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

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To want autonomy over my body.

999 replies

thebodydoestricks · 23/04/2014 16:12

Aibu here. I am 50 but apparently still fertile.

I have 4 children already and do not want any more.

According to some posters if I fell pregnant but hadn't used at least 2 methods of contraception I should be denied the abortion I would most definatly want.

I would have to go before a panel of judges in a court to plead my case. They would judge whether I should have an abortion or not.

Of course if there was a back log of cases then I would have to wait and if it reached 24 weeks it would be too late anyway.

I would be forced to give birth.

Aibu to be absolutely stunned at this posters view in Britain 2014?

OP posts:
AnyaKnowIt · 23/04/2014 21:54

OK, forcing women to continue with a unwanted pregnancy.

Its not a thread about a thread, its a part 2

LoveSardines · 23/04/2014 21:55

There are lots of "unnatural medical interventions" involved in pregnancy and birth these days.

There are of course many who would like to deny women and girls all of them. And access to contraception as well.

TheBabyFacedAssassin · 23/04/2014 21:55

Hahaha sassy you are joking! right? Sour grapes because your goadfest didn't go as planned? Grow up, we are having a discussion. And there are REAL people with REAL experiences that are sharing and learning from each other. If you don't like the thread go somewhere else.

Re the use of the word "forced", what word do you use when someone is made to do something that they don't want to do?

passmethewineplease · 23/04/2014 21:56

I thought this was just continuing on from the previous thread as it was full?!

Either way withholding that medical treatment is barbaric.

But hey no one gives a shit about the woman and her health.

LoveSardines · 23/04/2014 21:56

Strangely those who talk about "unnatural medical interventions" only tend to do so when it comes to talking about things to do with female reproduction.

An interesting anomoly that.

whattowatchnext · 23/04/2014 21:57

I am on the fence too. I believe in women's rights, and agree that outlawing abortion will only lead to harmful back street abortions. I am in favour of abortion in the first trimester and thereafter for medical reasons only up to 24 weeks. No, I don't hate women, and I'm not a misogynist, and I do care about the mother too, before you all start flinging straw men arguments at me.

However I have no time for the extreme pro choice brigade who bang on about their RIGHTS to the exclusion of everything else, refuse to recognise that a foetus is more than a bundle of cells, can feel pain, and deserves respect and recognition. If you honestly think it's ok to abort a child up to full term then there's a chip missing somewhere, of course that's not a morally acceptable thing to do.

Thebody, in the nicest possible way, I think at age 50 it's highly unlikely you're still fertile and able to carry a baby to full term.Possible, but extremely unlikely. So you seem to be frothing about something that's entirely hypothetical - are you just bored?

TheBabyFacedAssassin · 23/04/2014 21:58

swoop I really appreciate your post and don't think you are derailing at all. I have been trying to understand the different reasons for why some people are anti-abortion, thank you for sharing.

MyrtleDove · 23/04/2014 21:58

The religious argument, naturally, also changes depending on the religion involved. The traditional Jewish position is that life begins at birth, for example (though there are individual Jews who disagree of course).

Speaking personally, I am a Christian and firmly pro-choice (I suspect going to stay with nuns is quite a giveaway there!). The nuns, obviously, are Christians and also pro-choice. I do get annoyed when being anti-choice is assumed to be the default position (by other Christians who are anti-choice I mean, not people who have been hurt by religious people being anti-choice - that's understandable). I am very sorry for the harm that has been caused by anti-choice people in my faith's name.

Binkyresurrected · 23/04/2014 21:59

Isn't contraception an 'Unnatural Medical intervention'? are you wanting that stopped as well, or should be reduce access to it and only have it available for women that are prepared to go to court and prove their case. Or do you only reserve court for those seeking abortion Sassy. It was you that suggested that on the last thread wasn't it?

