Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To assume if you are anti-abortion, you are...

431 replies

Hamandcheesebaguette · 26/05/2018 20:24

...pro a full, complete and comprehensive government benefits system to fund mothers for at least the first 5 years of her child's life?

I'll tell my story, it's not particularly interesting or traumatic, but had I not had access to a safe abortion at 6 weeks then I honest to god don't know how i would have not have ended up homeless or starving.

When I was 21, I met a man. Same age as me. I was working in an airport, leaving for work at 2.45am and usually not getting home until after 4pm. My take home pay was around £980 per month. After rent in my 1 bedroom flat in the cheapest (and also not particularly pleasant) area in my expensive city, council tax, topped up my gas and electricity meters and phone bill (I didn't even have a TV!) I had £35 left to eat and pay for buses to work for the rest of the month. After only knowing this man for 6 weeks, I found out I was pregnant. I was on the pill, maybe it failed, maybe I had missed a couple, I don't know.

Should I have had that baby... how in the hell would I have been able to provide anything for it on that wage? Oh wait, I wouldn't have had a wage at all bevause I wouldn't have had anybody to care for my baby whilst I was working full time and leaving for work in the middle of the night.

So I assume, if you are anti abortion, and I had had that baby, you also agree I should have been entitled to a reasonable council property (not covered in damp or mould or other H&S issues), my rent paid, my council tax paid, plus money provided for gas, electricity, food etc. Plus some furniture (as I always rented fully furnished and didn't have any furniture of my own at 21), a TV, broadband (or maybe I should have sat in with my baby with absolutely nothing except the walls to stare at...)

Plus possible full training paid for by the government when I could have gone back to work once this baby reached school age, as I wouldn't have been a very attractive job applicant by this point.

AIBU to assume this is tour stance if you insist I should have been forced to have been a mother when I didn't want to be one, couldn't afford to be one?

OP posts:
PaulDacreRimsGeese · 27/05/2018 10:58

In terms of practicality vs theoretical, there isn't as far as I'm aware a society anywhere in the world that has said we allow legal abortion, so therefore we're not going to provide any assistance once the baby is born. Whereas there are shitloads that ban or severely restrict women's access to abortion. One of them is in the UK! A couple more are elsewhere in Europe. There's also no real correlation between access to abortion and access to assistance from the state if you choose to bear the child. There are societies offering neither, societies offering both and lots in the middle to varying degrees.

With this in mind, the idea you posit is intrinsically theoretical with no currently realistic possibility of coming to fruition. It is abstract.

Juells · 27/05/2018 10:59

@LockedOutOfMN

Op, you said you didn't want a baby, but you had sex

I didn't even make it past the first page...

FlyingElbows · 27/05/2018 10:59

What Hamandcheesebaguette has described a few posts up is exactly why the pill should not be considered as a one stop shop for contraception. It's completely incompatible with the lifestyle that's so common in our "carefree" teens and early twenties. It needs to be taken properly and girls and women are still ignorant of that. So you hear "I missed a couple" or your about a booze fuelled party weekend and the inevitable vomiting and they don't make the link.

We need a serious overhaul of contraceptive and sexual health education for both girls and boys. But we cannot "equality" our way out of the biological reality that is our own fertility. As women it is our responsibility to ensure as fully as possible our own contraceptive health. I am fully pro-choice but I'm also pro-responsibility. I would fully support any women who wishes to terminate but we need to do more to make contraceptive choices better and more understood. But that's a whole other kettle of fish...

PaulDacreRimsGeese · 27/05/2018 11:03

Yes, I can certainly also understand the argument that the baby is a person and to murder it is far worse a consequence than women giving up babies for adoption at birth (and we all know what a massive shortage there is of new borns to adopt in the UK so it is not as if most of these babies would be destitute - many would go to middle class infertile married couples who are desperate to adopt a new baby)

Don't be so daft xenia.

There is a shortage of newborn babies to adopt now because women mostly are able to have an abortion if they want one, thus there aren't many unwanted babies born. There are almost 200,000 abortions each year in the UK, about 180,000 of which are to UK resident mothers. You cannot possibly think there are sufficient adoptive parents to take on 180,000 babies each year. Even if we thought making abortion illegal would reduce the number of pregnancies by, say half (there is no evidence for this) do you think there are 90,000? Really?!

And meanwhile what would you do with the older children who would still potentially require adoption? The pool would be even further reduced for them.

Pengggwn · 27/05/2018 11:04

PaulDacreRimsGeese

I didn't say they make one a condition of the other.

Anyway, let's leave it there. Clearly you want to discuss abstractions when they suit your argument but dismiss them as abstractions when they don't.

