Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

To think that just because I'm pro-life doesn't mean I hate feminism?

812 replies

TinkerSailerSoldierSpy · 18/05/2013 12:38

Friend and I were having a discussion, I'm 18 weeks pregnant, and it was a bit of an inconvenient surprise, considering I've started a new job just 2 months ago.I mentioned that it wasn't going to look good, me taking maternity leave after not even being there for a year, and she suggested perhaps considering there was no dad on the scene and my new job, I should terminate. I felt a bit uncomfortable but told her that I could never do that as I'm pro life and view it as killing a child. She then proceeded to stare at me like I had an extra head and ask me why in a shocked voice. I explained my reasons and views and we got into an arguement about it, the usual stuff, what about in cases of rape and if the woman's not financially able to support the child, to which I countered but is it right for a woman to get an abortion just because she wants to continue a party lifestyle? And she stormed out the house shouting that I was misogynistic and women have the right to their own bodies. Let me be clear, I certainly would never stop anyone from making their decision about an abortion, I just can't seem to get over the idea of it, it repulses me. But I wouldn't judge a woman who got one. I understand the other viewpoint but I can't agree with it myself, and in all other respects I would say i was very liberal about womans rights. When I mentioned it to other friend she said it was my views but they were quite outdated and misogynistic. Are they? I need advice, should I apologize to friend A?

OP posts:
hopkinette · 19/05/2013 18:01

It makes no difference whether it's a zygote, an embryo or a foetus; it doesn't matter if it looks like a ball of cells or a cute little baby. Its status as person or human being is irrelevant. It could be the second coming of Christ and it would STILL have no rights to use anyone's body without her consent.

VisualiseAHorse · 19/05/2013 19:06

I do however think that termination of a viable foetus should be done in a way that allows for the removal from a woman's body in a manner that preserves life if possible

But that's not really abortion is it?

VisualiseAHorse · 19/05/2013 19:10

Sorry, pressed enter too quickly...

That's not really abortion is it? That's giving birth to a live baby which will either go on to be adopted, put into foster care (because we all know how easy those options are), or be bought up by the woman who didn't want the pregnancy in the first place. How is that abortion?

sunshine401 · 19/05/2013 19:12

What is the legal limit now ? Meaning how far gone can you be and still have an abortion by choice not for medical reasons??

VisualiseAHorse · 19/05/2013 19:19

24 weeks.

The problem that some people have with this limit is that babies can now survive from 22 weeks (I think maybe some babies have even survived from 21 weeks).

Blistory · 19/05/2013 19:27

A woman aborts a pregnancy. I don't see why we can't separate the pregnancy that occurs within a woman's body from a foetus capable of survival out with the womb. They could be two very distinct things where medically possible.

Kithulu · 19/05/2013 19:28

My sister had an abortion so she could continue her party lifestyle. She is 48 now and still morns that child. She never managed to conceive again.

I am still pro-choice, especially in rape/ health cases. But, in the case of my sister, I wish, I don't know, if anything would have made a difference to her at the time, counselling/ support??

VisualiseAHorse · 19/05/2013 19:33

I don't know if that would be a good idea really Kithulu - isn't that almost like guilt-tripping a woman into keeping her pregnancy?

Kithulu · 19/05/2013 19:35

You are right, I'm not sure what would have made a difference at the time. Only that she is still so sad about now :(

sunshine401 · 19/05/2013 19:36

Surely unless medically needed, women will make their decision near enough straight away. 24 weeks is quite far gone.
I know the rarity of late discovers does still happen. Other than that I do not think women would suddenly decide to abort that far into their pregnancy.

VisualiseAHorse · 19/05/2013 20:00

There's a research paper out there somewhere about later-term abortions, includes a few 24 weeks, and a few over that time as well which were given for various reasons.

I think that the vast majority of abortions happen before 12 weeks.

Kithulu - it is very sad about your sister - but she wasn't to know at the time that that may her only chance to have a baby. I'm sure she did what she felt was right at the time, she made the correct decision for herself then. Hindsight can be both fantastic and awful.

VisualiseAHorse · 19/05/2013 20:04

And still, taking away the choice to have a late-term abortion is not right.

I think that any woman, regardless of her reasons, should be able to terminate her pregnancy when she wishes to. Until that child leaves her body, her rights should always take precedence over that of an un-born baby.

You can disagree with abortion all you like, but you should NEVER ever take away a woman's choice not to give birth.

thegreylady · 19/05/2013 20:12

Most women do have a choice-visualise-they can choose not to have unprotected sex.
You talk about the baby not having the 'right' to use a woman's body without her consent hopkinette-as if the embryo-foetus whatever makes a choice to do that!
I have rarely read anything here or elsewhere which disgusted me as much as that statement.I was enjoying the debate but that is too much.I will now hide this thread.

