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?

If the late term abortion limits are about viability, will we see them get more restricted as Neonatal care is improved?

Babies didn’t used to make it at 24 weeks, now I believe there has been at least one fringe case of a 22 weeker making it after the mother lied to the medical staff about the EDD so they would try to save her child.

As medical advances are made and the point of viability becomes earlier, will we tighten abortion laws further and further until “10% of 8 week embryos make it to term in an artificial womb, so no abortions ever!”?

Babies born at 22 weeks don't necessarily have all the care required to keep them alive motoko. Not at all. Many trusts don't offer resuscitation/only offer it in restricted circumstances at that stage. No bad thing imho. One example:

www.uhs.nhs.uk/Media/Controlleddocuments/Patientinformation/Pregnancyandbirth/Havinganextremelyprematurebaby-patientinformation.pdf

It's not until 24 weeks that it's standard practice to offer all the care needed to keep the baby alive.

YABVU.
''Should the threshold be lowered?''
No. Look at the facts and try to put your own feelings aside; we aren't talking about your life or your situation.

Women cant get any benefits for a third child. If your partner died or walked out during your third pregnancy how would you cope?

Look at how life is for women in countries where abortion is restricted of illegal and do everything you can to stop that happening here.

I do think it needs lowering. Late abortions for medical reasons, absolutely fine. I think the cut-off should be 12/14 weeks. That's my opinion I know others will disagree.

If someone has got to 20 weeks or later they will have to give birth anyway, so I think they should look into adoption.

I'm pro choice and aware that very very few people do it because of the baby being the "wrong" sex. Well said that if you believe in a woman's right to choose you believe in it whether you personally feel it's justified or not.

I think the current system works fine as it stands.

When I hear about other countries and how difficult it can be (or is becoming) for a woman to have any choice it scares me.

Pro choice all the way here.

I personally think it is too late. I would go as far to say around 12-16 weeks as the limit for what looks like a normal pregnancy in normal circumstances, but a friend decided to terminate later I would understand. For me personally, about 8 weeks if I really was sure I wanted to have a termination (I'm pregnant now with an unexpected pregnancy and panicked at first, but I'm glad I didn't make this decision now).

It depends on the circumstances. If there is a valid medical reason and the baby would suffer immensely if born at a later stage it might be ok. It would be hard to carry another baby to term knowing this too and the knock on effect of this on the mother's mental health if already emotionally fragile could be severe.

I think the statistics are that children born at 23 weeks can still survive. So maybe it does need reviewing, so that the limit is dropped for babies that are conceived in normal circumstances with normal development, but is different in certain cases, however, I don't know if it is possible to implement this and there probably is a blanket rule for this reason.

Not that it gives me more a say but for relevancy I have had three premature babies including a 24 weeker who sadly didn't make it.

As early as possible, late as necessary every single time.

I don't want my baby surviving for so long used as an example to try and take choices away from other women.

i think it should be up to term for all.

@ewltsahooman well yes, that is the current position but is that right? It is also the current legal position that women don’t have the right to have abortions unless medically necessitated even though they are not interfering with any legal rights. That certainly isn’t right. The question isn’t whether women should have abortions but whether feotuses should have rights and what they should be.

Your argument re these kinds of women shouldn’t be mothers is a bit neither here nor there. If a woman attempted a late term abortion herself resulting in a live birth should we kill the child because it doesn’t have an adequate mother? What if the child is already three months old when a parent attempt to murder it? Should we kill the child in that scenario? Killing children really isn’t a solution. In late term pregnancy the distinction between a child and a feotus is quite artificial. Literally a second separates a child and a feotus. This, while a convenient state of affairs, isn’t sufficient as an intellectual solution. There is no difference in the feotus/child itself immediately before birth and immediately after it so how can we justify such different legal treatment? There must be a better answer.

I'm in the pro-choice camp. As early as possible, as late as necessary.

And sometimes, it's the mother's mental or physical health that may be driving the abortion, it's not just the health of the foetus that comes under the medical intervention reasons.

Putting ever more limitations on abortions causes all sorts of problems. I recall a poster from Northern Ireland. They have more restrictive abortion laws there, and this poster was pregnant with a foetus that would not be surviving the birth. Yet due to the restrictive laws was being forced to continue the pregnancy know there was no good outcome.

As early as possible, as late as necessary, for any or no reason.

I'm not so pompous as to think I know what's best for another woman or her family.

Even if I know about it in detail, I don't walk in her shoes.

It's as simple as that. There is no dilemma for me in this. Each woman's life experiences, appetite for risk, domestic setup and support and medical history is unique. No one else should be telling another sentient human what's best for her.

