to be completely confused - pro/anti choice

[ScarletFever]

I have ALWAYS considered myself pro-choice

and then this - remember that person Josie who is on the daily mail a lot, with her nhs boob job etc who has made a career of annoying people... who said

"i would have aborted my baby if it meant i could go on Big Brother"

Right - so I was like "oh you evil cow" etc......, but then it was pointed out somewhere, if you are pro-choice, then what difference does it mean if her reason is crap?

So, how do i get my head around it being 'ok to abort a disabled child, or if you are not ready for children, or even it is the wrong time (re career) to have a child' but not ok to abort a child for a 'celebrity' reason??

In other words, I suppose what i'm saying is that once labour is induced, at the request of the mother, with a view to abort - parental responsibility is withdrawn.

So if someone with a healthy 25 week fetus has labour induced, then once that baby is born, it is treated as any other 25 weeker would be.

Which my understanding is on a case by case basis. Not automatically left with no treatment to die JUST because it's an abortion - once the baby's out, the mother loses the right to prevent treatment to allow the baby to die.

What an extreme my sick twisted punishment for the mother is that supposed to be.

And how different is it that the baby is aborted and dies in utero or has treatment witheld and dies on the outside.

So you have the 23 weeker that pulled through but is still reliant on 24 hour care because of a complication no one could forsee despite it looking good at first. A you going to give a home to this child?

90 - 65% of babies born at 23 week DON'T survive

so maybe you only force 10-35% of women to give birth - so it's fair

and of those most will then watch their baby die anyway - which is nice

WalkingInMemphis

What about a woman who cannot access abortion before then? Someone who can't afford to travel, has a controlling partner or thinks that they want the baby until then.

If you found out the person who made you pregnant wasn't who you thought, perhaps because they were under cover police, a con artist or you found out they had raped/murdered would it be fair to force a woman to continue a pregnancy under those circumstances?

I have no experience of late stage abortion but i dont think it involves inducing labour whilst the fetus is stil alive and then setting it aside to die. Does it? Surely that is completely unneccesary and unbelievably cruel to both mother and baby?

No it doesn't cats and although a woman still has to deliver the fetus the methods used can be different and for example there us much more pain relief options for the mother including general anaesthetic and the Drs aren't trying to weigh up the effect on the fetus v's the mother ad they do in a normal Labour. So stronger drugs can be used for the induction etc.

From memory, survival rates only go over 50/50 at 28w or something, although it's a steep curve from then on.

My understanding (from two friends who had tfmr, although we haven't spoken about it for ages) is that a "late " termination requires an injection into the fetus to stop the heart, then essentially an induced labour and delivery of the then-dead baby. Where the tfmr is because problems are incompatible with life, the first step may be omitted to allow the parents a few minutes with their baby.

Apologies if I have this wrong or if my terminology is upsetting.

I have sympathy for the position that "babies who could be born alive ought not to be killed and born dead" but I think the gestational cut-off for an otherwise healthy baby would be a lot later than the current 24w and is therefore moot.

I think it's very similar to the argument "people shouldn't have IVF when there are babies waiting for adoption". It reduces pregnancy, labour, delivery and recovery to a mere nothing, and any woman who has undergone any of those will tell you it's nonsense.

Cats - in some cases, yes I think it does...although probably very rarely.

I think in most cases where the mother has to give birth, the babies heart is stopped with medication before birth.

A you going to give a home to this child?

No...clearly not. Your point being I suppose 'what on Earth shall we do will all the newborns'. I don't think I really, really need to explain, do I?

What about a woman who cannot access abortion before then? Someone who can't afford to travel, has a controlling partner or thinks that they want the baby until then

So do you believe there should be no cut off at all for healthy foetuses? A 34 weeker who would die without only minimal oxygen etc after birth, but otherwise with an excellent chance at life? Really? If the mother has to go through birth anyway, why stop the heartbeat before birth? Why not just let the baby be born?

On that basis...what about when people give birth at 30 weeks without realising they're pregnant? And realise then that they don't want a baby? It's kind of a bit tough for them. Too late.

There will ALWAYS be a point where there is no longer a choice. Always. The only debate is what that point should be.

Yes as mrshathaway says sometimes in termination for medical reasons the baby may be delivered alive so the parents can spend some time with their baby.

Of course you need to explain. If hospitals are full of pre term babies the women wanted aborting then where are the ones who's parents have chosen to treat going to go.

And when drs save all these about to be aborted babies but they still have severe disabilities that mean foster placements or adoptive parents who can take care of them are extremely hard to find and they need some kind of care home, what's going to happen.

Or does that not matter because pro lifers cab pat themselves on a job well done and bugger the actual consequences of the decision.

