Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Abortion limits lowered part 2

375 replies

CosmicCanary · 26/12/2018 01:02

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.

OP posts:
FruitCider · 27/12/2018 22:37

‘Them all’ ? I thought women would never choose to have late term abortions for healthy pregnancies anyway.

I didn't say that, I know plenty of women that would abort late term pregnancies if they could have/have had that option. But let's explore this idea of "healthy". How healthy would a baby need to be for you to volunteer to adopt them? And are you offering to adopt all of them?

bumbleymummy · 27/12/2018 22:43

Fruit, the argument from many on these threads has been that even if it was legal, women wouldn’t choose to have late term abortions. Seeing as abortion to term is already legal for medical reasons, the threads are specifically discussing late term abortions of ‘healthy’ pregnancies (which are not currently legal). Hope that clears things up for you.

FruitCider · 27/12/2018 22:46

What about medical conditions that arent diagnosable until birth? Fetal alcohol syndrome? Are you still willing to adopt those? My argument has consistently been that there are a limited number of circumstances where women may want to abort a "healthy" baby. It may be pertinent for you read the first part of this thread if you can't envisage why.

bumbleymummy · 27/12/2018 22:51

I’ve read both threads Fruit. I was under the impression that you hadn’t seeing as you’re talking about aborting to term for medical reasons which is not what is being discussed.

FruitCider · 27/12/2018 22:53

Interesting how you've skipped my question relating to one of my posts on the first thread. Again. Are you sure you've read it? Or are you just being obtuse? Anyway what counts as "healthy"? Are you willing to adopt every baby with FAS or NAS?

bumbleymummy · 27/12/2018 23:07

Fruit, I don’t think I engaged with you at all on the first thread so I’m not really sure what you’re talking about. Confused

As I just explained, the late term abortions of ‘healthy’ pregnancies we are discussing are the ones that are not currently permitted under ‘medical reasons’.

larrygrylls · 28/12/2018 07:22

‘Forced birther’ Is another silly term. Birth is a physical process that, without medical intervention, will happen beyond 24 weeks (or even earlier).

It is interesting that, in the assisted dying debate, which to me is far more cut and dried (very few competing rights), no one is arguing that they are a ‘forced breather’ because a doctor won’t help them die.

And the nexus to the circumcision debate (which people love to demand be kept separate) is, to me, unavoidable. Some of the same people who passionately object to the removal of a tiny piece of foreskin from a newborn baby in what their parents feel is in the baby’s best interests, equally passionately demand that one day prior they have the right to inject the same baby with potassium chloride and collapse it’s head by sucking out the brains.

In Nassim Taleb’s immortal words people who can argue the above are IYIs (intelligent yet idiots). They have a precept (bodily autonomy), link it to the current legal (but morally highly suspect) point that a baby is not a human being until the moment of birth, and take it to its logical conclusion ignoring all common sense and counter arguments, thus reaching a ridiculous conclusion.

larrygrylls · 28/12/2018 07:30

And, for those who advocate abortion until birth, when precisely is a baby born. Is it Ok to chop its head off when it is out but not breathing independently yet? It is still totally dependent on the mother. If not then, half way down the birth canal? Or when the mother is contracting but pre the pushing stage?

This is not a nit-picking point, it is something law makers would have to discuss if the law were changed to support your position. If you want to embrace the ‘full bodily autonomy’ position these issues are unavoidable.

Samcro · 28/12/2018 07:32

i said on the other thread that I think it should be up to birth. my reason is that if its ok to do that for disability.....there can't be a problem with it.

echt · 28/12/2018 07:35

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

FruitCider · 28/12/2018 08:30

Fruit, I don’t think I engaged with you at all on the first thread so I’m not really sure what you’re talking about.

It's quite simple really. You claim to have read the previous thread and proclaim that everyone asserted that no one would abort a healthy baby at term. I've disputed that as it's not the position I debated. I've asked you to define healthy and whether you would personally adopt every "healthy" baby women are forced to have currently because of abortion laws. I also asked you if you are personally willing to adopt the babies my patients have eg babies with FAS and NAS. However you've ignored that question so I'm going to assume the answer is no. Unless you are personally willing to adopt every child in care, not your body, not your choice.

Xenia · 28/12/2018 08:51

mubley, late term abortions for healthy babies can be legal - I posted above a summary of the law. It may be hard to meet the requirements but serious permanent damage to th woman's mental health means she can kill/ abort at 39 week old healthy baby , not that that often happens so I still think we should leave the law as it stands in England.

BertrandRussell · 28/12/2018 08:53

You can’t ban abortion. You can only ban safe abortion.

bumbleymummy · 28/12/2018 08:58

Fruit, yes, it is easy. I’ve explained what ‘healthy’ means in this context several times and yet you’re still going on about abortions for medical reasons. I don’t have a problem with adoption (if we would be allowed) but currently abortion to term isn’t allowed and there aren’t a huge number of babies to adopt so how would that change if the proposals in this thread - to allow abortion to term - weren’t allowed, only live delivery? It’s the same situation as we have now.

larry that’s a good point about ‘forced breather’. I also agree with you about the need to decide where exactly in the birthing process the woman no longer has control over whether the baby is born alive or not. Iirc from previous discussions. Some believe the baby doesn’t have its own life until the cord is cut so I guess it’s ok to kill them until then? Perhaps circumcision should be performed before cutting the cord to avoid any concerns about the baby’s right to its foreskin?

