That many people believe they are pro choice but are not

[winterstail]

My understanding of pro choice is that you support a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy.

Many people claim to be pro choice but then express shock at the reason a woman chooses to terminate.

This isn't pro choice then, is it?

I think using abortions as your main form of contraception is selfish and expensive for the nhs
Even if women did use abortion as a main form of contraception (they don't) I would still rather multiple babies be aborted than a woman have multiple babies she does not want and cannot support.
I wonder how many people complaining about abortion being used because women misused or didn't use contraception are happy for the state to pay for these children all their lives. Are you ok with that or are you the same group of people who are happy to see the 2 child benefit cap?

I don't believe in abortion for myself, but I support a woman's right to choose for herself

However yes, I do think I'd understand if rape, or severely disabled child involved. But the thought of terminating for any other reason really saddens me. I don't want to think about 'up to 24 weeks'.

So I suppose .not pro-choice really as I don't think in absolutes on this one. I do have a friend who's had several terminations and in my mind I think"how could you?". But I'd never say it to her as it's neither my body nor my life. Or my business.

I think using abortions as your main form of contraception is selfish and expensive for the nhs

This is a silly argument. The lifetime care for a child under the NHS will cost far more than an abortion.

The reason I am pro choice ‘but not after the stage where the foetus is independently viable’ is that I can’t bring myself to accept that at that stage abortion means killing a viable child in the same unit where another of the same gestation is being given support to live. How are these late abortions done? That’s a rhetorical question by the way.

Some of my friends have had them. I don't know one who hasn't regretted it
That's unfortunate. I have absolutely no regrets from my abortion.

My friend has had 3 abortions. She isn't lazy or stupid or reckless.
First as a teenager not using a condom effectively.
Got married, had 2 children.
Second she was on the pill but a combination of a car crash and subsequent medication resulted in a surprise pregnancy.
Third one was when she was in her last year of a nursing degree after her children had grown up. She had a coil.
Some people are just unlucky. She has no regrets over any of them.

Also I don't think any1 who wants the legal cut off to be lowered is talking about the medical reasons (which I believe is still 28 weeks) but the other limit for non medical grounds which is currently 24 weeks

Assuming you are talking about England then there is no 28 week limit with the seriously disabled or risk to life criteria

You cannot say that someone who has their own limitations is not pro-choice.

We all draw our lines on everything in life. I support the right of people to drink, but not their right to get behind the wheel of a car afterwards. That doesn't make me anti-alcohol. I support the rights of people to sleep with whomever they want, but I don't support people having affairs. I support the rights of people to eat meat and animal products, but I won't support battery farms.

We all make our own judgements in life and choose our own comfort levels.

@needs sorry your right. I thought they had kept the 28 week rule for "ground e" when they reduced the limit from 28 to 24 weeks but they did away with the limit altogether.
But my point was I don't think anyone was suggesting an abortion on medical grounds should be lowered to 20 weeks (or before) as obviously alot of abnormalities are not picked up until the 20 weeks scan (which can happen as late as 23 weeks impe).
xx

You aren’t wrong rebel and I don’t disagree that some women find out later.

Bring brutal I’m saying in my world that would mean tough shit, too late for abortion and your route is adoption.

The baby would have a right to live after 16 weeks barring medical conditions.

I find it abhorrent that a wanted baby born naturally at 24 weeks will be, rightfully, hugely supported whilst in the same hospital a baby can be killed at about the same stage because the mother changed her mind. It repulses me and in my mind it is murder.

Thousands of couples in this country would adopt these babies. Infertility is a rising crisis

I found my own personal view on abortion changed the moment I saw my baby scan, prior to that I would have assumed if there was something wrong I would have an abortion. I then realised it was a little life I would love regardless of any 'defect' . However I still believe it is a woman's personal choice (but not without a lot of counselling) and would never judge others. It is not an easy decision to live with and have a friend who is very screwed up by an abortion she had at 14

Really? Where are these thousands of couples and why are there so many kids stuck in the social care system?
A quick look on the infertility boards shows a lot of time (years sometimes) ,a lot of hope,a lot of drugs,a lot of money,a lot of effort and tears put into having "their" baby ,not adoption. It's their right of course and no judgement and i do hope everyone gets their much longed for baby. But don't use infertility as some kind of correlation to potential adopters. That's just a pipe dream.

I am pro choice.

As early as possible
As late as necessary
For any or no reason

I agree. Someone I knew had three abortions. When she told me, I was shocked. When she told me the reasons, I was less shocked. Her body, her business.

Oh and a quick look online tells me that adoption rates are dropping,while the number of children in care are rising. Where are these thousands of parents?

