To think there are a lot of misconceptions about terminating a pregnancy

[fiveacres]

Obviously, about abortion, which is a contentious issue for some.

I am approaching the third due date of the pregnancy I terminated in the autumn of 2011 at 9 weeks.

I was a very pious sort once, who believed that abortions were morally wrong. i admit that freely. I still do feel that the best option is not to be in that position in the first place.

However, although I do sometimes think about it, I don't regret it. I've been pregnant twice since so it hasn't affected my fertility.

I paid privately. I did not have any counselling - I was undecided when I went for the initial appointment but I have to say it was very much 'assumed' that I wanted to terminate. The record of the abortion is not in my medical file.

You don't have to give a reason, although they did press me to have the implant, which I refused. They did do a scan, which was a bit upsetting.

It did not hurt. I was warned I would bleed a lot but I didn't. My periods came back in 6 weeks.

You are in a room with a LOT of other women after the procedure, which is upsetting.

Other than that, I felt good after having it done, relieved, happy, mainly relieved.

I do have the odd flash of guilt. I wouldn't do it again.

But, I was reading another thread and it crossed my mind a lot of people do not really seem to know what having a termination is like. My experience may be typical or it may not be, I don't know, but it would be interesting to see what the experiences of others are to try to dispel or to address some of the myths that surround this difficult but sometimes necessary issue.

No, I've stated that I'm for abortion on demand up to term.

When do I think? I'm not sure thats any of your business, but since you ask so nicely I think life begins at birth. When it takes a breath on its own and is an independent, legally recognised person in its own right.
After all when we are asked how old we are, and therefore how long we have been alive, we all count from the day of our birth, don't we? It seems to be a societally accepted definition of what it means to be alive.

Thank fuck she's not writing the laws, eh?

Until the baby has been born and taken a breath (by itself or assisted) it is not recognised as a live person with its own legal rights.

I personally support abortion on demand until term, if necessary.

I'm 46 and would absolutely have an abortion if I got pregnant again. No regrets. I've never had one, have had 2 DCs, but I know that a 3rd child would totally wreck the family dynamics and I'd find it hard to cope. Plus from a medical POV it wouldn't be advisable for me to become pregnant anyway. I'm not risking my health.

Tonberry "I think winter is saying that legally it isn't recognised as a person until it's born."

We weren't talking about 'personhood' (legal) we were talking about 'life' (scientific)

" I've stated that I'm for abortion on demand up to term. "

Ok, so you recognise that it is termination of a life then? Seeing as after 24 weeks (and actually some babies have been born earlier and survived without severe disability) the foetus does not actually need "another body to do all of the important bits"?

So after the umbilical cord is cut then? Interesting opinion. Did you come to that conclusion after you made your mind up about supporting abortion to term?

This thread has been really interesting reading about the experiences and feelings of ALL women who have had abortions. All those experiences and feelings are valid and should be respected.

I think it's a real shame for it to turn into yet another round of the bumbley show.

Just to be clear - does that mean you support 'partial-birth' abortion?

Please stop appropriating my comments for your own uses. You might see a difference between "life" (scientific) and "personhood" (legal), I'm saying IMO they are one and the same thing. And I dispute that there is a scientific definition of life anyway, you certainly haven't provided an independently sourced one.

And no, I do not recognise that it is a termination of a life. I have very clearly stated the exact opposite.
You've brought in the 24 weeks, I did not. Just because a foetus might be capable of independent life, that makes no difference if it is not currently utilising that capability.
As I said, more than once, my cut off is BIRTH, whether that happens at 20, 24, 30 or 42 weeks.

Sorry, posted too soon.

I can see that women will feel differently after a ToP, as women will have had different experiences, and I don't see there should be a right or wrong way to feel. Each person's feelings are just that; their feelings, no one else's. None of us have any right to tell someone else how to feel.

In the past, I've seen a little commentary from the pro-choice debate that tries to treat a ToP as if it's something that can be shrugged off and forgotten.

But in general, most of the commentary I've seen about abortion has carried the very clear implication that to have an abortion, women must feel guilty and should wear sackcloth and ashes for the rest of their lives.

Neither extreme is right as each person, and therefore their experience, is different.

I'm trying to go through life accepting people and not judging them for feeling how they do about an issue like this. Their feelings are not mine to judge. Neither are their decisions about ToP.

I find it a mixture of fascinating and infuriating that any debate in Mumsnet about abortion ends up focussing on the vanishingly small number that are carried out after 20 weeks, and not the 90% that happen before 12 weeks. I suspect it is because those are the abortions that the anti choice brigade can get the most emotional milage out of.

