Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

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 · 09/09/2017 10:41

But I may have been murdered or seriously assaulted if I hadn't had the abortion

You were intimidated in to having an abortion.

So just those silly women who think they don't want a baby but really they do, they will be damaged for the rest of their lives if they abort

I don't regret it but it has affected my mental health

Hmm
LairyMcClary · 09/09/2017 10:42

Why are you suggesting it's wrong to say someone needs psychological support?

Because it is wrong. They are just as likely not to need any support at all.

LairyMcClary · 09/09/2017 10:43

But for a lot of us, it's not a decision to be taken lightly, as it is a potential life

But that only matters when it is you personally making the decision. Your opinion on it makes no difference when it is my decision.

CardsforKittens · 09/09/2017 10:44

I don't often find myself in discussions about abortion so I'm not deeply familiar with all the perspectives... and I've seen something here which I haven't seen before: some posters say (if I understood right) that they're pro life and wouldn't have an abortion except for medical reasons. Did I misunderstand something? Isn't the exception for medical reasons a pro-choice position?

So I wonder: which medical reasons qualify, which don't, would a mother's mental health condition be a reason, etc...

Or maybe I completely misunderstood?

CecilyP · 09/09/2017 10:47

It's actually about making sure the woman has adequate support following or before an abortion from a mental health perspective. To suggest everyone walks away after a late period feeling fine is lunacy. We all respond in very different ways to different situations and I can assure you there Is nothing wrong with being mentally unwell.

This is so ridiculous, I don't now where to start. So a woman, already stressed by an unwanted pregnancy, has to face the additional stress of waiting for an appointment with a semi-judicial tribunal. Then has to prepare her case for the panel to try to make it convincing enough. Then has to wait for their verdicts to reach her, while all the while the weeks are ticking by. And you seriously think this is going to be good for her mental health?

AndNoneForGretchenWieners · 09/09/2017 10:54

mumof56 yes I was intimidated into having an abortion. However, I don't regret it in hindsight because I don't have any ties to that bastard now. It has wrecked my mental health partly because I now can't have any more children (unrelated to the abortion) and partly because I still find it hard to accept that that was my life. It might sound contradictory but it really isn't. I was not capable of giving a baby a good home or life. I don't share your views that abortion is a response to a disposable society. Sometimes it is the least worst option. In my case, it was. At the time I may not have seen that but then I was young, infatuated and being abused.

ARumWithAView · 09/09/2017 10:56

I believe and would like it if you had to go before a panel in order to obtain the rights to have an abortion. The panel should include a mother who has had one, a couple who can't conceive, a doctor, a nurse and maybe some sort of mental health expert? I will probably get an absolute flaming for this but I just feel that many people use them as contraception or a safety net for not having safe sex.

This was mowgeli, right? Then some clarification that rape victims will be exempt from the jury, because it's about deciding whether you have a 'genuine' reason for needing the abortion, or if you're just being irresponsible.

Twenty pages later, it's now actually about making sure the woman has adequate support following or before an abortion from a mental health perspective.

That's less a misrepresentation of what you said and more an outright lie. If you're going to air extremist views, why not a) have the intelligence to back them up (with something better than essentially 'it was just an idea, I dunno'), and b) have the guts to stand by them, instead of whinging that people are being 'bolshy', completely rewriting what you said, and then flouncing (for the 2nd time this thread, IIRC).

Mittens1969 · 09/09/2017 11:20

People are desperate to hear from mowgeli, but you're not going to because she isn't coming back! She made her outrageous comment and ran away. So you may as well forget her suggestion of a panel, it was just one poster's stupid comment.

Mittens1969 · 09/09/2017 11:24

Sorry, you're back again, I see now, mowgeli. Well yes, you are entitled to your opinion.

But speaking as a woman who is infertile, the idea of being the on such a panel would be utterly repulsive. Why the hell would I want to discuss the decisions. of someone wholly unconnected with me?

