Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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 When I mentioned it to other friend she said it was my views but they were quite outdated and misogynistic.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 · 21/05/2013 11:39

Late abortions are very occasionally necessary but if they are not essential they are an offense against all that being a woman means

Could you explain to me - a woman - what being a woman means, then?

hopkinette · 21/05/2013 11:40

Does it mean "reproductive unit," or are you going to put some more palatable romanticised misty-eyed quasi-spiritual spin on it?

Solari · 21/05/2013 11:42

Depending on who their parents are? I'm totally lost... apologies if that wasn't directed at me.

GlassofRose · 21/05/2013 12:07

Very interesting thread with interesting terminology.

xylem8 Mon 20-May-13 11:55:39
WShould I just turn a blind eye to children being abused because it is the parents' choice and nothing to do with me? who speaks for that human embryo being murdered?

Interesting xylem because "murder" is unlawful killing, abortion is not unlawful.

seeker · 21/05/2013 12:23

Another issue is that the debate is often hijacked by special interest groups onto the subject of late abortion.

The really important thing is to ensure that safe, timely non judgemental advice and abortion is freely available to all women.

Doing this will ensure that late abortions become even less of an issue than they are now.

Solari · 21/05/2013 12:37

^
Couldn't agree more.

BlessedDespair · 21/05/2013 12:40

as well as abortion at any stage for proven severe abnormality

What do you class as severe abnormality though? What one set of parents/single parent could cope with another set/single parent may not

Depending on who their parents are? I'm totally lost... apologies if that wasn't directed at me.

I think it's to do with people saying abortion is fine if the pregnancy was a result of rape but not if it was consensual. Basically saying that depending on who your parents are you are either worthy of life (consensual conception) or less worthy (conceived through rape)

Apologies if I'm wrong

Solari · 21/05/2013 12:42

That makes sense BlessedDespair, thanks Smile.

TrucksAndDinosaurs · 21/05/2013 12:45

Passionately argued, upsetting but necessary thread: even though OP wasn't real - well done everyone.

Cloverer · 21/05/2013 12:45

Exactly - a foetus is worthy of life if their parents are just "irresponsible" or silly party girls.

A foetus doesn't have a right to live if it's mother is a teenager or it's father is a rapist.

That's before we even get into the disablism of only perfect foetuses deserve to live.

Surely, if you believe the right of a foetus to live outweighs the right of the mother to bodily autonomy, then that is true regardless of who that foetus's parents are? Is it a person or not?

Cloverer · 21/05/2013 12:47

That argument makes it seem that the issue of concern is the morality of the mother, not the worthiness of the foetus.

eccentrica · 21/05/2013 13:15

VisualiseAHorse
"My (badly written and explained) point is, and always has been - the woman's right always, always, always should trump the unborn baby's 'right'. [...] But when it comes to a pregnant woman there is only ONE person involved, and she should get the final say in what happens to her body. (Am I making sense?)"

Yes, you make sense but I can't agree with you.

I think a lot of laws are about balancing incompatible rights and my personal feeling is that it's wrong to terminate in late pregnancy except for medical reasons.

That's not based on anything abstract but on a gut feeling about it. I think earlier abortions are sad but (and I speak as someone currently 7 weeks pregnant) it's not the same thing. There are simple realities such as the ability to feel pain and fear which develop in the course of pregnancy. Aborting an 8 week embryo is not the same thing as a 36-week foetus unless you are coming from a religious point of view where it's all about 'the soul'.

Also, it's not only human beings who have rights. We also recognise in law that nonhuman animals have rights to do with being free of unnecessary pain and suffering, so the fact that a foetus is not yet a full human being doesn't in and of itself mean it has no rights.

eccentrica · 21/05/2013 13:19

mathanxiety "If the foundation of a law permitting abortion is the autonomy of the woman over her own body then that has to hold until the time of natural birth. If an abortion law limits a woman's autonomy over her own body to a certain time frame then it is in fact illogical. Either a woman has autonomy or she does not have autonomy with no grey area in between. There is not such thing as autonomy with an asterisk. Anything less than full autonomy is not autonomy. That is the nature of autonomy."

You keep saying this, but that doesn't make it any less nonsensical.

We have many forms of autonomy in our everyday life and pretty much all of them are restricted where they intersect with other people's autonomy.

We have freedom of movement, up to the point where we trespass on someone else's property.

