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.

Original poster

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:
namechangejustforthisthread · 23/04/2014 22:39

babyfaced, I agree wholeheartedly that making that decision would not have meant you loved your daughter even a tiny bit less. She will always be your daughter and you will always love her, I don't think anybody could doubt that. I completely understand the feeling of not being able to start grieving "properly" although of course you are already grieving in a sense. I identify with wanting to avoid public places and well meaning excited comments too.

It's occured to me that I have heard of women from Ireland travelling to England for a termination - but have just realised how expensive that would be, and that presumably it creates a two-layer system where termination is available to women who can afford to pay for it but not those who can't? Correct me if I'm wrong. I can't begin to imagine how having to make the journey must add to the trauma of the whole thing, but that's another thread. I honestly didn't know that termination would not be available to someone in your position in Ireland, even as an "early induction". It has shocked me that this happens, and nobody hears about it. You are so brave to tell your story and draw attention to the way things are. It has really made me think twice about the right to choose Thanks

Moomin....just Thanks for you too. I don't think anyone has the right to judge the decision you made either, to prevent your baby from suffering, and I don't believe anyone knows what they would do until it happens.

Kendodd · 23/04/2014 22:39

MyrtleDove

Yes, sorry I should have qualified that, and the law as it stands allows for that and abortions for 'social' reasons up to 24 weeks. IMO I might want to bring this down to 22 weeks for social reasons though.

For the people who think it's fine to abort for any reason up to full term are you really not uncomfortable about aborting a baby who could survive perfectly well and with no special care outside of the mother?

AnyaKnowIt · 23/04/2014 22:40

Black cats, you said you thought the law was right?

LoveSardines · 23/04/2014 22:40

I am off to bed now but I agree with Anya etc.

Logically, if you believe that females have the right to bodily autonomy, then you have to support abortion to term, as any other position means removing autonomy at some point.

If you also believe that women and girls are not in the main stupid evil harpies, then you understand that were abortion available to term it would not result in a sudden influx of women wanting to have incredibly late term abortions just because they fancy it. This is borne out by the statistics and, well, the evidence of anyone who has actually met any women and noticed that they aren't, you know, stupid evil harpies.

AnyaKnowIt · 23/04/2014 22:41

Nope, not uncomfortable

namechangejustforthisthread · 23/04/2014 22:42

So sorry Moomin, I do know that later terminations involve going through labour and giving birth. I was thinking only in terms of my own situation, that if I had terminated at the 12 week scan when anencephaly was diagnosed, I wouldn't have had that - didn't mean to trivialise your experience at all.

AnyaKnowIt · 23/04/2014 22:43

Yy Lovesardines

gordyslovesheep · 23/04/2014 22:44

well of course it's not comfortable - but being 100% pro-choice means you don't get to chose easy fluffy options

the natural conclusion to being pro choice is that a woman has 100% autonomy and therefore could theoretically abort for any reason at term

it would be hypocritical to have a cut off point where the rights of women suddenly don't have precedence

it doesn't mean I would run down the street shouting with joy and handing out balloons if a woman chose (theoretically) to do so - but I can't be against it without being a slippery eel

Original poster
thebodydoestricks · 23/04/2014 22:44

baby my heart goes out to you. I can absolutely see how people would be asking you about your bump. People do. How bloody dreadful for you.

See for me I always feel that the posters here advocating women's rights and choice over her body are so much more empathetic and kind than the forced birthers.

They are also more practical and sensible.

OP posts:
Kendodd · 23/04/2014 22:44

It is legal to abort to full term for a disabled child? Why is that OK?

Ok lets imagine the 'disability' is that the baby has no lungs, it can survive perfectly well inside the mother but has no chance at all outside. The mother goes late for her 20 week scan, arrives at 24 weeks to be told this. I would not want to force the mother to carry this baby to full term if she didn't want to.

blackcats73 · 23/04/2014 22:46

Okay Anya I did. I've ad wine (DCs at Grandma!!) The law is right about abortion to 24 weeks for any reason. I disagree with abortion of a fetus past 24 weeks, for reason other than terminal conditions.