When the people who believe in forced births step up and provide emotional and financial support to women for the first 18 years or so of a child's life is when I'll listen to their opinions.

Bumbley, don't take this the wrong way but for fucks' sake let it go. It is clear that no one hear agrees with you and no one is coming out in support of your statements.

You do know the statistics on babies born at 24 weeks, don't you? Very, very few hospitals will fight to 'save' babies born prior to 24 weeks because their chances of survival are so slim. Once 24 weeks is reached the chances of survival are still relatively low and, of those that do survive, there is a high chance of life long health problems. Some go on to thrive and do incredibly well, however many do not. Chucking around comments about viability and that fact that some (very few) born before 24 weeks survive does not change the statistics for the many.

Bertrand, thats because bumbley always steers them that way to suit her agenda. It's sad the way they use and abuse the real experiences of women who are often in desperate situations for their own ends. But what can we do but try and dispel the myths and give a clear and rational view from the other side?

" IMO they are one and the same thing"

Well you are, of course entitled to your opinion. Although I haven't come across a scientist who thinks life begins when the umbilical cord is cut.

"Just because a foetus might be capable of independent life, that makes no difference if it is not currently utilising that capability. "

But it is 'capable' of utilising that capacity. The woman is preventing it from doing so if she terminates at that point.

"most of the commentary I've seen about abortion has carried the very clear implication that to have an abortion, women must feel guilty and should wear sackcloth and ashes for the rest of their lives."

Really? Where?

Well Bert, as has been explained to you several times, it comes up because people often say that they support abortion to term for any reason ie beyond the current 24 week limit so it makes sense to discuss the implications of that and why they feel the way they do. I find it fascinating that despite this being pointed out to you so many times you still don't seem able to grasp such a simple point.

Tonberry, why on earth do you think I care whether someone agrees with me or not? Would you care if someone disagreed with you?

Exactly, Bertrand. I believe that it was around 1% of abortions in the last year that were carried out after 24 weeks, maybe even less than 1% (I will try to find a link to back this up). In these cases the pregnancy has usually been ended due to extreme circumstances such as health problems - bearing in mind that many conditions not compatible with life cannot be detected until the '20 week' foetal anomaly scan, (usually carried out between 18 and 22 weeks although sometimes later) - a drastic change in circumstances, or other reasons that are the business of no one except the woman having the termination and the staff treating her.

The majority of abortions in the UK are carried out in the first trimester with most of them taking place before eight weeks. At that point in the pregnancy the foetus is entirely unable to survive on its own, is incapable of feeling pain, and is most certainly not a person.

Would you care if someone disagreed with you?

I wouldn't keep droning on like a broken record when it was clear that my opinion was neither wanted nor accepted.

"In these cases the pregnancy has usually been ended due to extreme circumstances"

I also find it fascinating that people frequently forget that abortion is actually illegal after 24 weeks unless it is for a medical reason.

Although I haven't come across a scientist who thinks life begins when the umbilical cord is cut

And I haven't seen where you have linked to any scientific data whatsoever, so can we please disregard your opinions on what scientists think?

But it is 'capable' of utilising that capacity. The woman is preventing it from doing so if she terminates at that point.

No, it isn't capable of spontaneously leaving the host body and utilising that capability for independent life (which it generally does not have at that point, and never does without significant assistance replicating the host body)

Well I haven't actually given my 'opinion' as such on this thread. Just asked a few question and engaged in a few conversations about terminology.

And mental health is just as important as physical health. Mental harm is a medical reason.

I also find it fascinating that people frequently forget that abortion is actually illegal after 24 weeks unless it is for a medical reason

What makes you think anyone has forgotten that fact? The fact that we are stating we are for a different law indicates that we haven;t forgotten it at all.

...why on earth do you think I care whether someone agrees with me or not?

Well, your stance on this issue completely!relies with every woman and lawmaker in the world agreeing with you, so....?

Or, are you saying that your stance - forced pregnancy and birth - doesn't need people to agree with it, they just need to get on with it, in agreement or not.

Well I haven't actually given my 'opinion' as such on this thread. Just asked a few question and engaged in a few conversations about terminology.

You have, repeatedly. Please don't pull on the "I don't have opinions just questions" garb. Its insulting to yours and our intelligence. Its the same trick you try when arguing against vaccinations as you do when arguing against abortion.
Which is an odd bedfellow, you want unwanted babies to be born but then not protected from preventable diseases.

A quick google will set you right on all the scientfic opinions on when life begins. Good luck finding your 'umbilical cord' theory!

Why does it need to be spontaneous?

Why does the need for assistance determine the value of life? Some babies born at full term require assisatance - so do some adults for that matter.