AnyaKnowIt · 23/04/2014 22:00

If you honestly think it's ok to abort a child up to full term then there's a chip missing somewhere, of course that's not a morally acceptable thing to do.

Why?

lovelyjubberly · 23/04/2014 22:00

Stottie no I don't get wtc. I do Thanks to women who have to abort due to baby having medical problems, it must be heartbreaking.

The majority of abortions are not related to medical problems though. As I said previously, I don't go out and campaign against abortion, but I am allowed to disagree with it. I do campaign vehemently against child abuse etc and do voluntary work. I would love to adopt a child(ren) too, as I said, I love babies and children.

I'm not going to bother to keep in this conversation and will agree to disagree. I'm surprised that some of the aggressive pro-abortionists don't agree you can be a feminist and disagree with abortion, I don't see how removing your foetus is a symbol of success and achievement, I'd rather try to smash the glass ceiling and provide a better life for my child than do that and I will do for my beloved child.

namechangejustforthisthread · 23/04/2014 22:01

babyfaced, I've been reading your posts, they are both heartbreaking and thought provoking. Perhaps it's my ignorance but I have never considered that there would be women in the uk in your position. It's hard to get my head around the fact that things are so different.

Much as I consider myself pro-life, and I find it hard to pin down my thoughts on the case of babies with abnormalities which are incompatible with life, I think the "best" argument I can come up with is that it should in this case be a matter for individual conscience / choice, and that doctors should be neutral, providing advice on both options equally. I know that when my baby was diagnosed with anencephaly (for those who don't know, a severe abnormality, incompatible with life, involving most of the baby'd brain and top of the skull failing to develop), the option of termination was presented to me as the only option, and I felt under a lot of pressure.

I didn't terminate, but baby's heart stopped beating at 22 weeks, and she was born asleep. I hoped I would carry to term, but honestly changed my mind a million times a day as to what was the "right" thing to do. As you know only too well, there is no happy ending, no good outcome. I can only speak for myself, and the reasons I didn't terminate - which were that I felt strongly that I did not want to make the decision to end this baby's life, I wanted God / nature to decide, that I wanted to value this child's life just as much as any other no matter what abnormalities she had (I am not suggesting for a minute that those who terminate don't value their babies, I know the opposite is true having spoken to many women who have terminated after an anencephaly diagnosis). I also wanted to care for my baby for as long as I could, I wanted her to develop inside me, hear my voice, and have the best life she could however short, even though I knew she would not live after birth. I am glad that I got to hold her, and meet her properly, that I have memories of her, photographs and footprints. I think that because of my pro-life views, I felt I could no more terminate than I could end her life for her if she did breathe after birth. that's how it felt to me.

I don't honestly know what I would do if it happened to me again. I can't even say with 100% certainty that I would not have terminated that pregnancy had it not ended naturally when it did. I just lived day by day not wanting it to be then, and who knows whether I would have stuck it out to the end. In that position again, I would know what was coming and wonder whether I really would be able to face it, and also these decisions are never black and white. My baby with anencephaly would not have suffered, with other conditons where they might, I know that would be unbearable to watch, and to be forced to do that would be barbaric.

But there is a world of difference between choosing to carry to term with a fatal diagnosis and being forced to do so. I don't know what I think about the law, I only know that after what I've experienced, and after I have met so many women who have made the decision to terminate for medical reasons, who have loved and grieved for their babies and made their decision for reasons which were right to them, and for them, I don't believe I have any right to make that decision for them, much less to judge the decision they made out of love for their babies.

I'm hesitating to post this; I hope it answers some of your questions, in some way, about the other side of the debate. I hope you have all the support you need over the next few weeks / months.

Northernexile · 23/04/2014 22:01

Reading the thread with interest, didn't see the previous thread (yet), and this is a bit of a tangent, but I am in NI and haven't heard about this new legislation TheBaby mentioned. I can't find anything online to indicate things have changed re 18/24 weeks etc, in fact it still says on the NI Direct site that stillbirths don't have to be registered at all. I would be very interested to find out more if someone can link to an article?

