Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To be frustrated that it's impossible to have a discussion on abortion ethics....

999 replies

coconuttella · 06/09/2017 19:54

On one side there's those who believe an embryo has fully human rights from conception, and on the other those who believe the foetus has no rights at all until birth.

Both sides seem to put forward their position forcefully and dogmatically as though they're stating the obvious, and anyone who thinks the ethics surrounding it may be a more complex is shouted down, especially by some on the pro-chioice side who seem to view anyone who doesn't agree with their stance as a misogynistic slave of the patriarchy.

Personally, I'm not in either camp and find the ethical questions complex, with this being brought home the other evening when I was reading that Incas didn't regard babies and toddler as having human status until the age of 3-4 (where they had a ceremony to mark this rite of passage) and no longer totally dependent on their mothers and past the most perilous time wrt child mortality. It made me question again my thoughts on when we should a human should acquire rights, and frustrated me that any discussion on this immediately degenerates into a slanging match.

OP posts:
Mumof56 · 07/09/2017 18:00

sigh but 39 week abortions of healthy foetuses DOESN'T HAPPEN

Sarah Catt aborted her baby at 40 weeks
www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/12/appeal-jail-term-woman-aborted-baby-40-weeks

It doesn't happen in clinics or hospitals because the LAW prevents it.

Elendon · 07/09/2017 18:06

I don't believe a mother should have complete unfettered rights to an abortion up to term as I believe a viable foetus should have rights that the mother's right don't automatically trump. In this regard I'm pretty consistent with the law of the land.

A person isn't a mother until they have that baby in their arms though. You are not a mother if pregnant with your first child. Some women give birth to dead babies. More women give birth to dead babies than abort late. Can you not think about this? What sort of person wouldn't have sympathy for all pregnant women, regardless?

Plus law of what land? What are you talking about?

You are clear that women only have certain rights when it comes to abortion. Are women humans?

Mittens1969 · 07/09/2017 18:11

What I don't understand is why she didn't seek a termination earlier? She knew of her pregnancy in time to do that. It can be kept confidential.

Why would she put herself through that trauma? So sad, what she did was horrible but the sentence is way too harsh.

Elendon · 07/09/2017 18:15

But it's like saying why did you have children with this man?

Elendon · 07/09/2017 18:21

It's a bit victim blaming to question the motives.

I also knew someone who's long wanted baby died at 15 weeks. She refused all treatment and in the end had to be admitted to hospital under an emergency mental health act in order to save her life.

She since gave birth to a live baby and is now a happy and loving mother.

Mittens1969 · 07/09/2017 18:22

True, I'm not really expecting an answer. But sometimes details like this do come out in court.

I would have understood it if she didn't know that she was pregnant before 24 weeks.

GreatFuckability · 07/09/2017 18:40

Sarah Catt aborted her baby at 40 weeks
www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/12/appeal-jail-term-woman-aborted-baby-40-weeks

She is one woman. and, it seems, a woman with issues.

It doesn't happen in clinics or hospitals because the LAW prevents it

i know the law prevents it, however given that most women who terminate do it very early, its safe to assume that few women would choose this option if they had the choice. personally speaking, i think they should be allowed. the law doesn't however and that is what it is.

lylasmam2012 · 07/09/2017 18:50

It should be available for those extreme circumstances, an example a 12 year old who had no idea she was pregnant until it was too late and to go through with the rest of the pregnancy and childbirth would have serious repercussions on her mental health.

For the 14 year old girl who is suicidal and has sought help too late.

You don't have to agree with it, nobody is asking you too, but setting limitations throw these people under the bus all because people think that women might abuse it, when really that can't ever happen.

MrsHathaway · 07/09/2017 18:51

When you're discussing abortion you're discussing several issues at once; hence most abortion debates are talking at cross purposes and frustrating all parties.

One aspect is legality. There are currently around 190,000 abortions in England and Wales per year (total population 56m). International statistics suggest that the number of abortions in a country doesn't depend on the legality there, although your chances of surviving do, as does female life expectancy more generally. Assisted suicide is currently illegal in the UK; if the illicit cases reached 3 cases per 1000 population per year, it's very likely it would get serious parliamentary debate time and at the very least some concessions and permitted circumstances.

You don't have to approve of a thing (eg smoking) to recognise that restricted legality of it could be a good idea. When abortions are legal, they are more likely to be sought early, and it should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that a 6w abortion is better for all parties than a 26w abortion. The neural column isn't closed at 6w, and the cervix doesn't need to dilate to let such a foetus through. This is the kind of thinking that keeps smoking legal but restricts sales to over 18s and in plain packaging behind closed cabinets.

Legality is a completely separate debate from ideas of morality, and separate again from philosophy.

Currently, artificially ending a pregnancy before around halfway through necessarily results in the death of the foetus. A woman who wants an abortion other than TFMR* is primarily concerned about the pregnancy, not the foetus. If science could transplant the foetus to another host or incubator or suspended animation of some kind to save for later, termination of pregnancy wouldn't mean termination of life. The only arguments against abortion which hold any water are those based on ending a life; if abortion didn't do that, there would remain no sane objection to it.

So abortion debates hinge on whether a woman's rights over her own body (the pregnancy) are more important than those of a not-yet-legal-person (the foetus). Currently, legally, a human becomes a legal entity at birth and ceases to be one at death - this is why the precise time of birth and death are so carefully recorded. Having a clear line is important for clarity and certainty. Changing the definition of legal personhood would have implications far beyond abortion, so although culturally there are varied grey areas, legally there are not.

