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.

No!! It was in relation to keeping the limit at 24 weeks. Abortion should be allowed for rape until 12 weeks I think

What would be the criteria for abortion post rape? For those saying it's ok if it's rape.

Genuine question (I'm not questioning if rape is rape btw, just how would that be legally defined).

So it has to be proved it was rape? In 24 weeks? Not possible. What about an abusive relationship rape not 'stranger in an alleyway' rape? How does one prove it was non consentual?

(I know they are both rape, I'm not trying to lessen one, I'm just trying to be realistic in defining when an abortion can be carried out because of rape).

If the abortion is agreed by medical professionals because of rape, is the father therefore a rapist by default although not convicted?

You haven't answered my question, Category

Since your post, someone has given an example of their friend having a late term abortion because she stuck her head in the sand. I know "late term" in this context is not the same as a termination at 39 weeks but clearly later terminations through simply not wanting to be pregnant any more, do happen.

Very few people like the idea of abortion - it is the ultimate lesser evil.

But there are ideas I like much less. Such as forced birth, forced pregnancy

There are also terminations for medical reasons. Would you force a woman to carry a pregnancy that will result in a baby that will die, or one that risks her life, mental or physical health? ( and she may have other children)

There are no absolutes. We have contraceptive failure, pregnancies that go wrong, rapists. So we compromise with a time limit with exceptions.

Remember that your god created bad things as well as good.

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?

Why on earth would you think couples who can't conceive would have a valuable insight into whether someone should have an abortion or not? It's perfectly possible to want to be pregnant yourself but understand that some women don't want to be.

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?

I'm not sure.... it's complex. However, what I can say is that I don't believe I have the right to choose to kill whatever animals i like simply because I have power to do so.

Another one who can't reach a settled position on this. I believe that life begins at conception. Abortion is always the taking of an actual human life - not a potential life - in my view. And yet I think that women should be able to end this human life in the first trimester if they choose. Probably beyond for maternal/fetal medical reasons. Why do both opinions feel so right, despite being so contradictory?

Jacob Rees Mogg was in the press today saying that he's against abortion in all circumstances. Ectopic pregnancy is common and sometimes fatal. In his worldview, he risks his wife's life every time he has sex with her! How can he - and other men who oppose abortion on all grounds - live with himself? That's the only position I can't respect.

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 think these are issues that will be debated more in coming years.

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

Bertrand, I think it's because that is the sticking point for a lot of people (including me) when it comes to saying that they are pro-choice. Because the logical limit of pro-choice is that you accept that a woman has full rights over her own pregnant body for the whole of the pregnancy, and that the foetus has no rights at all. And that a 40wk foetus could be aborted if the mother chose (I'm leaving the law aside for the moment and just debating the ethics).

So I have to say I'm somewhere in the middle on that one.

Curly you are beginning to really irritate me.

If the panel was a reasonable one then obviously incest or rape wouldn't even need to be seen. It's more like repeat abortions for people who can't be arsed with contraception.

Stop being so presumptuous. For the second time. Do you genuinely feel that was my entire policy? I was only throwing some ideas about.
You have entirely shut down the dialogue by being so juvenile.

I'm out of here.

"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?"

Fuck me. That must be the worst idea I have very heard in my whole life

mowgeli

And forcing a woman who doesn't want a baby to carry a child and permanantly affect her body and life isn't morbid?

Where are your facts to prove your opinion that it isn't common?

Rape, incest and especially teenage pregnancy rates are high. It does happen. Stop trying to pretend abortions only happen because women are lazy and don't want to practice safe sex.

You say I am making the topic taboo but you want abortion to be taboo, that is your belief.

And you are yet to answer my question, what is the punishment for the man?

Of course life begins at the moment of conception. Everything that makes that person who they are is there. Many of these lives never get far, some finish before the mother even knows she is pregnant. Of course at the beginning the life is not capable of independent life. I had a scan at 30 days pregnancy and they measured dd at 10mm long, about the size of a little fingernail. And on this tiny smudge on the screen you could see the heart beat, like a pixel on the screen flashing on and off. No doubt at all that life was present. The question of whether it is right, or acceptable to end one of these lives is another debate. And that is where it gets so very complex. I don't think you can ever reduce it to black and white, right or wrong, pro-choice or pro-life. Every case will be slightly different, every woman with her own reasons for choosing a termination. I really think that a late abortion ( even up to the 24 week limit) is not something anybody undertakes lightly or without thinking it through.

