Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Irish abortion laws

999 replies

crumpet · 23/05/2015 16:38

In all the publicity about the gay marriage referendum Aibu to wonder why there hasn't been mention of the abortion laws? Have I missed discussion on this?

OP posts:
Alisvolatpropiis · 30/05/2015 13:07

Um...no.

Also I've never said I support abortion to term (although it is in fact legal in the UK, for medical reasons), I suggest you don't make things up in an attempt to strengthen your straw man arguments.

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 13:28

Ok, then why are you trying to answer for people who do support abortion to term?

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 13:28

For any reason.

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 15:08

You are aware that 90% of abortions happen in the first 12 weeks- and you are stopping those as well. 2% happen after 20 weeks. There are foetal abnormalities that are not detectable until 18-20 weeks, and health problems for the mother that do not arise til later on in pregnancy.

Nobody is happy with the idea of late abortion- but there are times when it is necessary. And hard cases make bad law.

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 15:15

Bert, we're talking about it because people say that they support the idea of abortion being legal to term for any reason. It's trying to understand people's reason for supporting this idea when it doesn't seem to be coming from the 'woman's right to bodily autonomy' angle because at that stage of the pregnancy the woman doesn't need to terminate to end her pregnancy.

You're actually well aware of this and you're just trying to be goady. I'll just go back to ignoring you.

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 15:24

"You're actually well aware of this and you're just trying to be goady. I'll just go back to ignoring you."

I'm not being goady. I was trying to point out something you don't seem to grasp. The abortion debates particularly in Ireland where abortion rights are so restricted is not about the vanishingly small number of post 20 week abortions- it's about the 90% that take place before 12 weeks. There are always exceptions- where for whatever reason an abortion has to take place later. But they are exceptions. And provision always has to be made for exceptions. As, for example, a previously undetected abnormality,nor when a woman's mental or physical health couldn't deal with continuing the pregnancy. And while some 24 weekers do survive, very few survive unscathed. And to condemn a severely disabled baby to a life without loving parents seems to me to be inhumane in the extreme.

Incidentally, for the person who said that pro lifers were benefit bashers to accuse anyone else of being "goady" seems extraordinary...........

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 15:39

"the person who said that pro lifers were benefit bashers"

Strawman! Trying to be goady again.

The part you seem to be missing is that some people have said they support abortion to term so it makes sense to ask why they support this if it isn't to do with women's rights to bodily autonomy which is what they have previously cited as their reasons for supporting abortion.

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 15:47

""the person who said that pro lifers were benefit bashers"

Strawman! Trying to be goady again.

I'm not trying to be goady. I want to know what the connection between being pro life and being a benefit basher is- and you won't tell me.

And a woman's right to bodily autonomy doesn't automatically stop at 24 weeks gestation. She should still have to right to decide whether to continue to carry a child that will cause her physical or mental injuries or which has severe disabilities.

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 15:51

I can't tell you. I didn't say all pro-choicers were benefit bashers.

Yes, but post 24 weeks making the choice that she no longer wants to carry the child doesn't mean she has to terminate. So what is the reason for supporting termination until term if it isn't bodily autonomy?

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 15:58

Because bodily autonomy doesn't stop at 24 weeks.

Why did you make a connection between pro lifers and benefit bashers?

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 16:02

I didn't say it did stop at 24 weeks. It just isn't necessary for the foetus to be terminated at that point for the woman to have bodily autonomy so why specifically support termination?

I didn't make a connection between them, I mentioned that some people who claim to be pro-choice criticise the measures (financial support) that actually would allow women to have more choices. A bit hypocritical don't you think?

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 16:59

"I didn't make a connection between them, I mentioned that some people who claim to be pro-choice criticise the measures (financial support) that actually would allow women to have more choices. A bit hypocritical don't you think?"

Ah, so some, individual named people. Who you don't name- just insinuate. Very nasty.

And they people you claimed don't campaign for causes that support women? Are they individual named people as well?

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 17:04

The problem with talking about late abortions is that it is impossible to generalise. Obviously if there is a late diagnosed severe abnormality then the need for an abortion is clear. Or if the woman's health suddenly deteriorates.But the minute number of women who would want to abort a healthy foetus at this stage would each have a reason which I could have no idea about, and which would have to be dealt with on a case by case basis to get the best possible outcome for the woman concerned.