We have control over our own bodies, but we can't sell our blood or organs even if someone's willing to pay for them.

We have autonomy to drive, if we've passed a test and not been banned, but not when we've got above a certain level of blood alcohol.

We have autonomy to move our own bodies, until they impede or injure someone else.

ALL autonomy is "autonomy with an asterisk". ALL autonomy has "grey areas". Really, seriously, obviously true.

EglantinePrice · 21/05/2013 13:27

eccentrica. I think in the interests of womens rights we need to have abortion to term. I worry that otherwise its the thin end of the wedge and before we know it, c sections will be compulsory at 37 weeks on the say so of a Dr.

However I do find it abhorrent. Also I can't find any cut off point that makes any more sense... Babies have survived at 21 weeks, should this be it? And yet many babies only survive at term because of life saving medical intervention? Then still require complete care.

The grey area is about 20 weeks long.

Where do you suggest?

EglantinePrice · 21/05/2013 13:32

Have any of the proponents of 'abortion for rape victims only' yet answered the questions

Is it enough to be charged with rape?
Does someone have to be convicted? (what if this takes 6 months/)
If its a stranger in a dark alley do you need a witness or to provide evidence of rape? What evidence?

I'd really like to know how this one works.

ICBINEG · 21/05/2013 13:55

I am still with solari. You have the right to end the pregnancy but not to kill the foetus if it could survive independently with minimal medical intervention and pain.

ICBINEG · 21/05/2013 13:55

eg ohh good point about the rape thing...obviously implausible.

GlassofRose · 21/05/2013 13:56

One of the things that doesn't sit well with me is that we can argue to we're blue in the face, "fathers" can say they have no say yet when it comes down to it, the people who make the laws for us women are predominantly men.

GlassofRose · 21/05/2013 13:57

Very interesting Eglantine; what about the poor woman who is pregnant as a consequence of rape and her attacker is seen as not guilty in the eyes of the law?

GlassofRose · 21/05/2013 13:59

or attacker is never found so was never tried?

hopkinette · 21/05/2013 14:09

A lot of anti abortionists seem to really enjoy thinking about the rape exception. Basically, I think you have to be a single woman, raped by a stranger who beats you up really badly - it has to be immediately visibly clear that you fought hard to defend your honour, and then you earn an abortion. If there is no evidence that the sex was forced, I think you're SOL. Realistically, we have to accept that the rape exception has no practical application if you're talking about reporting, having it investigated, someone being arrested, charges being brought, a trial happening etc. That's not what we're talking about here. The rape exception applies to visibly "innocent" women who have been violently raped. There have to be bruises otherwise it doesn't count.

seeker · 21/05/2013 14:09

The problem is that people who have simplistic views about abortion often seem to have simplistic views about rape too.....

grimbletart · 21/05/2013 14:25

Here is a very unusual and quite heartbreaking case in today's media that illustrates a particular sort of grey area that some posters are taking about.

www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10069903/Bipolar-sufferer-in-legal-battle-over-abortion.html

Woman 23 week planned pregnancy, wanted baby, enthusiastically attended ante-natal clinics etc. The woman, who is bipolar and appears to have developed paranoia now wants termination following (apparently) stopping her medication. Hasn't happened because she was detained under the Mental Health Act. She is cogent enough to argue for abortion and has tried to induce labour. Says she will kill herself if refused. Psychiatrist says she is 100% certain she lacks mental capacity to make decision.

Now awaiting urgent ruling under Court of Protection. Sad The point being I suppose - given she planned the pregnancy and wanted the baby and given her mental health - will she be more distraught if she is refused the abortion or if she is given the abortion and then on recovery realises that it is not what she wanted at all.

No win situation.

HorryIsUpduffed · 21/05/2013 14:26

If you establish a rape exception, then misreported rape would go through the roof.

"Shit, I'm pregnant and I really can't be ... it was rape, please can I have a tx? ... thank God that's over ... actually I'm not sure now, I'll withdraw my complaint."

There are enough problems with reporting real rapes without adding this as an additional headache.

neunundneunzigluftballons · 21/05/2013 14:45

Horryisupduffed but really it is as likely that a woman will foul cry rape as will look for a 30+ week abortion or will be the type to abort so she can carry on with her party lifestyle and according to this thread none of those women exist and I like to think hopefully they don't.

As regards the rape exception realistically you have to allow all abortions up to a certain time limit to allow this nothing else would practically work IMO.