josie cunningham.

[CunningAtBothEnds]

I have read an article on the above where she states despite being 18 weeks pregnant and pleased up until now she will be having an abortion to "further her career" namely to qppear on big brother.

whether this is morally ok is one thing but AIBU to ask if an abortion for the reasons she gives is legal? i suppose its similar to someone saying its not the right time, just more brazen?

(I consider myself pro choice btw I just find her apparent callousness a bit tough to take)

I'm still struggling with this one.

To be clear I still consider myself pro-choice, think the 20 week limit is about right with later exceptions for medical reasons, but I'm still troubled by this scenario.

With all her best interests in mind, our healthcare system generally doesn't back massive changes to people's bodies on a whim - for example you wouldn't get a nose job without dialogue making sure it was right for you and knowing exactly what you were letting yourself in for, good and bad.

This is were I'm questioning my belief in abortion on demand. Without a doubt I can't accept any woman should be pregnant if she doesn't want to be, at the same time it's a a big deal for 90% of women. It's generally not taken lightly and I do believe there's a responsibility to make sure they're as sure as they can be within the time constraints that they're making the right decision for them. It's all within the scope of putting the woman not the baby first.

I'm coming from the angle of experiences of my own and friends, but the knowledge I have, albeit at much earlier stages, is that we pretty much do have termination on demand. It's easy - that's not a bad thing as such, but it concerns me that some women could be under external pressures and be carrying out wishes of another person and never really have the opportunity to express that because the whole process is designed to be supportive of the decision you've made.

Idk, it's a tough balance to find without leading a woman one way or the other or being patronising and infringing the right for women to choose what happens with their own bodies.

Sorry for the jumbled up train on thought, but as I say, I'm conflicted over the rights of a woman over her own body and the duty of care to ensure she is actually making the right decision.

It's a great starting point to assume every woman is making decisions in the best possible circumtances and is 100% mentally healthy, but society is made up of people at varying levels and for those who it would be damaging to have an abortion - well I'm concerned about what's there to protect them and if there is even a way to do it.

I don't find it conflicting at all really.

She should be entitled to terminate her pregnancy if she chooses to, perfectly legal in the UK thank Goodness.

As per other thread my personal view is a woman should have full autonomy over her body at all times pregnant or not.

Said too ad nauseum, very few women would abort late term babies for frivolous reasons but a woman should be able to make that choice.

No one should be forced to abort or equally to give birth.

cornettoninga a person suffering severe mental illness can be sectioned so decisions can be made on their behalf.

It may be within the law, but people find it distasteful that she was in the Daily Mail cradling her bump but talking about aborting the baby to get a place on a tv show.

But cornetto, being forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy, go through birth and then make a decision about adoption is also potentially damaging and I think there was a study in the US to say that this scenario ie forced birth was more damaging to mental health than abortion.

Pregnancy and birth give rise to greater bodily changes than abortion. It's not like a nose job as there is no "neutral" option.

In response to your "it's a big deal for 90% of women" - There was a great thread on here that GOML started about personal experience of abortion. Her POV, shared by many, was that often women seem to be expected to be racked by guilt and doubt, talk about it as a tough decision etc - whereas for her (and many) it was more of an "ah, crap. Right, off we go to fix this." Caitlin Moran's abortion account is similar - she and her husband had not planned a third child, so an accidental third pregnancy... Well, termination was a straightforward decision.

It may be distasteful but that doesn't alter the fact that she has a perfect right to do what she likes. Her body her choice.

TheDoctrine yes all the women I know who have had sbortions, and I know at least 10, say they just felt utter relief.

thebodydoestricks, but there are always degrees of health aren't there? In terms of mental health you can need support from therapy to sectioning. At what point should someone intervene and assist someone else with decisions?

thedoctorineofsnatch that's where I struggle. My own experience - well it was sad and I have to admit tinged with regret, but there's no doubt in my mind that at the time it was the right decision. So even though I'm comfortable there's emotions mixed in there. I can't imagine what it's like to think you've made a mistake afterwards.