I am one of those women who get pregnant at the drop of a hat and have had to go through two abortions in my late twenties whilst at university. The second time it was a result of a split condom and a failed morning after pill. I think about those babies a lot and whilst I know it was the right thing to do I am full of sadness. I have three lovely dc who were concieved when I was ready to be a mother. My mother too is very fertile fell pregnant accidently with me. Whilst she loved me very much
My childhood was very tough for various reasons and I vowed I would never do the same.

Your point being I suppose 'what on Earth shall we do will all the newborns'. I don't think I really, really need to explain, do I?

yes - because there is not exactly a huge line of people wanting to adopt children with disabilities or additional needs

^I don't even know how a late abortion takes place - at 25 weeks for instance. Isn't delivery necessary anyway?

If that is the case (no difference to the mum, physically - there's a point where she'll have to give birth/have a csec whether she wants to or not) then I think it's barbaric if the baby once delivered is then left to die.^

There is a BIG difference physically. With a late term abortion 1) the baby's heart is stopped before delivery and 2) the mother can have morphine and any other pain killer they want oh and 3) c section would not be used as there is no aim to protect the baby. Whereas with a live 25 week delivery both baby and mother go through the pain of delivery.

So if someone with a healthy 25 week fetus has labour induced, then once that baby is born, it is treated as any other 25 weeker would be.

Medically yes it would be treated as any other 25 weeker. But what about after that? 25 weekers usually have long term and often serious health issues/disabilities. Usually these babies have biological parents who desperately want them to survive and thrive and will do all they can for them. The babies you're talking about will not have biological parents who want them. Are we going to find adoptive parents for all these aborted 25 weekers, who are willing to take on the disabilities, health care requirements etc?

cross posted and agreed ghosty

That is why pro-life is really pro-birth isnt it? Bugger the kids once they are born.

Yes, yes, yes MrsDeVere. Pro lifers are saying it is more important that a child is born than that it is wanted.

Your post is ridiculous Giles, and you are deliberately ignoring things I've posted.

I'm not pro-life. I've already stated it.

Also 'all these' babies? Filling up the hospitals? What? Late term abortion is rare, which has been stated over and over. How many women do you think abort post 24 weeks?

My point is that I do not believe a potentially viable baby should have their heart stopped before birth. I believe that once labour and birth has taken place and the baby is independent of the mother, all babies should be treated the same, based on their individual gestation, health, possibility of survival with quality of life etc.

Regardless of if that born baby is a 25 week 'abortion' or a much wanted, 25 week pre-term birth.

Thanks for clarifying everyone. I knew it couldnt have been as barbaric as was being suggested.

Cats - I believe what normally happens is that the foetus is given an injection to stop the heart before labour is induced.

I think WalkingInMemphis's argument (which I agree with), is that a woman has the right not to be pregnant. When the foetus can't survive outside the womb, exercising that right automatically results in the termination of the foetus as well as the pregnancy. In late term abortion, the process isn't automatic, so you don't need to terminate the foetus in order to terminate the pregnancy.

Those who support abortion to term are arguing that the woman has a right not to give birth to a live infant (I think the foetus becomes an infant at birth technically so this is not meant to be an emotive word) in addition to her right not to continue with a pregnancy.

xpost

well if YOU believe that memphis YOU never ever have to have a termination past 24 weeks

BUT just because YOU believe it doesn't mean you have the right to assume other women do or deny them their choice

your feelings are for YOU - the law is for everyone else and the law says it's legal

The only one ignoring anything is you.

because they have no parents. No one to sit by their bed sides. No one to train up to manage their very likely extreme disabilities preventing them from.ever living independently or quite possibly even knowing where they are or able to eat or drink without a tube. We are talking life long round the clock care needed by a baby who has no one. And yes they are very few of these late term abortions but you are talking months and months In a hospital. Of course that has an impact on beds when there are limited hospitals that deal with micro preemies.

Not to mention the poor mother. Who isn't some "slut" who should have known better and changed her mind at the last minute.

But likely someone who's circumstances suddenly changed and she was no longer able yo continue with the pregnancy or who went for a routine growth scan at 32 weeks and a huge issue suddenly became apparent.

Actually the law doesn't say its legal except in particular circumstances (eg significant disability)

Walking in 2012 there were 185,122 abortions in England and Wales. 0.1% of abortions after 24 weeks. So 185 abortions after 24 weeks, in one year. I assume the numbers would be similar every year.

You still haven't answered the question: who is going to look after these aborted 24+ weekers as they grow up? Bearing in mind the health problems they will likely have?

(I'm not even mentioning the enormous cost to the NHS of the months of NICU these babies would need).

the law says abortion is legal - that is the law and it's abortion being discussed

Of those 185 aborted after 24 weeks, the vast majority are aborted because they have a condition incompatible with life. Abortions for "social reasons" aren't available after 24 weeks.