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.

In general Meerka, yes. But on a thread about dispelling myths, we can't let one person fill it up with myths and nonsense, can we?
It's an arsey job, but someone has to do it.

I do get very tired of the "why not just give the child up for adoption instead!" rhetoric.

Giving a child up for adoption is a good solution for someone who is happy to be pregnant and give birth but does not want to be a parent. Having a termination is a good solution for someone who does not want to be pregnant.

Or should I say possibly a good solution, in both cases.

Winter, I missed leedy's question because she had quoted you as part of her post.

I actually agree with the law in Ireland ( I realise that no one else here does). I think if anything is going to be changed/introduced it will most likely to be to allow abortion in cases of FFA and will be tightly regulated. I don't think the majority of people in Ireland want a law like the UK where it is pretty much 'abortion on demand'.

"It assumes if she doesn't want to have it, whether any one else does is immaterial. " is not the same as "I'd rather all children were wanted and cherished from the day they were born, which means women need to be able to not have children they don't want. "

Children can be wanted and cherished from the day they were born even if in your words 'she doesn't want to have it' .

Re 'myths and nonsense'. As pointed out earlier, you seem to be trying to dispel 'myths' that don't even exist eg. that everyone thinks women feel guilty for aborting.

"Having a termination is a good solution for someone who does not want to be pregnant."

Except it isn't good for the foetus whose life she is terminating which is why not everyone agrees that abortion is the 'solution' - two lives not one.

"I actually agree with the law in Ireland ( I realise that no one else here does)."

Thanks for answering. Would you continue to agree with the law if (purely hypothetically) the UK and the rest of Europe became magically inaccessible and all those women who go for terminations there resorted to dodgy backstreet measures here instead?

Because that's basically what the situation was in the US before Roe vs. Wade. It wasn't pretty.

Well, I don't agree with the 'dodgy backstreet abortions' either and I don't think all the women would resort to using them either.

Children can be wanted and cherished from the day they were born even if in your words 'she doesn't want to have it'

Yes, of course. But you are missing out a glaring fact: First you have to force the woman who doesn't want to have it to do so, don't you?

Well, I don't agree with the 'dodgy backstreet abortions' either and I don't think all the women would resort to using them either.

Of course they wouldn't. But isn't one too many?

Well that's the whole thing isn't it Winter - some people believe that every child deserves the right to be born, loved and cherished - even if the woman doesn't want it. They don't attribute the 'value' of your life to whether or not someone wants you.

One abortion is too many, yes.

That's not what I asked you (and obviously I don't agree with dodgy backstreet abortions either). I asked you would you still support our total ban if as a result women were having dodgy backstreet abortions. I'm not going to link to the article I read about pre-Roe US as it's horrific, but I'm sure you can imagine the gist.

And of course they would resort to dodgy backstreet abortions. They were doing so before abortion was legal in the UK, and they're continuing (in one sense) to do so in the form of abortion pills purchased illegally over the internet (which at least are probably what they think they're buying and are less dangerous than having an illegal surgical procedure). If it gets too late for pills, people will do desperate things if they can't "travel".

Your belief that if you make abortion inaccessible enough women will be "re-educated " into stopping desperately wanting to end unwanted pregnancies is bizarre. No, they will throw themselves down stairs. They will drink a bottle of gin and sit in a too-hot bath. They will take any tablets, visit any dodgy character who promises to sort out their problem.

Well that's the whole thing isn't it Winter - some people believe that every child deserves the right to be born, loved and cherished - even if the woman doesn't want it.

Yes, thats clear, thats your opinion. But what I am trying to get you to admit to is that your opinion means that you would force the woman who doesn't want it to have it. Because you believe thats more important.

If its your opinion, say so. Own it. If you're ok with women having no access to abortion, you're ok with women being forced to give birth when they would rather not, and to have children they don't want.

Yes or no, if you could, for clarity?

"One abortion is too many, yes."