PaulDacreRimsGeese · 27/05/2018 11:04

Yes, I can certainly also understand the argument that the baby is a person and to murder it is far worse a consequence than women giving up babies for adoption at birth (and we all know what a massive shortage there is of new borns to adopt in the UK so it is not as if most of these babies would be destitute - many would go to middle class infertile married couples who are desperate to adopt a new baby)

Don't be so daft xenia.

There is a shortage of newborn babies to adopt now because women mostly are able to have an abortion if they want one, thus there aren't many unwanted babies born. There are almost 200,000 abortions each year in the UK, about 180,000 of which are to UK resident mothers. You cannot possibly think there are sufficient adoptive parents to take on 180,000 babies each year. Even if we thought making abortion illegal would reduce the number of pregnancies by, say half (there is no evidence for this) do you think there are 90,000? Really?!

And meanwhile what would you do with the older children who would still potentially require adoption? The pool would be even further reduced for them.

PaulDacreRimsGeese · 27/05/2018 11:08

Anyway, let's leave it there. Clearly you want to discuss abstractions when they suit your argument but dismiss them as abstractions when they don't.

Fraid not.

What you did there was say let's leave it there but then after that you carried on the discussion, ie didn't leave it there. Can't have it both ways. Pick one, not both.

Anyways, I'm carrying on, since you did. What you are doing is speculating about something that isn't happening. Do that if you want, but I'm going to call it what it is. Meanwhile, there are dozens of territories in the world that ban or severely restrict access to abortion, and not one where provision for children has been stopped or is proposed to be stopped because of abortion. These are facts. They're not up for debate. Thus, discussion about what happens when abortion is banned, like it isn't far from being in part of our fecking country, isn't theoretical. What you're talking about is.

bobstersmum · 27/05/2018 11:08

Erm, no. You were an adult you said yourself maybe you missed a couple of pills? That's irresponsible to be honest when you state you were on no position to have a baby. Why should the government fund you to bring up your child because you were irresponsible?

Kokeshi123 · 27/05/2018 11:09

What does "fund" mean, in this scenario?

Pengggwn · 27/05/2018 11:12

PaulDacreRimsGeese

It is irrelevant that it isn't happening. We have access to abortion in this country. We are still debating it. You are attempting to pick and choose which speculative discussions are relevant to an argument. I don't see why that is a fair basis for a conversation, so again, let's leave it there.

Kokeshi123 · 27/05/2018 11:14

I don't "like" abortion and find it an ugly reality, but am pragmatic about the fact that there is no alternative. Women will get abortions no matter what you do, and the idea that we could somehow get tens of thousands of babies adopted each year is a joke. We'd basically have to return to the mass-orphanage system.

indoeuropean · 27/05/2018 11:15

I know its from the land of rainbows and unicorns, but yes, I think single parents, teen parents etc. should have 100% moral and lot of financial support. Children are our future, society needs to step up.
Abort should mostly happen in very serious situations (medical reasons, rape), and not after 12 weeks. Im all for contraception, but once the baby is here... Its not ok to sacrifice that new life because grownups (mum, dad, relatives, society) screw up. Lets find solutions to our grown up problems and leave babies to be!
I am a woman. Its 0 to do with men and their controle. Its mother-baby relationship, only thing I find sacret in life. Interesting, that in matriarchal/matrilinear societies every baby is a blessing and happiness, no matter who the father is.
I will tell my daughter (still a toddler now) that I will always help with the baby if she would get pregnant and the same thing if my son's girlfriend would get pregnant. Of course, I would not disown them in case of abortion, but I will make sure they know I will always support my grandchildren.

MiggeldyHiggins · 27/05/2018 11:18

Why should the government fund you to bring up your child because you were irresponsible?

Are women and children meant to suffer because of a forgotten pill?

You're not listening.

MiggeldyHiggins · 27/05/2018 11:18

It is irrelevant that it isn't happening. We have access to abortion in this country

You might, other women in your country do not. There is no abortion in NI. This is reality, not speculation.

PaulDacreRimsGeese · 27/05/2018 11:25

Again pengggwyn, if you want to leave it there then you leave it there, you don't continue with the discussion and then say leave it there. Because what you're doing is the opposite of leaving it there. If you actually want to leave it there, feel free to do that instead of doing the opposite.

So:

  • Discussion about moral arguments in favour of withdrawing financial support for children born when their mothers could have aborted them is entirely speculative. It's not happening anywhere, and yes you did say it's an argument that could be made.
  • Discussion about the possibility of abortion being banned or severely restricted isn't theoretical, because it's already happening. In Europe and in the UK. It's thus not speculative.

Again, these are facts, not opinions. As I said earlier, if you want to have these speculative, theoretical discussions, have at it: I have certainly not suggested you shouldn't. But other people get to call them what they are and make a value judgement about their usefulness or lack of it.