KatherinaMinola · 09/09/2017 11:24

Nobody is being shredded. Their points calmly refuted but definitely no shredding going on.

There have been a lot of rude comments which don't fall into the category of calm refutation. I'm thinking of this sort of thing (directed at everyone who ventures to suggest that a foetus might at some point have personhood):

"Assorted wierd women and men championing the rights of the foetus and forced birth most probably tories voting for welfare cuts."

I think the person who suggested the panel has now realized that it's a ghastly idea - which is the point of having a debate, surely? So that people can listen to counter-arguments and either shift or reaffirm their own position. So I don't think this kind of hounding is helpful:

"If you're going to air extremist views, why not a) have the intelligence to back them up (with something better than essentially 'it was just an idea, I dunno'), and b) have the guts to stand by them, instead of whinging that people are being 'bolshy', completely rewriting what you said, and then flouncing"

lylasmam2012 · 09/09/2017 11:26

lylasmam2012 or on the other hand look at my post and do you think being accused of bringing down the gene pool if you won't have an abortion or a doctor telling you that you have to have the triple or amnio completely ignoring choice. Choice is fine for a lot of pro choice people as long as it is the choice they approve of. Neithr side is perfect.

Those people aren't pro-choice. Pro-choice people support everyone no matter what choice they make. If someone said that to you, they are disgusting and they are not pro-choice.

Uokbing · 09/09/2017 11:36

The thing about many so called 'pro lifers' is that they are in fact not pro life at all, only when it will affect a woman and keep her down.

So if we take our friend Jacob Rees-Mogg for instance. He bleats on about 'the sanctity of life' but he gives not one shit about the lives of refugees or poor people. He says that life should be preserved at any cost, but is perfectly happy to watch the NHS go down the shifter.

Or in America Mike Pence and his ilk. Women shouldn't terminate a 7 week old bunch of cells because it's murder, but primary school kids being slaughtered in their classrooms is just unfortunate collateral for the right to bear arms, a right which must be preserved at any cost.

Or the nuns in Tuam, who forced women to have babies they often didn't want because 'abortion is murder's but who then chucked the bodies of those poor neglected babies into a mass grave.

Obviously I know there are people out there who are anti abortion and who are consistent with their beliefs about 'the sanctity of life' but many of these people are just steaming piles of hypocrisy.

Uokbing · 09/09/2017 11:39

It's all part of our disposable throw away society.

You think abortion is a new thing?

Ah, bless you!

KatherinaMinola · 09/09/2017 11:40

I think pro-choicers might make their ideas more appealing and be greeted more sympathetically if added to their comments was the point that unwanted pregnancies are a sad thing and that minimising the quantity of them through education is important

I think some people do take that view, but some don't.

Until the early 1990s or so I thought that pro-choice meant that you would support the idea that somebody could fall pregnant accidentally, find out that she was pregnant, and decide to get an abortion - all of which I could get on board with. Then I realized that the absolute pro-choice position is that women should be able to terminate the pregnancy (with the death of foetus) at any point up until birth, for any reason whatsoever.

There's one newspaper feminist (it might be Caitlin Moran) who says that we should never talk about abortion in terms of regret - it is an entirely neutral decision like going to the dentist and should be referred to in those terms (I'm paraphrasing a bit). I think for some people that is the position - and it is a logical position. So they will not talk about abortion as a "necessary evil" because that isn't how they see it.

I think everyone on this thread accepts that it's necessary for society that abortion should be available (we disagree about the details).

I think everyone on this thread also thinks of it as a "necessary evil" rather than a positive boon / trip to the dentist.

LairyMcClary · 09/09/2017 11:43

I think pro-choicers might make their ideas more appealing and be greeted more sympathetically if added to their comments was the point that unwanted pregnancies are a sad thing and that minimising the quantity of them through education is important

Maybe they are crediting you with the intelligence to realise that is a given, since it is so patently obvious?