Rufusthebewilderedreindeer · 28/12/2018 09:08

larry that’s a good point about ‘forced breather

Its really not...its just a phrase and i will bet people arguing for euthanasia have all sorts of phrases, i would imagine they are more linked to being in pain though

I think xenia is making some very good comments

JacquesHammer · 28/12/2018 09:12

I’ve lost where I am with the two threads but I had a long discussion regarding why the term “forced birth” is problematic but why it can be useful.

Oakenbeach · 28/12/2018 09:12

It's more illogical to only allow abortion up to some arbitrary date. You are either pro choice or you aren't

Ridiculous .... by your “logic”, it’s also illogical to set an arbitrary age after which an individual can legally have sex, and apparently you’re either pro-sex (for all ages) or not Confused

Thankfully, our law-makers have been rather more nuanced and considered when making abortion laws and recognise we don’t live in a childishly simplistic universe.

Oakenbeach · 28/12/2018 09:24

What about medical conditions that arent diagnosable until birth? Fetal alcohol syndrome? Are you still willing to adopt those?

If they’re not diagnosable until birth, then how is abortion a solution? Or are you arguing for infanticide Confused

CardsforKittens · 28/12/2018 09:25

yet you’re still going on about abortions for medical reasons

bumbley I'm not sure where you're getting confused. Is it because you don't know how and when FAS is diagnosed? I think Fruit is asking a reasonable question, but you keep claiming to have answered it when you haven't.

Firecarrier · 28/12/2018 09:53

Fruit cider said
Unless you are personally willing to adopt every child in care, not your body, not your choice.

So, if we could guarantee a loving home for this hypothetical baby then there would be no need to ensure the baby was born dead?

Many people willingly adopt babies and children with disabilities, including foster carers who already know exactly what they are taking on as they have looked after the child.

Also, if someone decides they 'no longer want to be a mother' and therefore went to the NICU where their 'technically unviable' baby was being kept alive by multiple pieces of technological equipment and killed the baby....

CecilyP · 28/12/2018 09:54

But the question was:

Oh ok, are you volunteering to adopt them all?

Except it was in relation to extending the right to abortion of healthy fetuses post 24 weeks. As there is no such right at the moment and very few babies are currently placed for adoption, it is hard to see what 'them all' actually refers to.

Rufusthebewilderedreindeer · 28/12/2018 09:55

Also, if someone decides they 'no longer want to be a mother' and therefore went to the NICU where their 'technically unviable' baby was being kept alive by multiple pieces of technological equipment and killed the baby....

It would be infanticide...as you well know

A number of posters have explained a number of times what they mean by 'to term', so much so that even I understand what they mean

FruitCider · 28/12/2018 10:36

If they’re not diagnosable until birth, then how is abortion a solution? Or are you arguing for infanticide

Because women in prisons want late term abortions and can't have them, it's very likely my patients babies will have FAS, NAS, and learning difficulties but none of these conditions are diagnosable before birth so women who are addicts are forced to carry babies to term knowing they will probably be disabled. How is that fair?

Oakenbeach · 28/12/2018 10:42

Unless you are personally willing to adopt every child in care, not your body, not your choice.

So unless you can personally be the saviour for an issue you believe to be wrong, you’re not entitled to have a view Hmm. I abhor human trafficking... do I have to spend all my days searching high and low for trafficking victims, offering each one I find a safe house in my home in order to be able to express a view against it!

FruitCider · 28/12/2018 10:43

For people that missed my post on the first thread.

Imagine you are a 20 year old woman. You were put up for adoption because your mother gave birth to you when she was in prison. Your first 60-90 days on this Earth are spent in severe pain as you are detoxed from the substances your mother was addicted to. No one wanted to adopt you because you have FAS, so you grew up being passed around foster carers. When you got older you were put in a care home.
*
When you were 12 years old you met a "nice man". Nice man said he was in love with you, then proceeded to sexually abuse you, drug you, and pimp you. He was violent to you and raped you on a regular basis.

When you reached 16 years old, you were turfed out of the care home and put in a hostel with more drug addicts. You became addicted to heroin. At 17 years old your first baby was removed and put up for adoption - you don't know who the father was, he was probably a punter. Every 9-12 months you continue to have babies that are put up for adoption. You are too addicted to drugs to get contraception sorted out.
*
Eventually your life style catches up with you and you end up in prison, 7 months pregnant with your 4th child at 20 years old. You didn't realise you were pregnant until you arrived, because you are so addicted to drugs you didn't notice. You have been sentenced to 24 months in prison for drug dealing so your baby will be removed at birth again. You have venous leg ulcers and a PE. You cannot be detoxed from methadone as you are pregnant, meaning your baby will be addicted to opiates when it is born.