Now. Back to the legislation which prevents the 90% of abortions that happen in the first 12 weeks.

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 19:54

"so some, individual named people. Who you don't name- just insinuate."

No - another strawman argument. (Surprise surprise) I'm not insinuating anyone in particular in that post as well you know.

You still didn't answer why it specifically has to be termination when that's not necessary for bodily autonomy.

Bert's strategy on these threads - twist someone's post and goad them about it for the rest of the thread to avoid answering difficult questions/questions she doesn't want to answer.

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 20:15

"if there is a late diagnosed severe abnormality then the need for an abortion is clear. Or if the woman's health suddenly deteriorates"

In the case of the former we're again brought back to why we show more compassion for the foetus than a born baby/child.

In the latter, a deterioration in the mother's health that requires her to longer be pregnant at this point wouldn't necessarily require an abortion.

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 21:57

I really don't see what question I haven't answered. If a foetus has a condition incompatible with life then some people choose to carry on with the pregnancy and then let the baby die after birth- some people choose to intervene and abort. Neither option is better- just different. The point is that the mother should have the choice. I personally think the most compassionate choice is to abort, but I have no desire to impose my beliefs on others.

As for the tiny number of post 20 week abortions of healthy foetuses- I have no idea why a woman would choose this course. As I said- there aren't enough to generalise. But I trust the women concerned and their HCPs to know what is the best outcome for themselves. And if I have to choose between the life of a living woman with life experience and a family and sentience and a not yet born foetus, I woud choose the woman every time. Even though it's a crap decision we would all rather not have to make.

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 22:04

""so some, individual named people. Who you don't name- just insinuate."

No - another strawman argument. (Surprise surprise) I'm not insinuating anyone in particular in that post as well you know."

So if you're not saying that all pro lifers are benefit bashers, and you're not saying that a few named ones are- what are you saying?

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 22:08

Bert, "why it specifically has to be termination when that's not necessary for bodily autonomy."

I haven't mentioned or implied any names and I think you mean pro-choice.

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 22:22

Just in case you forgot your own words, bumbleymummy, - you said

"'m sorry but very few people campaigning for abortion rights are clamouring to help end these issues. In fact, you often find the same vehemently pro-choice people on benefit bashing threads!"

So if not named individuals, then who?

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 22:24

Do you know what 'named' means?

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 22:28

Heading off. I'll leave you with:

"Bert, "why it specifically has to be termination when that's not necessary for bodily autonomy.""

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 22:41

"
"Bert, "why it specifically has to be termination when that's not necessary for bodily autonomy."

I do feel I have answered this question several times. But I will try again. If we are talking about late abortions, there are so few that it is impossible to generalise. i have no idea why a woman would feel the need to abort a healthy foetus post 20 weeks. But I have to trust the woman concerned and her HCP that this is the best outcome for her. I have never met anyone as far as I know who has had an abortion later than 22 weeks, so I have no personal experience. But....as I said, hard cases make bad law. Which means that making law on the strength of a vanishingly small number of exceptional cases is massively damaging to the 98% of women who need to have abortions before 20 weeks.

bumbleymummy · 30/05/2015 23:57

No, you're talking about why a woman might want to end a pregnancy and that you don't want to judge her for that. You are not explaining why the pregnancy has to be ended specifically by termination - which is what the question is. Why support termination to term rather than supporting a woman's right to end a pregnancy until term?

SabrinnaOfDystopia · 31/05/2015 00:27

bumbley - having the baby adopted is an option open to women with unwanted pregnancies, but not one all women want to take.

If having a baby adopted was an option that she would consider, then I can't see why an induction at 24wks would be advisable. The chances of survival are approx 50%, intense medical care is needed, and there is a higher than average chance of disability.

You are trying to make an argument that past 24wks the woman's bodily autonomy ceases to exist - which is simply not one I agree with.

bumbleymummy · 31/05/2015 00:32

"You are trying to make an argument that past 24wks the woman's bodily autonomy ceases to exist "

No, I'm not. I'm saying that after 24 weeks it is possible for a woman to have bodily autonomy without having to terminate.