Vestal ..... ahhhh, I see what you mean now.
I've been a tad concerned for some time that there are "forces" in Britain that are trying to import a US-style abortion debate into the UK. I've also noticed that the British alt-right and MRA movement has developed a particularly hard line.
And it concerns me a lot because I see dodgy statistics and facts, or information from sources with significant bias, starting to filter into the debate in this country.
For example, when I started doing my research into my condition, I contacted a number of US research specialists in the area and they were extremely helpful. But what became apparent was that some of their attitudes were heavily influenced by their religious beliefs to the point where they were advocating clinical measures that, to my mind, were actually cruel in terms of the level of intervention before the baby would inevitably die ... all in the name of avoiding a termination for medical reasons.
And it is these people who are influencing debate on abortion by saying that 22 weekers "survive". Well, erm, no they don't. Maybe one baby out of 100 born at 22 weeks survives with severe disabilities if they are born in a hospital with a very high tech NICU and specialists that have experience with micro-prem babies. That is not a win. And the rest of the babies they attempt to save, but do not make it (the 99%) in such units have a very short life of being isolated in a plastic box where they cannot be touched because their skin is so fragile with tubes and needles stuck in their very delicate limbs.
All in the name of "life is sacred." Well, how many "sacred lives" had to be a sole experience of suffering, just so these people could save the one percent of the babies born in their unit at that gestation?
And when you realise these are some of the dynamics coming into play into the abortion debate, you've got to question just what exactly is going on.
Again, we have 250,000 miscarriages and stillbirths in Britain every year (60,000 more losses than the number of terminations). Where is the debate about those "lost babies"? Who ever talks about that as a "genocide"? No-one, that who. Yet a significant number of those babies could be saved through fairly basic tests, scans or early inductions and ELCS, or just a better flow of medical information and potential procedures from specialist consultants to regional obstetricians. Yet who in the "life is sacred" camp campaigns about that?
So when you stand back and consider the entire picture, it does convince you that the real issue for many anti-abortion activists is women's agency. That's the bit they don't like. Otherwise, they'd all be running marathons to fund ultrasound scanners and miscarriage research programmes, instead of standing outside clinics waving placards.