I think another part of the issue is if a mother wants an abortion because she isn't capable of supporting a child (emotionally, practically, deal with special needs etc) and then she is pressured by those saying it is wrong to kill a child, who is there to support her with the kept child afterwards? Those people aren't there for the next 18yrs of the child's life. The mother has to cope and support it and her choice to abort might be best for everyone.

Thousands and thousands of abortions are carried out every year, advice. What do you propose is done with all these unwanted pregnancies once labour is over and there is a child to care for? Where will they go? What will their quality of life be? Who is going to fund and house them? Are you, personally?

Ps. What coco
I'm not sure.... it's complex. However, what I can say is that I don't believe I have the right to choose to kill whatever animals i like simply because I have power to do so.

Bye

Mowgeli you call everyone infantile and tell them to grow up yet you stamp your feet and leave because people raise genuine arguments against your points and you can't think of a response to combat them?

I am pro-choice but agree that there should be a legal limit on how far into a pregnancy abortions can be carried out (except for extreme medical reasons). I don't feel that I have the medical knowledge to have much of an opinion on what that limit is, but I believe that it should be decided by medical experts and reviewed periodically to account for advances in technology.

This is my position. I'm a mother of a baby born prematurely - I simply can't (despite my otherwise feminist leanings) agree that it could ever be OK to terminate a pregnancy at 36 weeks unless the mother's life depended on it.

Interestingly, when MORI type people survey on this issue it's women who are more strongly supportive of lowering the current limit of 24 weeks, men are more relaxed about the status quo or even increasing it.

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

But why does a baby get full human rights after birth, but none beforehand. This isn't self-evident and hasn't been held by most societies throughout history.... yet it continues to be parroted as though it was obvious as saying "the sky is blue"!

I think it depends on whether you think right to life supercedes all other rights. I don't. I believe the right to bodily autonomy is more important than the right of to life of a foetus. A woman shouldn't be forced to sustain the life of another with her body, against her wishes.

To the poster who suggested a pregnant woman should go before a panel- why? Do you believe women are too stupid or don't know their own minds? What would be the purpose of an infertile couple making a judgement about whether a woman should be forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy? It is utterly repulsive to suggest that women should be made to surrender control of their bodies to the judgement of strangers.

Give it a rest khajiit, stop making this about what I will do for anyone. We're having an interesting discussion on abortion. I don't believe anyone should be allowed to abort over 12 weeks, women and men should start taking responsibility for children they produce after they have exerted their right to have sex. With rights come responsibilities, something we as a society don't want to accept

Well, if you believe that life starts at conception then logically you would be anti pill as well as pro life, as I believe one of the mechanisms by which the pill works is stopping a fertilised egg implanting.
That's not a point of view I subscribe to btw.

mowgeli prior to DD I would have qualified to be on your panel as one half of an infertile couple (I have to say the idea disgusts me). And even in the peak of the infertility years, I would still strongly have been saying that a woman has the right to choose. Post DD I believe that even more strongly, having experienced how difficult it can be with a newborn.

I don't think many infertile couples give a shit about whether other women have abortions or not. Personally, it's women having babies that they then neglect that concerns me more.

For me it IS simple. Until the child is the born, the woman has the right over her own body. full stop.
Would i like it if someone chose to abort a 39 week healthy foetus because they just couldn't be arsed anymore. Of course not, but a) that just does not happen and b) the alternative is a child brought into the world with a mother who doesn't want it. and that for me is far worse.

and the idea of a woman who is already upset and distressed and feeling guilty being stuck in front of a panel of childless couples is just cruel. its just a ploy to make someone feel like shit. and then what? what point does it serve? she gets the TOP but feels shitty about it, or she doesn't get it and has a kid she doesn't want/can't take care of. what the actual fuck kind of mind do you have to suggest that?

We also have the right to own our own body and the right to abort. Thankfully.

I don't understand the exemption for rape. If you believe abortion is wrong except for rape cases then you are really saying women should be punished for choosing to have sex.