MinisterforCheekyFuckery · 27/05/2018 11:27

We do not have mothers and babies living on the streets. We do not.

We have mothers and babies living in hostels that aren't equipped to meet their needs, sofa surfing, in dodgy B&B's surrounded by drug use and prostitution, in squats, in severely overcrowded conditions and trapped in abusive relationships because they have nowhere else to go. We have mothers who are drug and alcohol dependent, have severe mental illness or significant Learning Difficulties caring for babies with inconsistent and ever decreasing support from health and social care agencies who can't cope with the level of demand. Believe me, I work with these families and see the consequences of this kind of adversity in early life on a daily basis.

The idea that if you force women to continue with unwanted pregnancies it will somehow just work out ok is utterly ridiculous. There are so many unwanted children in the world. So many children who are severely neglected either deliberately or because the parents do not have the capacity to parent them due to their own difficulties. The systems we have in place to protect those children and support their Mothers have reached breaking point and if you ask anyone working in the public sector with vulnerable families they will tell you things are likely to get worse before they get better. Why people like you advocate bringing more unwanted children into the world is absolutely beyond me. I can only assume you know nothing of the world in which many of these children would be growing up.

Prawnofthepatriarchy · 27/05/2018 11:29

I don't believe a foetus is an unborn child any more than I believe I'm an undead corpse. This despite the fact that my death is absolutely certain whereas a foetus has no guarantee of being born alive.

SensoryOverlord · 27/05/2018 11:32

if someone is anti abortion to the point that they think OP should not have been able to have one, then surely that person must agree that they have a responsibility to fund her to provide for that baby

Such rubbish.

All this 'surely they MUST' feel this way really gets on my tits.

No, surely NO ONE is required to feel the way you say they must.

You are fighting for the bodily autonomy of women whilst trying to deny others even the autonomy to have their own thoughts and beliefs.

Looneytune253 · 27/05/2018 11:36

To be fair though everyone manages. You would have been entitled to many extra benefits etc. I personally wouldn’t have an abortion BUT I do agree women should have that choice. Babies almost never come along at the perfect time but we make the most of what we have

harshbuttrue1980 · 27/05/2018 11:50

I come down slightly on the pro choice side of the debate. I think that killing an unborn baby and forcing a woman to carry an unwanted baby are both horrible things, but on balance the woman who is born has more rights than the unborn child. However, abortion should be a rarity for example rape. The op who was blase about the fact that she 'might have forgotten a few pills' had an overly casual and irresponsible attitude to the consequences of sex. A lot of people seem to forget that babies are the biological purpose of sex, and I have no idea why people who don't want a baby are so careless about contraception. Sex ed is a compulsory part of education, there is no excuse!!

Thehogfather · 27/05/2018 12:06

I do wish people would stop banging on about objecting to late term abortions. You don't simply get a late abortion as a lifestyle choice, there have to be good reasons.

And ime, I've never heard of, let alone met any woman who would want or go through a late term abortion purely for convenience/ lifestyle. There would have to be serious reasons.

I believe the pro life lobby do have a duty to offer an alternative. And not just the adoption route for all the reasons already mentioned. We can all object to whatever we want, but unless you have an alternative suggestion you are willing to stand by then you just sound like a petulant 5yr old whining that you don't like it.

I'd also be interested to know from those suggesting adoption, that also have had dc themselves, if they'd have been ok with handing over their dc at birth?

CarpeVitam · 27/05/2018 12:09

GreyGardens88, have my first Biscuit

🙄

SensoryOverlord · 27/05/2018 12:18

I'd also be interested to know from those suggesting adoption, that also have had dc themselves, if they'd have been ok with handing over their dc at birth?

Completely different situations that you can't compare...whether you actually want the baby or not to begin with makes a huge difference.

JacquesHammer · 27/05/2018 12:27

However, abortion should be a rarity for example rape

Great. So what about genuine contraception failure?

You’re not even slightly pro-choice if you moralise that some people are less worthy of abortion

MistressDeeCee · 27/05/2018 12:40

I'm pro-life but also pro-a woman's right to choose. I don't afford myself the right to dispute what another woman does with her body. I just know what I don't want to do with mine.

These threads come up with unfailing regularity. Why don't you ask men/policy makers your question OP, or are they all excused whilst you metaphorically bash women with a stick over this?

It may be a woman carrying the baby but it's no immaculate conception. I'm tired of women actively seeking out 'lets squabble' topics when in the main we aren't policy makers here so what different does it make?

A full comprehensive benefits system as opposed to men actually being compelled by law to financially support a child they've created with a woman? & jailed if they don't comply?

That'd be my ideal.

Why is benefits the 1st port of call?

It's all about letting men shirk responsibility. Always seeking ways to let them off the hook. Like a race to the bottom back to the last century and mistaking that for being modern.