I find it abhorrent that a wanted baby born naturally at 24 weeks will be, rightfully, hugely supported whilst in the same hospital a baby can be killed at about the same stage because the mother changed her mind. It repulses me and in my mind it is murder.

You have every right to feel like that. But the mother has every right not to carry on with the pregnancy, should she so wish.

It really fucks me off when people say "I don't agree with abortion but it's every woman's choice". You either agree with it or you don't..

Yes, it’s cognitive dissonance that affects many people, including myself to an extent if I’m honest.

On the one hand these people think it’s wrong because termination isn’t an amoral decision like having a tooth or appendix removed. They see it as moral decision because it impacts on another human’s life, albeit a small one entirely dependent on someone else. On the other hand they see it also see it as entirely down to the other person.

They would likely never have this dichotomy in other areas of life. For instance, can you imagine someone saying “I think robbery is wrong, but if you want to rob someone, that’s your choice, and I’m fine with that!”

Realistically access to ‘as late as necessary for any reason’ would be limited by the ability to find facilities and medical staff to carry out the termination.

You have every right to feel like that. But the mother has every right not to carry on with the pregnancy, should she so wish.

No, if you believe it’s ‘murder’ as that poster did (and I’m not saying that’s right) then you can’t also expect them to believe in the Mother’s right to terminate!

This “I believe what you are doing is wrong, but I believe you have to right to do it” is never held in other areas of violence. No one expects someone who believes belting children as punishment is wrong to say “well I don’t believe in whacking children - it’s assault of defenceless small people, but if you want to whack yours, that’s your choice and I’m cool with that!”

A pro-choice position is only reasonable if you believe the foetus is merely an appendage of a mother’s body until birth and should in no way be regarded as possessing any human rights.

”It really fucks me off when people say "I don't agree with abortion but it's every woman's choice". You either agree with it or you don't. There is no in between.”

Don’t be daft. I don’t agree with anything Nigel Farage says but I absolutely agree with his right to say it.

The planet is overcrowded isn't it? So pro-choice is an eco-friendly position. I applaud and uphold the rights of a woman to choose what happens to her own body and agree with others that her right to choose trump's the rights of a possibly heart broken would father, or of other invested friends and family members. Her body, her choice. Her right to choose does NOT trump the rights of her evicted foetus, however, or the responsibility of the doctor or midwife to save the life of her viable evicted foetus.

As early as possible. As late as necessary

This mantra is always used in these debates... However, if abortion is genuinely an amoral act where the only consideration is the mother, why is the caveat “as early as possible” added? Surely it should just simply be “whenever you choose” and not imply there’s a moral imperative to do so “as early as possible”.

I would have had an abortion if I had fallen unintentionally pregnant when I was young. I can remember being in the sixth form and waiting and waiting for a late period to start, feeling as if my life was on hold until it did. And the sheer relief when I came on.

The planet is overcrowded isn't it? So pro-choice is an eco-friendly position.

That’s a really, really dodgy opening argument. I could make the a justification for genocide on that basis!

This mantra is always used in these debates... However, if abortion is genuinely an amoral act where the only consideration is the mother, why is the caveat “as early as possible” added?

Because the earlier the abortion the “easier” it is both physically and mentally.

I am too choice.
Any date, any reason.
I say this as someone who would not have had an abortion with a planned pregnancy for any reason. However I respect a woman's right to choose.
Controversy I have the unpopular opinion that just because medical intervention could keep someone alive it doesn't mean it should.

Children should never be born with the intention of being out up for adoption.

There are thousands of unwanted children with huge emotional issues
The cost to society is huge, these unwanted children demand vast amounts of resources to be spent on them often without effect.

You are wrong if you think projects queing up to adopt these unwanted deeply damaged children.

Medical intervention has led to infertile couples using procedures to Try and have their own dc, they do not in general want some one else's unwanted child.

I understand pro life but only if you believe that all life is sacred and therefore never harm a living creature.
If you eat any meat or fish then you are a hypocrite.
If you have ever had sex with someone whom you weren't in a committed relationship with and therefore couldn't provide 100% support to a child then you are a hypocrite.

A lot of carp is spoken. A lot of misogynistic language is banded about.

Women enjoy sex, this leads to pregnancy. Unfortunately wanting sex does not mean you want a pregnancy.

If men got pregnant then we would not even be having this debate. Abortion would be an acceptable freely available thing full stop.

@Windthebobbinup1982 abortion is not violence. Your analogies are flawed. You compared it with robbery at first which is illegal and then smacking which in certain conditions can be.