Butt out, is what I always think when I hear whether someone " disagrees" or "agrees" with abortion limitations... It's none of your business, your option is less than nothing.

whenever someone floats this idea, they seem to have no idea of the stats, the situations, or the emotional distress that might cause the woman to commit suicide if denied a medically viable abortion, or the horror of enduring a forced birth.

it's as if the sight of a perfectly formed foetus makes them lose their minds - which is annoying, as that's what the anti abortion crowd want.

woman = womb to you then OP.

I stopped growing in the womb at 22/23 weeks and was born via c-section at 2 months prem. I was 2 pounds 7 ounces and you wouldn’t be able to tell I was prem by looking at me. No health problems and was out of hospital in 2 months. I really do believe babies at 20+ weeks can survive outside the womb if given the chance and the right treatment but it’s obviously some women’s only choice when there are debilitating medical issues presented

That's good for you, and that's not sarcastic, I genuinely mean it.

My cousin's little bit was born at 24wks and has a host of health issues. He's now 4yo with severe cerebral palsy and even, he is partially deaf and his sight is deteriorating, he's tube fed and has a machine at night to help him breathe as he has sleep apnea. All from being premature.

It's not as simple as "babies of 20+ weeks can survive with the right treatment" when the results are so variable and the impact can be lifelong.

The BPAS briefing on this is a useful read.

www.bpas.org/get-involved/campaigns/briefings/premature-babies/

They're quite right that the conflation of late term abortion and cusp of viability births doesn't do either group any good. But even if you do take this approach to determining abortion limits, and you shouldn't, there is zero hope at 20 weeks and thus zero basis for reducing it to that level.

@Hmmbiscuits why do early? I didn’t find out about my second pregnancy until about 14 weeks (combination of continuing to menstruate, few symptoms and difficulty getting an appointment to get a proper test to confirm-hone tests were very faint or negative suggesting early miscarriage).

I think it depends on the situation.
If I found I was 20 weeks pregnant at this point in my life. I would abort. Rather then go through another heart rendering court case for another child. I lost my children to adoption six months ago. I am just starting therapy and I am incredibly unwell.

Maybe in 5 to 6 years my answer would be different.

At the end of the day Its the woman's body. The woman's choice.

PoesyCherish - "You can't be pro choice and then put restrictions on it like this".

I disagree. The law imposes restrictions on abortions carried out for non-medical reasons, based on foetal viability. The upper limit is currently 23 weeks and 6 days, where it has been since 1990 (prior to 1990 it was 28 weeks).

I think most people would agree that there has to be a limit. Personally, I think that it's probably time to review the upper limit, since advances in neonatal care in the past 28 years have chipped away at viability. It's not such a rare thing nowadays for a baby born at 24-weeks to survive.

I'm pro choice.

It makes absolutely zero difference to the foetus whether the abortion is for a "good" reason or a "bad" reason so really we're just talking about making moral judgements of deserving/undeserving women.

It's interesting that you talk about how killing children isn't a solution racecardriver. Because sometimes, when women who want an abortion are forced into giving birth, that's precisely what the solution ends up being. There's plain and simple infanticide, then there's general neglect, poorer food, not getting appropriate medical treatment.

It's important we factor this into the discussion, particularly when you appear to be talking about access to abortion per se rather than simply access after a certain point. It's not like we don't know what happens when children are bought into the world with nobody who wants to care for them.

I don't want my baby surviving for so long used as an example to try and take choices away from other women.

Thank you for this @Pandamodium

I think the legal definition that a foetus becomes a person at birth is fine as it is. Changing the definition in a way that results in the foetus being given rights before birth takes away the bodily autonomy that women should have. And is yet another way in which women are treated as second class citizens.

What happens in this case if the needs of the mother and the needs of the foetus conflict? Who's needs take precedence? Would the father of the as-yet unborn child have the right to insist on treatment for the foetus against the mother's wishes?

For those saying that abortion should be available up to term, would you really terminate a pregnancy at 39 weeks?

And what should happen if between a woman booking and attending the termination appointment, she goes in to labour and the baby is born?

To be honest I think that this is one of those things people say without ever thinking it through.

At 20 weeks many foetal abnormalities become clear. It may then take another week or two for extra referrals, additional scans etc and then a wait for a hospital appointment to carry out the TMFR. A 12-16 week limit would simply be unworkable and would mean women would have to carry to term babies with severe foetal abnormalities who have no chance outside the womb.
As BPAS says it is wrong to conflate the legal limit for termination with prematurity and survival. I say this btw as the mother of a 26 weeker.
If you read this thread carefully 0.1% of all abortions are after 20 weeks. That is a very very small number.

Termination is indeed available at 39 weeks in this country for certain foetal abnormalities.
So it is under 24 weeks for a healthy foetus although most abortions between 20-24 weeks are carried out after the 20 week scan shows up problems.

Post 24 weeks termination is offered up to term only if there are medical reasons.