And once you have established that question, there are two logical options. Either the legal person has greater rights, in which case her right to an abortion trumps the foetus's right to incubation and delivery, or the legal person has LESSER rights under law, which sets horrible precedent. We believe in equal rights for all humans nowadays, and the latter option is dangerously at odds with that. The law must uphold the notion that a legal person has rights to his or her own body which cannot be trumped by anybody else's rights. Our laws on assault including sexual assault rely on this first principle.

Nobody in the history of the world ever decided to get pregnant so they could have an abortion. Never ever. In debates the options are often presented as "don't get pregnant" v "have an abortion" whereas it's far too late. It's "stay pregnant" or "don't stay pregnant", and being pregnant is actually kind of a big deal physically and mentally, even if you want to be. It's far closer to the debates around programming self-driving cars, and whether they should be taught to sacrifice their passengers or bystanders when they judge there is no non-fatal way out.

Incidentally, contraception options are better in the UK than they have ever been. But there's an awful lot of sexually active people in the UK - even if we guess at a third of the population having straight sex that means 333 per thousand population, so 3.3 abortions per year per thousand population looks bloody close to the expected contraception failure rate, ie pretty bloody low.

Yes, morally, when you perform a termination of pregnancy you are ending a human life, albeit not a legal one. I can see why that's a huge deal for people - it's a massive deal for me too and I am daily thankful it's a decision I've never even had to consider. It just isn't as big a deal for me as maintaining the legal personhood of every woman on the planet.

LairyMcClary · 07/09/2017 18:52

I think people like to pretend it's complicated and nuanced, when its not. Abortion rights are human rights; as early as possible, as late as necessary, no barriers of any kind is the only logical standpoint.

coconuttella · 07/09/2017 18:55

Elendon

  1. I accept mother may arguably not be the correct term, but it's irrelevant to my point. I'm happy I substitute for mother for woman

  2. I've no idea how you jump to the conclusion I have no compassion for women who have stillbirths based on what I wrote! I'm just arguing that the unborn child's rights need to be considered rather than completely ignored. I'm not even sure the extent of what these rights. I'm just uncomfortable with automatically assuming they have none.

3). The law of the land recognises that abortion is a complex issue with regards to the competing rights of the evolving foetus and the mother..... hence the 24 week limit on abortions (with certain exceptions).

  1. Of course women are humans with human rights. The question is to what extent foetuses should be regarded as having human rights too. Again, I don't know the answer, but I don't think we can blithely assume they have none.
OP posts:
MrsHathaway · 07/09/2017 18:59

Oh yeah.

  • TFMR is a completely separate argument. "Incompatible with life" v "life limiting" v "disability".
coconuttella · 07/09/2017 19:08

It should be available for those extreme circumstances, an example a 12 year old who had no idea she was pregnant until it was too late and to go through with the rest of the pregnancy and childbirth would have serious repercussions on her mental health.

I accept that in those circumstances a late abortion may be the least worst option.

OP posts:
lylasmam2012 · 07/09/2017 19:10

And I can say hand on heart that it's all the we mean when we say "as late as necessary"

Motheroffourdragons · 07/09/2017 19:16

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

Lovingmybear2 · 07/09/2017 19:21

again I am only talking about bodily autonomy for a pregnant woman

Ffs!!!! Not a rape suspect or a drunk driver or a dead organ doner or a sick child!!!

A pregnant woman is in a unique position she's not actually a criminal in this country,,, yet

Elendon · 07/09/2017 19:21

The law of the land

What law of what land though? The rest of that point you are making is useless. Not all women in the UK of GB and Northern Ireland have the same laws, notwithstanding the Isle of Man.

Elendon · 07/09/2017 19:25

I don't think we can blithely assume

That is emotive and unnecessary in this discussion. No one is being blithe or assuming anything.

Think again.

Lovingmybear2 · 07/09/2017 19:28

And sorry but all those agonising about the foetus! Look I had 5 babies, I love my babies now adults but I don't want to adopt or foster a baby that another woman was forced to give birth to.

Unless you do, unless you are really comfortable with hundreds more babies left in the care of the state, and we all know the outcomes of many looked after kids, then stop agonising and pontificating and put your names down to foster or adopt!

Unless you are willing to have one of these unwanted babies into your home, if you are truly happy at forcing women to give birth when they would rather abort then you better be there to pick up the piecea.

The actual practical pieces in hundreds more unwanted children.

Chestervase1 · 07/09/2017 19:33

Itsbetterthsnabox yes organs have to be taken from living people. Please research.

Lovingmybear2 · 07/09/2017 19:33

And one woman aborts her baby herself at 40 weeks. One woman.

Jesus Christ it's hardly an issue that hundreds of women will be demanding abortions at 40 weeks is it?

BertrandRussell · 07/09/2017 19:34

"I accept that in those circumstances a late abortion may be the least worst option."

Nobody thinks that abortion, particularly late abortion, is anything but the least worst option.

user1469567950 · 07/09/2017 19:36

In relation to the point about "personhood" being status achieved at birth, here is Ireland's constitution:

"The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right."

Major campaign underway to remove this from the constitution. And of course, in a typical Irish fashion, it is not illegal to travel to another country for abortion - so in effect we take the "moral high ground" with the constitution but then export the problem.

PurpleDaisies · 07/09/2017 19:36

yes organs have to be taken from living people. Please research.

Only living in a technical sense. People have to be declared brain dead first. That's effectively dead.

Your position is totally bizarre.

Elendon · 07/09/2017 19:41

19 year old teenager jailed for 30 years after miscarriage. Her pregnancy was a result of rape.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world-0/el-salvador-abortion-case-raped-woman-jailed-miscarriage-evelyn-beatriz-hern-ndez-cruz-prison-a7827891.html