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??

OP, I think it's fine to have ambivalent thoughts and feelings, but not to try to impose them on other people. I'm pro-choice because I trust women to make their own decisions based on their own reasons. I don't think they should have to justify themselves to third persons and go through a process where people will judge them worthy/not worthy.

I'm also pro-choice because I know abortion won't disappear if it's made difficult to access. Abortion's been around since ancient times and limiting it/making it illegal makes it unsafe for those women determined to terminate.

Where is this epidemic of unwanted babies in the UK?

You wont have those figures because we dont live in a society were women are able to say, let alone put on public record, that they didnt want their baby or that they wanted the first two but not the 3rd.

I have struggled with this.
My DD was prem so was in a neonatal unit. Next to her was a baby born at 22 weeks who had medical staff battling every day to try and keep her alive. Equally, a baby can be aborted at the same number of weeks. Both situations 100% dictated by the individual choice/wants/needs of the parents. It did not sit easy with me that's for sure.

"I have never understood those who say they are pro choice ..unless"

What about 'I am pro-choice although I personally cannot imagine seeking a non- medical late abortion or multiple abortions but I completely support the right of other women to do so'

Where does that put me as I don't seem to fit neatly into one of the categories you mention?

But of course it's a grey area. Because at the moment we can still say we are "pro choice" but there are still boundaries to that choice.

People say it's about the woman's right to have autonomy over her own body, but fact is that the woman only has that right until 24 weeks, at which point she no longer has that choice - unless the baby has a disability, in which case she can terminate it up to term... but that's a whole different debate.

What people do with their own lives is up to them. How I choose to judge what people do with their lives is up to me. That goes for so many areas of our lives, surely?

It's not illegal to go out every night and drink yourself senseless, your body, your choice and all that. Doesn't mean that people in society don't judge people who do just that.

It's not illegal to use abortion as a form of birth control (and yes, 37% repeat abortions would imply that there are people out there who do exactly that) but ... y'know, their body, their choice and all that. Doesn't mean people don't judge. And yes, contraceptive failures happen. But I refuse to believe they are that high, in fact I read an article recently which suggests that women in their 30's have a very lax attitude to contraception and then claim "contraceptive failure" when they fall pregnant.

There is and should be, IMO, a middle ground between pro choice and pro life. Because it really isn't that simplistic.

Personally I see it as absolutely fine to say "I am pro-choice but it's not a decision I believe I could make." I know plenty of women who feel this.

Adding caveats about multiple abortions... I don't know, I find that a very difficult grey area. Say a woman had a termination at 16 because she was young and made a mistake. Say she had a termination at 25 because her contraceptive failed and she wasn't in a position to have a baby. Say she had a termination at 30 because she fell pregnant just months after having a baby and didn't feel she could go through a difficult pregnancy (lets imagine SPD, OC, HG, something like that) with a tiny baby at home.

Then she has another contraceptive failure at 35.

Should she then have to go through with that pregnancy just because she has already had several terminations?

The problem with pregnancies coming off the back of contraceptive failure is that you might have had one failure, moved to a different form of contraceptive, then eventually had a failure on that one as well... But you're still pregnant. You can't turn back time and make yourself unpregnant. You still have a difficult decisions to make about that pregnancy, regardless of what conversations go forward about further contraception.

I think you stop being pro choice when you would like to see women's access to abortion blocked because you don't agree with her reasons.

It's not illegal to use abortion as a form of birth control (and yes, 37% repeat abortions would imply that there are people out there who do exactly that)

That's what it is intended for.

cotherstone I don't think she should be prevented from having a termination, two/three/four terminations if that's what she wants. Doesn't mean people won't judge her for it though.

And this is where the grey area lies IMO.

I don't believe abortion should be illegal although I do believe it should be illegal after twelve weeks except in the case of severe disability which may not have been picked up until after that. and even that should IMO be illegal after 24 weeks...

But if you are using abortion as a form of contraception then yes, I would judge. Doesn't mean I don't think you have the right to that abortion.

I believe that abortion is wrong. I'm also pro-choice, because I'm old enough to understand that other people believe differently and I have no right to impose my belief on anyone else.

Contraception prevents conception. (It's in the name) abortion cant be used 'as a form of contraception' because conception has already occurred. Abortion is used to end a pregnancy.

so presumably you would be in favour of termination of all pregnancies up to term? and if not, why not?

Or perhaps some people would like to go back to the days when undesirable women had their children removed at birth and adopted to worthy couples?

What has children being removed from women who wanted them have to do with women who don't want children either having abortions or deciding to give them for adoption?? Bringing up horrible emotive events from the past that have no relevance doesn't convince me you have a valid point.

So people should continue their unwanted pregnancies in order to provide babies for others?

As previously stated, I am anti abortion. I think continuing an unwanted pregnancy and giving the baby up to parents who will love them is a better choice than having an abortion. It is what I would do in that situation. (I am not saying women should be compelled to do this, but it does seem the better choice to me. Obviously stopping the unwanted pregnancy happening in the first place is an even better choice).

*And anyway who said that there was an epidemic of unwanted babies?

There might be if we started restricting abortion.*

Have you even read the conversation you are jumping in to? I stated I was against restricting abortion, but I would prefer if we minimised the number of them as much as possible (and suggested methods). Another poster stated they didn't want to minimise abortions, because they would rather minimise 'unwanted babies', and I was simply pointing out there is no problem of unwanted babies, in fact the opposite true, and there are more people who want babies than have them.

Yes, some abortions will always happen. Keeping the numbers as low as possible seems a good thing to me. (Just like car accident deaths will happen, but we should fight to keep the numbers as low as possible).

The prevention of unwanted babies being born should be a far higher priority than making abortion numbers palatable to you.

That is how you feel, it is not how I feel. Preventing abortions (i.e. deaths on unborn children) is much higher priority to me than a mythical 'unwanted babies' problem that doesn't exist. Those babies are very much wanted.

giving the baby up to parents who will love them is a better choice than having an abortion.

Better for who?

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/319460/Abortion_Statistics__England_and_Wales_2013.pdf it's page 14???

Can someone tell me if am reading these stats right? As I am reading that 47% of 30-34 year olds have had more than one abortion? Closely followed by 45% of women over 35 and 44% of women aged 25-39

Sorry but these figures seems excessively high. It's saying that almost half of women aged 30-34 that had an abortion in 2013 have had one previously?

I feel very uncomfortable about the idea of abortion, I used to be staunchly prochoice but I look at my own kids now and think about all the stuff I read about development through the stages of pregnancy and I can't shake the thought that life begins at conception. However it's one of those things where there are competing and irreconcilable rights and I think, in the early stages of pregnancy at least, the woman's right to autonomy over her body has to take precedence. I think it's impossible to make a judgment about what is a good enough reason until you've walked in that person's shoes. I do feel profoundly sad for Josie Cunnigham's daughter though, because of her mother's decisions to make her thoughts so public that child will grow up knowing that her mum considered aborting her so she could go on Big Brother.

Those babies are very much wanted.

So why arent they being adopted? There are thousands of children in the UK in foster or care homes waiting to be adopted. Do you not realise this?