KatherinaMinola · 09/09/2017 11:53

But Lairy, as I've said above, that isn't a given. I think it's what everyone on this particular thread believes, but there are people who don't think that at all.

LairyMcClary · 09/09/2017 11:55

You're telling me that there are pro-choicers who DON'T think unwanted pregnancies are a "sad thing" and think there should be less of them?

I call bullshit, I'm afraid.

ARumWithAView · 09/09/2017 11:59

I think the person who suggested the panel has now realized that it's a ghastly idea - which is the point of having a debate, surely?

She really hasn't, that I can see. Pretending you said something different (in this case, that your suggested panel/jury would be about supporting women's reproductive choices, rather than judging and limiting them) is not the same as retracting or reconsidering them.

I think if someone says something repulsive and extreme (especially with regards to the human rights of one particular group and the ways in which their behaviour should be supervised), it's very dangerous to react in a measured 'oh: that's an interesting idea, why don't you tell us more about that, if you're happy to?'. This is exactly how extremist positions merge slowly into mainstream discussion and lose their ability to shock.

And we should be shocked. To say, in all seriousness, that a childless couple and a panel of other selected social representatives should judge an individual's 'genuine' right to an abortion or not is a profoundly regressive suggestion; a sort of combination Puritan/tribal approach to women's reproductive health and women's sexual behaviour, not all that far off public examination of wedding-night sheets and scarlet letters.

MaisyPops · 09/09/2017 12:00

I think pro-choicers might make their ideas more appealing and be greeted more sympathetically if added to their comments was the point that unwanted pregnancies are a sad thing and that minimising the quantity of them through education is important
I think it's sad that abortion is required. I don't think anyone who is pro choice thinks abortions are the best thing on earth and everyone should use them as a convenient form of contraception.

But I won't make sweeping comments about how ending an unwanted pregnancy is tragic or anything.For some women it's a decision they agonised over, for others it's a 'i do not wish to be pregnant do I'll go to the Dr and get a couple of tablets'.

I don't think it's for anyone to tell a woman whether her feelings over the situation are 'right'.

I also don't think those of us who are pro choice should waste our time trying to appease anti-choice individuals by presenting it sympathetically/altering our views to pander to their world view (e.g. oh yes it's so terrible, a mother is feeling like she needs to end the life of her baby etc).

And this is from someone who is personally pro life and yet still pro choice because it's not my place to impose my personal views on others.

streetface · 09/09/2017 12:12

I've decided to share my experience as I am going through it right now. I am sharing it mainly as a reaction to the 'jury' idea and the 'sexual practice responsibility' posts but also because it gives examples of how women's choices do not happen in a vacuum, well before the point of conception.

I have just turned 40. I have three children including a 2 year old. I considered myself 'done'. All pregnancies were planned and carefully thought out. I have recently discovered I am pregnant, but too far along to do anything about it.

Before that my husband was booked in for a vasectomy. As females, any form of temporary contraception (aside from condoms) is down to us. The medical profession has ensured that we are required to fill our bodies with hormones that change our moods, alter our weight, increase our risk of cancer, reduce our bone density or make our periods irregular if we wish to protect ourselves from pregnancy. The onus is largely on us.

If we opt out of this and our men take responsibility and this fails, the government punishes us by ensuring the morning after pill is prohibitively expensive so as not to 'encourage us' to use it as a form of contraception. I was astounded to be asked for something like £25 to access emergency contraception the following day and as I didn't have it on me I decided to return a couple of days later. As it happens I came on my period. So that was a relief then.

Except it wasn't.

I went to my doctors to discuss my 'heavy period'. I was booked in for a scan as it had continued for several weeks. Government cuts ensured this scan was canceled due to 'understaffing' and rescheduled.

When the medication I was taking in the meantime did not reduce the bleeding and my belly started 'showing' I took a pregnancy test. It was positive. Had I not taken the test I would have waited for my revised scan date I would have discovered my pregnancy at around 25 weeks when. As It happens I found out at 17 weeks.