JackieTheFart · 19/05/2013 20:15

MediumOrchid and angloamerican - you both mention that you feel abortion is 'killing a child'.

I give you this:

I am holding a test-tube with a fertilised egg in it. I am also holding a newborn baby. Someone points a gun at me and says I can choose which will live.

If you are truly pro-life, then you can't choose. Because that group of cells means as much as the baby.

I am pro-choice, all the way.

(PS - that example isn't from me, but it resonated when I read it.)

loopsylou · 19/05/2013 20:18

At 40 weeks the baby can feel pain, and think, and reason. It's a fully formed human being, and you think that it's acceptable to murder it because the mother doesn't want to go through having to give up the baby for adoption?!?

sunshine401 · 19/05/2013 20:22

You can disagree with abortion all you like, but you should NEVER ever take away a woman's choice not to give birth.

But the law does take away that right. Unless there is a medical reason. The reason the law is against abortions passed a certain development stage is because that baby is alive, yes inside the mum but still alive.

There is no real need for anyone to wait so long to have an abortion unless it is medical.

loopsylou · 19/05/2013 20:24

I agree partly with the OP, I support abortions for those raped, or if the mother or childs life is in danger. However, if abortions are freely allowed and tolerated at any age, can you honestly justify a 21 year old woman who wants to live life and party and play, who gets pregnant because she doesn't use contraception, and they kills a child at 38 weeks so that she can keep up her desired lifestyle. And all because, it's her choice, it's her body. So what, the baby, who at that age can think and feel, doesn't get a choice in their body because they don't have the brain capacity to hold or express views? Should we treat others who don't have that brain capacity the same way? Oh look, a disabled child is being a drag on this mothers life, lets kill him because he can't say anything about it and he "belongs" to the mother.

FrameyMcFrame · 19/05/2013 20:24

Blistory, agree with what you say 100%

loopsylou · 19/05/2013 20:25

And what about the rights of the father? They don't get a choice in the matter?

Blistory · 19/05/2013 20:36

No, the man has no say whatsoever.

And as for the dramatic language being used, no one wants to see 40 week terminations happening. But for those of us who think a woman has autonomy over her body, then yes, they should be legally possible. Ideally without sacrificing the life of the foetus.

No one gets to say what grows in my uterus except me. By all means have an opinion but you don't get control of my body even if all I want to use it for is partying.

Thisisaeuphemism · 19/05/2013 20:36

You want to force a 21 year old who wants to party go through pregnancy, childbirth, and parenting. Why? To punish her for having a good time? Or don't you think there are enough half arsed parents neglecting their kids and you would like to see more of them?

When men go through pregnancy and birth then yeah they would get a say.

CoalDustWoman · 19/05/2013 20:37

Hehe at the party girl having an abortion at 38 weeks. Some of you are so wrapped up in your nasty women rhetoric that you're not even making sense.

Back to the abortion is ok for rape victims stance. Can anyone answer my question, please?

Who decides if the woman was raped and therefore eligible for an abortion? Because most rape cases don't even get reported, let alone get to trial. And trials often happen months later. And if a jury couldn't say it was rape beyond reasonable doubt, then they are found not guilty, even if rape actually occurred. What about the woman who found herself being penetrated by a man who claimed he thought she was his girlfriend and was found not guilty of rape? What if she had become pregnant?

Cloverer · 19/05/2013 20:45

A 21 year old who wants to continue her party lifestyle should be offered an abortion at the soonest possible opportunity. Most women who are not ready to have a baby would want an abortion in the first 8 weeks.

Think about why a woman might need an abortion after 24 weeks - it's not going to be because after being pregnant for 6 months then she decides she doesn't want to be a mum.

Rape or abuse victims who have been in denial about the pregnancy (or too young to understand what is going on) might not realise until they are starting to show.

Women whose partners become abusive, or increase the level of abuse (pregnancy is a common trigger for DV) might need a late abortion.

Serious foetal abnormalities might not be discovered until late in the pregnancy.

Somehow the idea that party girl is going to wait til the 3rd trimester to seek an abortion doesn't ring true, does it?

Thisisaeuphemism · 19/05/2013 20:45

Good questions, coal dust - and it shows what meaningless rhetoric the 'except in cases of rape' thing is. They mean, "we're not totally heartless - if a woman has sex unwillingly then we might support her, but anyone who willingly has sex must be punished"

FJL203 · 19/05/2013 20:48

"No, the man has no say whatsoever.

And as for the dramatic language being used, no one wants to see 40 week terminations happening. But for those of us who think a woman has autonomy over her body, then yes, they should be legally possible. Ideally without sacrificing the life of the foetus.

No one gets to say what grows in my uterus except me. By all means have an opinion but you don't get control of my body even if all I want to use it for is partying."

This.

Absolutely and unequivocally, this.

Swipe left for the next trending thread