So you don't actually see any difference between a safe, legal abortion and an abortion carried out by an unqualified practitioner that might cause the woman to bleed to death? (and before you mention it, YES LEGAL ABORTIONS HAVE RISKS TOO BUT THEY'RE NOT THAT HIGH) They're just abortions and hence equally evil? The effect on the woman is irrelevant?

I agree with Winter (and you) that not all women would resort to backstreet abortions. But enough would.

Well, I don't agree with the 'dodgy backstreet abortions' either and I don't thinkallthe women would resort to using them either.

Not all the women would resort to it but some would, out of desperation or necessity, and some of them will die. They'll die horribly, in pain, and those that don't die will risk serious legal consequences.

Lack of access to choices puts women on the back foot of society, it forces them to wear a public 'badge' of shame and places 100% of the burden of an unwanted pregnancy on their shoulders - look at this enormous bump, it's an unwanted baby that I'm having to carry because I'm a shameful slut who had sex. Handing the baby over to someone else removes none of the shame because 'normal' women don't abandon their children.

This is one of the articles I've read about pre-Roe abortion in the US (warning: at least one horrific picture)

www.motherjones.com/politics/2004/09/way-it-was

" a man who assisted in autopsies in a big urban hospital, starting in the mid-1950s, describes the many deaths from botched abortions that he saw. "The deaths stopped overnight in 1973." He never saw another in the 18 years before he retired. "That," he says, "ought to tell people something about keeping abortion legal.""

Leedy, what you're actually asking me to support is abortion. Regardless of whether it is performed legally or not it will still result in the termination of the foetus which is what I disagree with. I'm not coming at this from an 'I hate women so I want to make it harder for them to terminate' position (despite what some would have you believe) I'm coming at it from the - I think the foetus has a right to life and I think that should have priority over a woman's right to decide to end a pregnancy. What do you think I'm going to say here? Why do you think I'm going to change my mind?

Shall I post some links to photos of abortions? Partial birth abortions anyone? No? Just 'botched' abortion photos are acceptable?

I'm asking you would you support legal abortion if it prevented death and injury from illegal abortion. Obviously personally I don't just support legal abortion for that reason, but it is a pretty good reason, I think.

Have a look at that article. It's chilling.

Leedy, I do not support the termination of a life regardless ioc how it is done (unless, as said before, it's to save the woman's life and even then I think every attempt should be made to save both). You can't dress it up any way that's going make me think it's 'ok'.

bumbley I've seen plenty of pictures of abortions (and not the falsified ones that the vile people outside clinics wave about; actual pictures of them).

It has not changed how I feel about abortions one iota.

It's a photo of a woman who bled to death on a motel room floor, and the warning was because people might want to read the article (which is very interesting), not because I wanted to wave grisly death porn photos in people's faces like an anti-choicer.

And no, you shan't. Especially as most "pro-life" photos of abortions are of stillbirths or otherwise faked (eg ridiculously dated - THIS IS A 12 WEEK FOETUS).

"Leedy, I do not support the termination of a life regardless ioc how it is done (unless, as said before, it's to save the woman's life and even then I think every attempt should be made to save both). You can't dress it up any way that's going make me think it's 'ok'."

And there we have it. When push comes to shove, doesn't actually give a fuck about live, grown women.

Are you denying that partial birth abortions happened leedy?

Ok, I promised to myself I wouldn't engage more, but...

Do you not understand that the laws you support in Ireland are not "saving foetuses", or that the few foetuses they do save are counterbalanced by a significant number of women experiencing distress, injury, and (especially if we didn't have the escape valve of the UK/internet pills) dying as a result of the ban?

"Are you denying that partial birth abortions happened leedy?"

I'd deny that that's a medical term, I believe what you're looking for is intact dilation and extraction. It's a procedure only used in very extreme medical needs cases where they are trying to cause least injury and suffering to the woman.

I love that you're now just flinging around anti-choice tropes. Late term abortions! Do you want to see a picture of an abortion! Partial birth abortions! I'm waiting for you to tell me about a woman who had an abortion at 7 months to fit into her prom dress next.