Logically I know there are no absolutes, and I worry about the balance because it's such a fragile line between support and dictating another persons rights over their own body. It's still a niggle for me though.

Just to be clear I pulled that 90% figure out of my arse , perhaps majority is better? Fwiw the remaining women who aren't included in that sweeping statement, to my mind anyway, are exactly the ones who need their rights upheld. But discussing statistics doesn't identify whose who and the one size fits all approach seems to imply that we should all be in that minority.

It may be distasteful but that doesn't alter the fact that she has a perfect right to do what she likes. Her body her choice.

And we have a perfect right to comment on it.

I think the whole 'very few women would do it' argument is incredibly flawed. There are plenty of things that not very many people would do e.g.. commit infanticide but we still have laws against them.

Well (much as I don't want to give this silly young woman any more of my thought time) she was having the procedure at a private clinic this week.

So she'll have done it or she won't.
Personally, I think if she's been overlooked for a place on CBB, she won't have done.
But I wouldn't like to think of the children she has or the child she might have finding all the news reports in years to come.

So the Press can hopefully put her to bed and not grace our pages with her (not my quote ) camel chewing a toffee face > .

Until next time she decides to claim her fame.
(Try getting a job Josie. Even prostitution, I have no qualms about prostitutes but try not to get up-duffed and FFS keep your clients confidential information confidential eh? )

"Try getting a job Josie. Even prostitution, I have no qualms about prostitutes but try not to get up-duffed and FFS keep your clients confidential information confidential eh? )"

If you have no qualms about prostitution, why do you have qualms about her client names being known?

Probably because she will come out with a footballer-kiss-and-tell next.

Any footballer or sleb with half a brain will give her a wide berth and those that dont shouldnt expect any protection from being named and shamed by her. Lets be honest they've all had fair warning now that she'll talk about anything.

There as been a mention of a footballer already.

Has been a mention

Doctrine
I have no issue with money changing hands for sex if it's the choice of both parties.
But aside from "the footballer" who was a friend, she gave alot of detail about the "client".

He went to her for a paid service. He does not deserve to have his details plastered over the press.

Well she isnt subject to data protection laws. Anyone can say they shagged someone if it's true. If he doesnt want people knowing he's best to keep it in his trousers or have her sign a pre shag silencer agreement.

Just proves though that this woman has no morals though IMO.

Doubt she signed a confidentiality agreement.

Being a bit flip, but I honestly think that many people who look bad in the press don't know when it's wise to say "no comment" - unless you are very used to picking your words, like a politician, you will say more than you would do in, say, a written answer. And then politicians are berated for giving a politician's answer. Look at Cherie Blair and the nightie photo - and that's a smart woman who is at least somewhat used to publicity.

"Just proves though that this woman has no morals though IMO."

Why no morals? It's pretty common in business to say "Glaxo and Vodafone are my clients" unless Glaxo and Vodafone specifically ask you not to do so.

No morals? Why? why should she keep quiet for other people's reputations?

"I called the client straight away. He was shocked and begged me to keep it quiet"

I'm not in the head of the client but I'm pretty sure if he saw fit to pay for the company of Ms Cunningham he reckoned on having sex with no ties.
( Condom split according to news report)
Not finding his detail plastered in the news.

OK no contraception is 100% and it's a risk you take but remind me how many times this woman has been pg? Eight?

Why did she not use "Belt and Braces" contraception?

She had five miscarriages and two children. I do not know if she was TTC when she had those pregnancies or not - has she said?

"I called the client straight away. He was shocked and begged me to keep it quiet"

Bit late asking after the event! She's under no obligation to keep quiet. If that was so important to him he should have made sure it was agreed beforehand. He was an idiot to think he was guaranteed any sort of secrecy/ anonymity. All celebs nowadays know they are a target for kiss and tell stories from fame hungry wannabes.

As for belt and braces? Why doesnt everyone use belt and braces? Hardly means she has no morals.