I would not choose abortion at this stage, I saw the fully formed baby and felt her kick. It's too late. Yes, I chose to make love to my husband. Should I be 'punished' for being irresponsible as he, not me, chose the contraception method that failed? Should I be forced to sit in front of a 'jury' and discuss the intimate details of my sexual activity that night? Feel the shame of telling strangers that I couldn't get twenty five quid together for a couple of days? Explain to random people in a room how I mistook a subchorionic haematoma for a period as I burn with shame?

Had I found out sooner I would have aborted. Should I have waited for the 'jury' to decide meaning that for me, personally, every week that passed would mean the decision would be increasingly difficult?

It was my decision to have sex. It was not my decision that emergency contraception should be made expensive to punish us silly wimmins for daring to have sex. It is not my choice that most contraception has shitty side effects. It was not my decision to cut NHS funding so I was forced to wait to find out for my scan.

It is not my decision that only women who are raped are deemed to be 'deserving' of tax credits for a fourth child and that support will not be available for my family now. It is not my choice that women who have as many children as me and claim financial support will be judged 'should have kept her legs shut the scrounger' or, when I go back to work full time instead I will be judged in terms of 'why have a baby just to palm it off onto someone else to raise it'.

My husband will not face any of these criticisms. They will be my cross to bear, whatever I decide. Who will suffer because I am having this baby? My children who will either now suffer financially or emotionally because I am never around since I will have to increase my hours to full time and with so many children I won't be able to sit with each of them and give the time they need from me when I get in from work.

The points I am trying to make are: a decision about whether or not to keep a baby has far wider reaching implications than the fetus or mothers rights. The ability to make decisions over our bodies are influenced by government policy. Females are judged every, damn step of the way. Having autonomy over our bodies in the event of a pregnancy is the last decision that is ours and ours alone. The thought of having to face more moral judgment about our choice from people who may or may not fully understand the wider societal influences that have led to that point is utterly abhorrent and humiliating. There is so much that needs to be considered, not just the fetus and the baby, but other children in the family and people's attitudes to the welfare state and women's place in the workforce.

You can't have pro-life advocates, for example, who are massively against the welfare state.

I am sorry if this is a bit long or a bit deep but there is so much to consider and so many forces working against pregnant women that it can ONLY be her who makes a decision as it will be her who has to face it all. My husband is lovely and supportive but his life, his job and attitudes toward him will remain the same. My life, my career choices, my children and societies attitudes toward me will all change. Nobody but me can fully understand the impact of that.

KatherinaMinola · 09/09/2017 12:16

Rum I agree that we should hold the line against extremist ideas - but I think in this case somebody had a stupid idea, voiced it, realized it was stupid and changed her mind and then felt a bit defensive/silly when everyone piled in on her.

You're telling me that there are pro-choicers who DON'T think unwanted pregnancies are a "sad thing" and think there should be less of them?

I call bullshit, I'm afraid.

Lairy, I have no reason to bullshit you. I actually don't have very fixed views on this topic and in any case I am not the sort of person to invent things in order to press a point. There are people who who think as I outlined - I have encountered many of them (starting with when I went to university). I can't remember the very prominent feminist who talks like this - it might be CM in How to Be a Woman (I've given away my copy so can't check).

Sequence · 09/09/2017 12:17

Supporting a woman's right to choice should not have to be "appealing" enough to be "greeted sympathetically". Women get to choose because it's right they have autonomy over their own bodies, not depending on how emotional and sad they appear to be in front of anti-choicers.

KatherinaMinola · 09/09/2017 12:20

That's not the point Chocolate was making, Sequence.

Elendon · 09/09/2017 12:26

I think everyone on this thread also thinks of it as a "necessary evil" rather than a positive boon / trip to the dentist

I don't think termination of a pregnancy is a 'necessary evil'.

Elendon · 09/09/2017 12:29

Most people would advise some form of counselling or discussion for those considering abortion

Counselling should be available, but not mandatory.