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

[coconuttella]

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.

But @MamaOfTwos why should a child be punished for his father's sin? (I mean if they're the product of rape)
I genuinely don't know the answer to that one. But what happened if say a mother didn't realise she was pregnant (this things happen albeit rare) until third trimester and decided she wanted to abort because it was due to rape?

I honestly don't know the answer. It's highly unlikely to happen.

One poster said that women should be trusted to make a choice. I agree completely.

It's not as simple as that Mowgeli.

Okay so you say this foetus deserves life, but what standard of life will a foetus born to a mother who doesn't want it have? If she is considering abortion she clearly is not financially or emotionally stable, possibly vulnerable. If this woman is forced to carry the child she cannot afford or does not want the child will grow up with a poor standard of life, why force a child to be born poor simply because you think it deserves life? Why are your feelings towards life only that everyone should be lucky to have it, and you don't care about the quality of life the foetus may have. If the woman didn't want a child the child may grow up catching on that it was unwanted. Yes sometimes people have unexpected pregnancies and it works out but forcing someone who wants an abortion to carry a baby is not a case like that at all.

Adoption you say? Adoption agencies are overrun and children who have been neglected or abused deserve more of a chance to be adopted without adding on babies you forced to be born simply because of the "sanctity of life" it is unfair to put a child in this system for your own selfish beliefs. Adoption rates are dropping why on earth would you contribute to this issue. We are overpopulated as it is.

It is fine that you wouldn't have one but that doesn't mean another woman shouldn't. What if she was raped? Incest? A young girl who isn't ready for a baby? Do you want to force these people to have their body go through 9 month of changes because terminating a bundle of cells is too hard for you to accept? It is cruel and outdated.

"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 is sick, really you're disgusting. You think a girl who has been raped or a 16 year old who isnt ready for a child should go in front of a panel and be guilt tripped into keeping a baby of her rapist or that she isn't ready for? Would you want this for your own daughter?

And what about the man who caused the pregnancy do you want similar for him? Or is it just your sexist belief that it is all a woman's fault if she becomes pregnant.

You have no idea why people have abortions and you are making stupid assumptions. Contraception is not 100 percent, it fails sometimes. People have sex and sometimes contraception fails, if they are and I mean the woman by the way because all of the pressure is on her, doesn't want a child why should they. Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. And what if a woman is raped? Is that her using abortion is contraception?

You live in Ireland so I guess that makes a lot of sense.

It's awesome that you are in a place to be on a high horse and say you would never abort because you are likely financially secure with the right emotional support, but try and have some understanding for people who are not and don't have what you have.

If you want to force all women with surprise pregnancies to have children I sure as hell hope you are willing to adopt them all.

But believe why should the child's right to life be taken away because of the rapist father?

Ttbb
You say it's until birth that it's seen as a human but woman have been prosecuted for trying to do at home late abortions.
How does abortion affect anyone but women?

If you are interested in finding the middle ground in a discussion, try reading this book. Its written mostly about American politics, but the rationale is relevant for UK as well.

Wedged by Erik Fogg and Nathaniel Greene
(available on amazon.co.uk)

www.wedgednation.com

Curly that's so presumptions.

Firstly I would stipulate under the very distressing circumstances that a discussion with a panel wasn't necessary. That would obviously include the disgusting idea of incest rape and molestation.

I don't live in ireland I said I lived in ireland, so stop guessing me.

Ps. I don't know how to ride a horse

Pricklyball, the 'halfway' position you mention is probably the position most people are in, and recognised the complexity of the issue aether than seeing it as black and White, choice or no choice.

Most people are uncomfortable with late abortion, especially if not for medical reasons. Few people I think would argue that women should be able to choose to abort at any point until birth and that the born baby has no right to life even in the last few days. But many also believe it is acceptable in early days and also think women shouldn't have to go through having a baby if they don't want to.......and most people feel a conflict when they think about it between the woman's rights and those of the unborn, especially in later stages.
So it's not simple at all as an issue.

Interesting points raised above about the rights of disabled unborn and how these fit in with our ideas about not discriminating against those with disability in life. Again, difficult areas which are often uncomfortable.

I agree it is a really difficult topic to discuss, because it is so very very emotive. There is little more as emotive because it covers ethical issues around rape, misogyny, and all sorts, as well as (for much want of a more sensitive phrase) ending a life that is separate from your own being - trying to phrase that carefully as I know people debate what constitutes a life.

Like, for me, there are 3 key things I think about the abortion conversation:

I do believe that life begins at conception, as I'm not religious and so life is biology and biologically, that entity has now been created and is separate from both the mother and father. However it's hardly simple in terms of rights, who's rights outweigh who's, who takes priority. It's all very very circumstantial. There's also no reason you can't simultaneously believe that life begins at conception but also be aware that a small ball of cells or very early embryo is not the same as a baby closer to term where brain function has started etc.

I do believe anti abortion sentiment is used to control and oppress women. The consequences of "pro life" messages are often hugely detrimental to women and are rooted in patriarchal societal ideals were women are vessels for men and their children - however due to the fact that yes you are technically "killing babies" it is very easy to disguise this sentiment as something positive, Christian etc. I think it is abhorrent that there are societies where a woman or even girl who has been raped would be forced to then endure pregnancy and then a child born from a horrific assault, because her rights and bodily autonomy can be second to, well not even her child really, but to society's views and expectations of her. I think all forms of contraception should be widely available and used so that unwanted pregnancies are avoided, but again we are living in luxury to have the access we do to contraception, and many women across the world are denied this for similar reasons to the "pro life" sentiment. However I think good contraception and education is key to empowering women and avoiding the need for abortions in the first place, which would benefit everyone, at the very least because abortions are medical procedures so can only be good to avoid needing them.