Back on topic, I don't believe anyone should have the right to tell a woman what to do with her own body.

MoominsAreScary · 23/04/2014 22:02

An unnatural medical intervention, well I was induced so does that mean we should not allow any inductions? Even ay 40+ weeks

Or the d&c I had due to a mmc, afyer all its another unnatural medical intervention.

Or should we just denigh the ones that suit you?

thebodydoestricks · 23/04/2014 22:03

22honey

There are many people who wish to deny women abortions at any stage.

I don't seek to wonder how other women should act in their pregnancy.

It's up to them.

OP posts:
AnyaKnowIt · 23/04/2014 22:04

It was an unnatural medical intervention that saved dd's life when I was in labour

MyrtleDove · 23/04/2014 22:05

whattowatchnext I don't think that a foetus is more than a bundle of cells, sorry. The personhood of a foetus is not a scientifically verifiable fact.

As for late-term abortions, currently these only happen for medical reasons - there are medical conditions incompatible with life that are diagnosed late in the pregnancy. I think allowing an abortion at full term in those circumstances is perfectly morally acceptable, and don't have a chip missing. For me personally, it is my rights re pregnancy that matter to the exclusion of anything else. My body, my rights, my decision.

Why any reason for the first trimester, and then medical reasons up to 24 weeks? A foetus is still not viable until 24 weeks.

namechangejustforthisthread · 23/04/2014 22:05

swoopdewoop, I don't believe in a God who sends babies to hell because their parents haven't had them baptised, or because they didn't live long enough. It isn't biblical, and it doesn't fit with the image of a loving and just God. I do find it frightening that you were told that at a young age.

LoveSardines · 23/04/2014 22:07

In the UK 89% of abortions are carried out before 24 weeks.

This does not, to my mind, indicate that British women are feckless bitches who will leave it later than they need to just for a laugh.

The idea that if abortion were legal to term, British women would start randomly opting to have full term babies aborted at the last minute for no reason apart from they feel like it, assumes that women are on the whole fundamentally selfish and not a little evil. This is a mysogynistic view of women.

People who view women as normal full human beings do not believe that women would start terminating 42 week pregnancies on a whim, just because they could.

LoveSardines · 23/04/2014 22:08

12 weeks that should say, sorry! 89% before 12 weeks.

AnyaKnowIt · 23/04/2014 22:10

Lovesardines its all those pesky hormones innit

MyrtleDove · 23/04/2014 22:10

lovely perhaps go and chat to the Call The Midwife nuns yourself and see how legal and safe abortion was necessary for any glass ceiling to be smashed. I think women who saw women dying from excessive pregnancies in tenement slums have more feminist insight than you will ever know. It saved lives and lifted women out of poverty. If I was pregnant, my abortion wouldn't be a symbol of success or achievement, it would just be a necessary medical procedure to enable me to have a happy life.

You have every right to not have an abortion yourself, you do not have the right to claim that restricting reproductive rights for other women (especially poor women) is any kind of feminism.

thebodydoestricks · 23/04/2014 22:11

sassy report away chik.

You can't shut us all down or make people like baby go away as you have no answers.

Your posts inspired this thread.

That's why you want to shut it down.

Shame on you.

OP posts:
blackcats73 · 23/04/2014 22:11

I believe in abortion on demand up to when the fetus becomes a viable baby at 24 weeks.

I agree with the poster who stated that anyone who agrees with abortion to term, unless the fetus has a terminal illness, or the mother's life is at risk (then special care units are more appropriate) is completely , morally and scientifically wrong. Just as extreme, heartless and callous as those who thinks a six week old embryo has a right to life. Bonkers!

WE have it right in this country, abortion until 24 weeks. No later no decrease in limit.

thebodydoestricks · 23/04/2014 22:12

lovesardines hear hear.

OP posts: