the child is born, it's a person in its own right so the woman has no say in that regard?!

I think what they mean is if the baby is fully formed, why can't the mother birth it when they want rather than killing it?

@Gothambutnotahamster if you want to get rid of a foetus at 33 weeks it has to be born. In getting rid of, it because you have full bodily autonomy, you have given it life.

Surely if you believe in full bodily autonomy red line what you demand is the right to end a pregnancy on request after 24 weeks. If a women is unwell and delivery is needed after 24 weeks it wouldn’t be a termination, admittedly might be a poor outcome 24 weeks but 30 weeks + normally fine.
I can get on board with the idea of supporting a women’s right to end her pregnancy if she really needs to, not killing 30 week babies.
of course this would prioritise women’s bodily autonomy over tax payer costs, doctors convenience and the countries long term interests - neonatal care being expensive and disability in those who have it common. So would never be something anyone would campaign for. But makes more sense than the idea of abortion up till birth.

I've held two babies born at 31 weeks. So nope cannot forgive this one.

Gothambutnotahamster isn't arguing for the woman's right to remove the foetus form her womb, she's arguing for the right to kill that foetus. Two very different situations.

This is why terminations should be as soon as possible.

Yeah, sure.

I worked as a Midwife for 11 years, fortunately, I didn't have to deliver many stillbirths during that time, but every single one is seared into my memory. It hurts your heart, truly. To do that, knowing it was done deliberately, you'd be one of a very few.

I'm also pro-choice, within the current legal framework of elective only until 24 weeks, thereafter only for significant fetal abnormality.

But after a certain time limit, Surely a living being doesn’t deserve to suffer pain, on the whim of his or her mother?

Just because the mother cannot decide, why should a baby pay the price of that indecision?

The mother is deeply selfish at that point- and it is hideously unethical in my opinion.

No problems with morning after pill - but not a moving, feeling, dreaming , fully developed viable baby.

To destroy that is wrong when the mother had months to abort.

This mother has a chance for early abortion and decided not to.

past a certain stage, surely the baby has the right not to be killed?

So to you, 24 weeks ok 25 weeks not ok? You must realise that’s a completely arbitrary line.

Either you’re pro choice or you’re not. Fine to not be pro-choice, as many people on this thread are clearly not. Comfortable with this woman going to jail? You’re not pro-choice.

This situation makes me desperately sad and uncomfortable and I reflect on my own losses. I feel a sense of unfairness. I feel anger toward this woman.

I remain pro-choice. She should not be in jail.

I don’t agree with this drivel that pro-choice fanatics are pushing on this thread.

You’re not saving a woman from the fate of childbirth or carrying a baby by allowing the abortion of a full term (or almost full term) baby. That ship has sailed. She has already carried the baby and will have to give birth in some way. The difference is she won’t have to be a mother. There are other means of not being a mother once a baby is formed and grown.

it’s absolutely fine to have your own moral
compass when it comes to abortions.

I am pro choice and am allowed to qualify that in whatever way I decide. I am pro
choice within the current framework we have for abortion. Not one that is decided by an unstable, callous woman. She doesn’t speak for us all and some women aren’t all sweetness and light.

I don’t agree with the termination of a full or late term baby JUST because the baby hasn’t travelled down the birth canal and hasn’t taken a breath. That’s such a weak argument. if an incubator and a woman can do the same job this is no longer about a woman and her body. At the stage a baby is viable there are two being to consider not just one.

I'm pro-choice within the time limit outlined by the law within this country. If being pro-choice means terminating healthy, viable late stage foetuses on the whim of their mother, then I happily hold my hands up to not being pro-choice. This woman had full access to abortion services up until 24 weeks and chose not to take them. She went on to obtain pills by deception in order to terminate a 32-34week pregnancy and then try and pass it off as a still birth. She continued to lie and maintain her innocence right up until the last minute which is why the judge had no choice but to give her a custodial sentence. I'm not sure that prison is the right place for this woman but what other option is there? A clear message has to be sent that what she did is very wrong and cannot be condoned.

I am now moving to the opinion that the abortion laws in this country should remain as they are simply because as this rare tragic complex case has revealed there are still many that do not believe in pro choice. Abortion rights for women has been aligned with progressive women's rights that have emerged over the decades. I find it worrying that there is possibly a significant number of people in this country turnpike be swayed to question these rights all together.

I do not think we need a situation as in the US where there is reversal in rights and I think luckily we do not have the constitutional framework to make this easy as we do not have a supreme court but a sovereign parliament. I think the vast majority of MPs wish to keep away from this sensitive area.

I do think this case could be used by pro life advocates to advance their cause and by dwelling on harrowing accounts of foetal distress and using terms such as murder the scene is set for a natural extrapolation of these concepts to earlier gestational age. We mustn't forget for the tens of thousands of women seeking abortions every year the contemplation of these areas could deter them from seeking abortion or made to feel shame about a process that lets face it most likely will leave.psychological scars.

I’m still staggered by the argument that body autonomy apparently means that you can choose at 39 weeks to kill the baby and then give birth rather l, than give birth to a live baby. This isn’t body autonomy at all. This is a woman not wanting their baby to live and be adopted, it’s about them preferring that baby to be dead. It’s wholly about whether there is a live baby out there or a dead one in the ground. The body autonomy argument only really makes any sense when we talk about earlier abortions, about a woman choosing to end a pregnancy before there is a viable baby. As that’s the only time when it affects her body less. Her body is not affected any less by giving birth to a dead 39 week baby than a live 39 week baby.

Exactly.

in terms of bodily autonomy it’s closing the door after the horse has bolted. As you say this is about a living or a dead baby.

Totally agree.

Who exactly forced the woman to stay at home and not seek help MUCH sooner? Who?

Absolutely.

And the only person who “forced her to have a baby” was herself when she didn’t seek an abortion earlier.

At this gestation she was having this baby regardless - there was no other option because the baby was only coming out one way.

The only difference is that she chose to kill the baby so she would give birth to a dead one rather than a baby who was alive.

If she didn’t want to keep the baby for herself then fine, there are other options like foster care and adoption, but for her to choose to purposefully kill a fully developed, term baby just because she didn’t want to be a mother? I’m sorry, but there is no way that can be excused or justified.

When does a foetus become a baby.....do we have an exact gestational age of criteria that define development such that there is a distinct point where babyhood i.e. humanity is reached? Does any one want to proffer an answer?

I think one question in this debate is if you wish a scientific/medical answer for his question you may have to rely on the medical community many of whom on this thread are maligning?

Depending on which medical website you look at, the general definition of foetus implies the baby is technically a foetus until it is born, and then it becomes a baby/newborn.

And the only person who “forced her to have a baby” was herself when she didn’t seek an abortion earlier.

So true. It's warped that her own irresponsibility (in the nicest way I can put it) led to this. And that is also used as the reason to kill the fetus at 34 weeks.

Messed up.

And why are the self declared true pro-choice people siding with her? It just makes you look crazy and extreme. This is why people want to strip abortion rights, because they see people defending this and think it's a slippery slope.

Whether you call a 34 week fetus a baby or not is really irrelevant. It's fundamentally the exact same being whether inside or outside.