Abortion limits lowered part 2

[CosmicCanary]

I messed up the last one.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3458517-To-think-late-term-abortion-rules-may-need-tightening-up

The limits should not be lowered in my view.
I am pro choice to the point where it is the womans choice as long as her body is required.

I feel sick after reading the procedure for a 'safer' late abortion. Truly shocking.

Life is cheap.

We always end up with the (silly) argument that a foetus is not a human being until the moment of birth and those wanting to change the law (to abortion on demand until term) using the law (‘the foetus has no human rights until birth’) to support their self-contradictory argument.

Most cannot see the magical transformation that occurs to a foetus as it passes down the birth canal and draws its first breath. It has the same brain, the same sensory organs and the same capability to feel fear and pain.

If you are up for abortion until birth, are you up to allowing scientific experiments on the foetus (with the permission of the mother) until birth? If not, why not? I can see some fantastic possibilities here .

And I would argue that the ‘yuck’ factor is a good argument for a law. We make laws around what other humans feel to be acceptable. We even argue that those engaged in consensual mutilation are still committing assault, which can only be the ‘yuck’ factor.

I think this is current English law and we can see there are a good few cases where after 24 weeks is not an offence. I don't know how clause b is used in practice - probably not ofen as we do not have many late abortions in this country so in mmy view it is a bit of a non issue, but presumably if you would have grave permanent mental problems if you had a 39 week child you could abort it under b.

" Subject to the provisions of this section, a person shall not be guilty of an offence under the law relating to abortion when a pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner if two registered medical practitioners are of the opinion, formed in good faith -

    (a) that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or
    (b) that the termination of the pregnancy is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or
    (c) that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated
    (d) that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped."

It is in no way comparable to legalising homosexuality. Homosexuality does not involve ending another human being's life.

People aren't against this because it is 'gross' it's because it is a horrible way to die, especially when it is not necessary for the baby to die in order for the woman to stop being pregnant. Yes I refer to it as a baby, there is a world of difference between a foetus only a few weeks into a pregnancy and a post 24 week foetus.

The general reaction to this method of abortion actually cements for me that women are generally kept ignorant about methods of abortion, even when they have them. Many abortions post 15 weeks will be done like this and it sickens me that this is acceptable. The wording on NHSsites is that they will dilate the cervix to allow surgical instruments to 'remove the pregnancy' Even pre 15 weeks it describes the suction method as inserting a tube to suck out the womb contents. This is a human life form being torn limb from limb by a hoovering device and I think we need to be honest about what we are doing here. Posters claiming that objectors lack compassion. REALLY????What about compassion for those babies having their brains sucked out and skulls crushed. I am sorry but it is barbaric and how it is allowed in civilised society is beyond my comprehension.

I am sorry but it is barbaric and how it is allowed in civilised society is beyond my comprehension

Because fortunately we live in a society civilised enough to allow women autonomy

I see nothing 'fortunate' about this procedure.

As pp have said, I am hugely relieved that that the majority of people don't think that late term abortions should become the norm.

The procedure described above is horrific and inexcusable,and don't think is justified in any circumstances.

I agree with larry that this silly argument that a baby is a foetus until it has left the birth canal is just theoretical nonsense. Would we advocate terminating the life of a disabled or unwanted newborn like this? Or even another animal and think it humane?Of course not.

What a horrible dystopian world we live in, I will not revisit this thread after posting this,it's too depressing.

Whoever said this is like homosexuality being illegal needs a reality check. I believe it is the opposite - future generations will look at our blase attitude to abortion the same way as we look at mass infanticide of female babies by the Chinese or locking mentally disabled children away in asylums - ie they will be horrified.

By the way, I looked up the abortion limit in the rest of Europe and all but a couple have a limit of 12-16 weeks. Why on earth do we need it to be so much later in this country?

Is it because women / girls are so much less informed about the signs of pregnancy so they leave it later to decide?

Is it because the NHS is too slow in providing an abortion once someone has decided they want one (up thread someone said they wanted an abortion at wk 14 but didn't get one until wk 19 which is just unacceptable)?

Presumably we don't think all other countries in Europe are barbaric or denying women bodily autonomy? So why don't women in those countries need a later limit but we do?

When you read the two extremes of this debate, it just cements for me why a compromise (as we have now) is entirely the correct position.

None of us have complete autonomy all the time. It is not realistic. Especially to demand a procedure from a 3rd party.

Equally to deny women bodily autonomy in 99% of pregnancies (abortion before 24 weeks) seems unreasonable. There are competing rights in most people’s opinion and a line needs to be drawn somewhere.

“Because fortunately we live in a society civilised enough to allow women autonomy”

You don’t need to terminate late term in order to have autonomy.

Abortion should be decriminalised, women are the best people to decide what is right for their body. Cant believe there are women who want to take away some of our rights. What next, forced births. Locking pregnant women up in prison?

You don’t need to terminate late term in order to have autonomy

There are any number of reasons why it might be necessary

Presumably we don't think all other countries in Europe are barbaric or denying women bodily autonomy?

Actually yes, I think 24 weeks is a pretty responsible compromise. I think not allowing women the option to abort to that point is pretty barbaric.

Wow after reading the procedure peformed in a late abortion it actually sounds horrific, How upsetting, I dont think any persons feelings should come before doing that to a baby. Makes me feel sick.
People can state it isnt a baby just because it hasnt come out of the lady if it makes them feel better but it is a baby none the less at full term. What an absolutely barbaric thing to do

Jacques can you give some of the reasons why it’s necessary to terminate for bodily autonomy?

• at a late stage.

Mother’s physical health.
Mother’s mental health.
Unaware of pregnancy
Issues with foetus

I can’t remember if it was on this thread or the first but I didn’t get my 20 week scan until just over 22 weeks. That was the first date they had available. If following the scan I wanted an abortion there’s no way it would have been possible to get it before 24 weeks. So in addition I would add pressures on the NHS.

Sorry. Missed the “autonomy” bit as issues with foetus doesn’t come under that! However it’s srill a valid reason for a late term abortion.

Physical/mental health and foetal health fall under ‘medical reasons’. They aren’t reasons to terminate an otherwise healthy pregnancy purely for the bodily autonomy reasons people have stated on this thread. The woman can choose not to be pregnant at that stage (bodily autonomy) without having to terminate.

X-post. I disagree that any of those are valid reasons to terminate at a late stage when it is possible to end the pregnancy without termination.

The woman can choose not to be pregnant at that stage (bodily autonomy) without having to terminate

By giving birth? So then we’re back to “forced birth”.

I disagree that any of those are valid reasons to terminate at a late stage when it is possible to end the pregnancy without termination

Which is fine. I think all are valid reasons to terminate at any stage.

I'm pro choice. Up to full term, on demand, for any reason

I'm confused. A lot of people who think they are having an abortion at a late date could end up with a live baby, couldn't they?

I just don’t know how anyone can terminate a healthy pregnancy past 12 weeks, it must be very distressing. I know the 20 week scan is where a lot of abnormalities are picked up, & amino isn’t available until 16+ weeks, but a late termination is understandable in these circumstances ( although I still couldn’t terminate at that late stage unless my life was risk )

Aborting a healthy baby past 24 weeks is not something the vast majority of people would support ( thank god )

Why the fixation on termination? People have been asking this throughout the two threads. Why is a live delivery not acceptable to you?

‘Forced birth’ makes no sense as early posters have explained. The woman will have to deliver at this stage, regardless.