Again, I understand the theory. But in reality I think most people wouldn't condone the termination of a viable fetus.

I'm off to bed, as I've had too much wine and have work tomorrow.

AnyaKnowIt · 23/04/2014 22:46

I kendodd, I don't think anyone should be force to continue with any pregnancy

gordyslovesheep · 23/04/2014 22:46

pro'lifers' get to be slippery as fuck mind with their 'except in rape cases' or 'if the baby is disabled' or 'if the woman used 787878 different types of contraception and is only 2 hours pregnant' stuff

I admire the more radical prolifers who have the same amount of guts to stand by the horrible implication of their position much more than the ones who squirm out of them

AnyaKnowIt · 23/04/2014 22:47

Ah ok black cats, night

MoominsAreScary · 23/04/2014 22:47

Sorry namechange, my comment wasnt aimed at you. I understand where you are coming from and would have continued myself if it wasnt for hes feet becoming trapped in my cervix x

Kendodd · 23/04/2014 22:50

ok, what about if the woman was in labour and the baby was in the birth canal, still ok to abort?

namechangejustforthisthread · 23/04/2014 22:51

It is legal to abort to full term for a disabled child? Why is that OK?

Usually because many serious abnormalities cannot be detected until the 20 week scan. The scan is often not definitive, and further tests are required to be certain of prognosis etc, there may be a period of waiting and re-scanning to see how the baby develops and again to be certain.

I can see why it seems abhorrent. But removing this would effectively remove the option of termination from most women carrying a baby with a severe abnormality, and put them in baby's position - which I hope even the most staunch pro-lifer can see is awful.

MyrtleDove · 23/04/2014 22:52

I was under the impression that once labour has started then it would legally cross from abortion to foeticide - any MNers with better legal knowledge than me know otherwise?

Original poster
thebodydoestricks · 23/04/2014 22:53

kendodd I might want to bring this down to 22 weeks for social reasons though

bingo do we have the panel of judges here?

Ok so what was she wearing when she got pregnant?

Slut! Social reasons!!! No abortion denied.

Perhaps we could get Simon Cowell to do a new show

Abort or keep.

Vile vile vile

OP posts:
AnyaKnowIt · 23/04/2014 22:55

Yes I agree, don't think I was clear in my argument

I was comming from a disablisist angle. Abort disable child - legal. Not disabled - you are labeled a baby killer iyswim?

Original poster
thebodydoestricks · 23/04/2014 22:57

Anya agree.

OP posts:
MoominsAreScary · 23/04/2014 22:58

What do you mean by once labour has started myrtle

Kendodd · 23/04/2014 22:59

thebodydoestricks

Did I say any of those other things? No.

The reason I might want to lower that is just because 22 weeks is in a tiny number of cases viable and viability is my line. Although 24 weeks is the time medical intervention is more commonly used and even then outcomes are very very poor. I would also argue raising this to 26 weeks before major interventions to save the baby.

gordyslovesheep · 23/04/2014 23:02

I often think people get confused by the term 'social' in this case it doesn't mean 'so you can go out socialising' 'social' can mean separation, homelessness, being beaten by your partner, going to jail, partner going to jail, job loss, illness in other children/family members, etc

TheBabyFacedAssassin · 23/04/2014 23:02

Thanks namechange. We could potentially have travelled to the mainland to have the procedure performed but I felt that leaving my family, friends and familiar surroundings behind to go to a strange place would have been more than I could cope with. With my current situation I am familiar with my local hospital and see my consultant often which makes the experience less traumatic. Early induction is not a massive possibility again because of the threat I mentioned earlier about investigations into still births and threat of criminal implication for the doctors concerned. Might poss get induced at 37 wks though.

Am off to bed now, have a scan tomorrow first thing at the antenatal unit. Oh here's a fun fact, I get to sit in the antenatal unit waiting area surrounded by all 'normal' pregnant women, that's not cruel at all, huh?