I do not agree on an emotional level with abortion, when looked at in isolation, personally, unless for medical reasons, and even then some of them are dubious to me. However I am not naive, self important or narrow minded enough to believe that my views should be influential on other women, because there will always be circumstances where abortion is the best option for someone, for whatever reason. I am also (sorry) clever enough to realise that while my emotions may conflict with my logic, that this is okay and I shouldn't be outside abortion clinics with a picket sign because my emotions feel sad at the thought of a baby not being kept alive - this is what all those "pro life" campaigners who protest outside abortion clinics etc are missing. It's blind and base emotion with very little thinking behind it IMO, because I understand why it is upsetting but I can use my brain and understand why it might be necessary.

There is no child. Just a foetus and the mothers choice, advice.

Adviceplease360

You want to force women who've been raped to carry the child of their rapist? Raise the child that resembles their rapist? Be reminded for the rest of their life of a traumatic event?

Would you want that for your own daughter?

For people arguing that a foetus has a right to life, can you tell me where you stand on cows, pigs and sheep? Do they equally ave a right to life and if not, why not?

Advice
Because if the mother doesn't want to be pregnant she shouldn't have to be

I'm pro choice but really don't get the caveats of some people in the middle who say "well only if the baby is disabled" or "in extreme cases like rape". A foetus is a foetus whether it's the product of rape, incest or disabled...

The main thing I have an issue with is that most pro lifers,are actually pro birth. They actually don't give a shit about the life ,or quality of life of the mother or the child after that.
It's painfully obvious when people say the pregnancy affects their health(sometimes severely ),mental or physical,they have other kids to take care of etc and there's always some twat saying to just think of the baby,how the children will love a sibling, how no one regrets a baby and just muddle through.

How does abortion affect anyone but women?

Err...

I admit i honestly cannot understand why, once you've reached the point in a pregnancy that would require actually giving birth, anyone would choose a selective abortion.
If you're going to have to go through labour and delivery regardless of if it is to a live baby or to an induced aborted foetus, why not just go to term and have a live baby and put it up for adoption.
To be clear i mean a healthy foetus, in a healthy pregnancy with a healthy woman, where there is no medical reason to abort, just a choice.

I guess this thread has actually made me realise something i didn't know i believed before hand, that i personally see a foetus as being a baby with the rights to live once it reaches the point that it does have to be physically born either live or aborted.

I think it's very easy to have a theoretical view on the subject, but impossible to know what you would actually do unless you're in the position of having to make the decision.

I'm pretty sure that I personally would not have an abortion except for conditions incompatible with life. But, if I was in a position where I was pregnant as a result of rape, could I actually carry the foetus for 9 months? I have no way of knowing.

It is the woman who has an abortion who has to live with the emotional consequences, and we all have different things we can deal with. So I would never judge a woman for having a different view to my own, or making a different decision to the one I think I would have made. Her body, her choice.

Having said that, I also think it's right that there is a gestation time limit for abortions other than medical reasons. I'd personally consider that to be where the foetus is more likely than not to be able to survive outside the womb. Even at that stage, I think the woman should be able to choose whether to continue with the pregnancy, but my view is that her option should then be an early delivery to let the foetus take its chance outside the womb rather than abortion.

I am very uneasy that the debate seems to centre around very late abortions. Which are a vanishingly small % of abortions and are usually for reasons which nobody could argue with

Thanks

mowgeli

So now you take a step back and add terms and conditions to your disgusting idea of emotionally guilting women. Where's the punishment for the men who also took part?

It's ridiculous to suggest women would choose to go to term and then end the pregnancy then - it's just not something sane people would do......... We should trust women to make decisions about their own bodies.

I hear this argument a lot, and I don't think it holds water ethically. Try replacing this with child... For example, "it's ridiculous to think that a woman would choose the have a child and then kill it when they're 3 year olds.... it's not something a sane person would do. Rather, we should trust a mother to make decisions about the life or death of their young children".

Curiosity what the hell is your obsession with such unusually morbid situations?
This is not as common as you are implying ... stop making people who disagree with you out to be sick or disgusting or on a high horse.
It is people like you who make the whole topic so taboo and out of bounds. Grow up

Totally agree bertrandrussel

"It's ridiculous to suggest women would choose to go to term and then end the pregnancy then - it's just not something sane people would do. The vast majority of terminations are performed in the first trimester - the very few that are late term are usually performed in heart-breaking circumstances where it's a choice between the mother's life or the foetus won't survive anyway."

I've seen it argued on here many times that access to abortion on request (ie for any reason) up to term should be allowed. For people that hold this view the woman's sanity is irrelevant.

But the ethical issues don't go away because something hardly ever happens. In fact, the ethical issues are as serious and complicated even if it had only ever happened once, or even if it was still theoretical.

"We should trust women to make decisions about their own bodies."

But this is precisely the problem. At what point does a foetus/child in utero become not the woman's body? You might argue that this happens when the placenta is formed and woman and foetus no longer share the same blood supply. You might argue that it is when the child in utero can feel pain independently of the woman. You might argue it is when the unborn baby is viable. You might argue that it is only when the baby is actually alive outside its mother.

I don't know which of these is right. Saying a thing is simple doesn't make it simple.