To think late-term abortion rules may need tightening up?

[FestiveNut]

Should people be able to abort healthy fetuses in a low risk pregnancy past 20 weeks gestation?

I read a very sad story concerning this earlier. I considered myself pro-choice in all circumstances but this thread has caused me to question that.

Should the threshold be lowered?

FissionChips If you read my post you'll see I said 'healthy' pregnancies - by that I mean the mother and the baby. Of course I'm not suggesting that a woman should risk death and disability, not sure where you got that from...

Abortion can be easily accessed well before it gets to [16-18 wks]

This is simply not true for a great many women. For women with means and the ability to navigate the systems possibly. If you discover pregnancy late, are not confident with navigating health services or advocating for yourself, or have a GP opposing your choices at the early stage then its not at all easy or quick.

I've only referred a woman for a late term termination once for non medical reasons. There were incredibly distressing circumstances surronding this and it was not a decision taken lightly by the mother.

However I do understand the views of those who think the unborn child should have rights rather than it being purely 'my body my choice '. I recall many years ago a later termination being performed where the baby was born breathing and taken to special care (did not survive). Additionally some methods STILL used across the world in terminations (late or otherwise) are barbaric and inhumane.

The point is that I can only decide aboutmybody and any abortion I might or might not choose to have. I have no right to decide about anyone else’s.
Well said.

I'm happy with the current UK law. It gives women choice whether to continue a pregnancy or not and has safeguards in for later term abortions (which are a tiny tiny % anyway but are largely what the anti choice, force women to be incubator types like to talk about from their armchairs).

People getting all agitated claiming about people murder babies at 39 weeks gestation on a whim do this to deliberately misrepresent an issue because it is much easier to get on their high horse and get all emotionally manipulative than it is to deal in facts which would facilitate a rational debate.

To me you are either pro choice or you are anti choice. One means women can make the right call for them (on any side of the debate), the other means imposing your opinion on someone else whilst never having to walk in their shoes.

At 26 weeks pregnant my child was diagnosed with severe and life threatening abnormalities. I was offered an abortion which I declined. The rest of the pregnancy is fortunately a blur and the medics then put in to place a complicated plan for delivery and the best outcome. That child is now in her late 20's with no physical or mental health needs and has just had her own child. It wasn't easy for any of us and many years were spent in hospitals having numerous surgeries. When I look at her and now her own child it is almost inconceivable that she may never have existed. At 26 weeks she was my child. She wasn't a foetus and I didn't have the right to choose for her not to have a chance in this world

I'm not suggesting that a woman should risk death and disability, not sure where you got that from

Yes you are because pregnancy, even a healthy pregnancy, puts a woman at risk of disability and death.

I was talking about non medical reasons!

You’re another one that doesn’t realise pregnancy and birth carry the risk of the mother dying or becoming disabled.

FissionChips
Of course I realise that, I'm not stupid. I've had children, 2 of which were emergency Cs resulting in pph both times.
I stand by my opinion.

FissionChips and if the woman doesn't want the normal risks associated with pregnancy and chooses to terminate, that's fine, but there is absolutely no reason why in a case like that it would need to be done at a late stage. I'm not arguing against abortion, I'm arguing against late term abortion in normal circumstances.

Well, I don't know any that, @Fission Chips. The maternal death rate in the UK is 0.0088% (based on 8.8 women dying per 100,000), compared to the death rate from general anaesthetic which is 0.06%. Both risks are tiny, but statistically the mother is more likely to die from the general anaesthetic during the late term abortion than from giving birth to the infant.

www.rcoa.ac.uk/news-and-bulletin/rcoa-news-and-statements/nationwide-survey-of-all-uk-hospitals-shows-anaesthetic

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/dec/07/better-medical-care-could-slash-uk-mortality-rate-during-pregnancy

the other means imposing your opinion on someone else whilst never having to walk in their shoes.

Again, someone has to perform the procedure which lets not pretend otherwise, is horrific. Who has primacy here ? It's a sliding scale, late in pregnancy you cannot, reasonably, insist that someone must carry out a late termination for you.

So, you are ok with a woman possibly losing her life because of forced pregnancy? To essentially allow the state to murder her? Really?

“It's a sliding scale, late in pregnancy you cannot, reasonably, insist that someone must carry out a late termination for you.”
No, you can’t insist. What’s your point?

but there is absolutely no reason why in a case like that it would need to be done at a late stage

Not unheard of to not realise you are pregnant untill after the cut off period.

but statistically the mother is more likely to die from the general anaesthetic during the late term abortion than from giving birth to the infant

But that is the woman’s choice to take that risk.
To force that (even small) risk is barbaric.

FissionChips this is ridiculous. The pregnancy is not forced if the woman chose not to abort within a normal time period, in a country where abortion is legal and free.

Unless of course the woman in question does not undergo general anaesthesia, but on the other thread, a woman whose job is involved with the process said that they generally are. I suppose they wouldn't have to be.

Of course it’s forced, a woman should be free to change her mind at any time.

But there are people willing to perform that procedure. No one is being forced into performing anything, but by having restrictions on abortions, women are forced into birthing a baby that they may not want.
I mean, if we stuck with "don't benefit from anything you wouldn't be willing to do yourself", we wouldn't have life saving surgeries. It takes a special kind to be able to cut into an actual person with the skills involved, the strong stomach needed, and the fact that you could kill someone by doing it.

Oh FGS Fission, abortion is free, legal and available in the UK up to 24 weeks. Claiming pregnancy is forced on British women is nonsense. Maybe take your concern to countries that still have barbaric laws, like El Salvador.

In what way is something not forced if the person no longer wishes to continue but is denied the right to stop?

but let's not pretend that later term abortion does not involve crushing skulls and cutting off the limbs of what as far as our senses tell us, is a dead baby

Elon, where are you getting your information on how a late term abortion happens?

I’ve had one post 24 weeks and there was no skull crushing or limb ripping involved
The heart was stopped, I was induced, the baby was delivered

The medical professionals involved in my Care were the same ones involved in the care of women delivering heathy full-termers in the same hospital

abortion is free, legal and available in the UK up to 24 weeks

How can you be so blind not to take account of the difficulties some women face when wanting an abortion?
Perhaps she wasn’t allowed out by her abusive partner so missed the cut off period, maybe she has mental Heath problems and was in denial for a long time, could be she had learning difficulties and didn’t realise she was pregnant etc etc

Of course it’s forced, a woman should be free to change her mind at any time.

There are many practitioners who will not perform the procedure. According to your logic, if the state cannot find a willing supply of people to perform a horrific and upsetting operation, you are not "free". Think about that.

we wouldn't have life saving surgeries.

This is completely the wrong way around. No one becomes a medical professional to perform late term abortions of perfect healthy little babies, no questions asked.

I do understand the point about not ceding ground, and I'm fine with that. But to me and I think most reasonable people demanding that is your right that the state provide abortion to term for any reason you want is outrageous.

There are many practitioners who will not perform the procedure. According to your logic, if the state cannot find a willing supply of people to perform a horrific and upsetting operation, you are not "free"

That a daft argument. There are people willing to do that procedure. Why are you using an argument that doesn’t even exist?

Why are you using an argument that doesn’t even exist?

There are practitioners in the UK just waiting for the nod to abort a 39 week old baby ? At that stage it's a quick turnaround. How do you know that any woman anywhere in the country could have access to an abortion at 39 weeks for any reason she wants ? And she is being oppressed if she can't get one in time ?