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.

Vdbfamily, yes they do but that isnt discovered in pregnancy is it. Some conditions can be and really why would you make a child suffer a condition if it can be avoided? Why put that stress on family in every aspect, physical, financial and mental

Squeekums, because it is not a definite for many babies at 20 weeks gestation. A high risk of Downs diagnosis has a massive spectrum of possibilities. We are expecting healthcare professionals to then be involved in a process of lethal injection and birthing s baby that are often born with no obvious defect. Some of the disabilities are minor. Many of them can be righted with modern science. I have worked all my adult life with people with disabilities, often profound and have yet to meet one who wished they had never been born. I have a colleague with CP who is one of the most inspiring people you would want to meet . I get that it is a massive thing for a parent to commit to but I also think that 'pro abortion lobbyists' have reduced embryos to a clump of cells until a baby suddenly appears and that sometimes because of this, these decisions are made too lightly, and in doing this and trying to rid the world of disability, we do a disservice to those currently living with disability by making out they are less wanted/ loved/ valuable.

well if its ok to get rid of disabilty(what a vile thing to say)make it up to term for all. as its ok.

Samcro, so what, you think people should be born to suffer? That is vile
If youve seen my previous posts i have no issue with abortion for any reason at any point. I trust women. I trust women wont just get to 8 months in a healthy WANTED pregnancy and go "eh im done, im gunna abort"
I know not every woman finds out she is pregnant early, i myself didnt know till 27 weeks, not a single symptom. Now if that was result of rape or i was a homeless drug addict, id want to abort and would do everything i could to obtain that, even self abort.
Most issues aint discovered till 20 weeks plus, which is why most late term abortions happen, medical issues either with foetus or mother.

I trust women wont just get to 8 months in a healthy WANTED pregnancy and go "eh im done, im gunna abort"

Why would you trust that someone wouldn't do something that is absolutely fine anyway? I don't understand.

This idea of ‘trusting women’ is, again, a silly argument. Taken to its extreme why bother to make infanticide a crime (for women? After all, we trust them, don’t we? Or Just exempt women from all criminal law as they are 100% trustworthy?!

Laws are made for the few in society who do decide or willfully neglect the morality imposed by the majority and enshrined in law

Samcro, that is already English law - you can abort lawfully severely disabled children up to just before birth.
"well if its ok to get rid of disabilty(what a vile thing to say)make it up to term for all. as its ok."

England, Wales and Scotland let the mother decide and many mothers choose not to have a child with disabilities. However most of these disabilites are found early on so it is quite rare ifor there to be late term abortions.

"During 2012, 92% of abortions were performed before 14 weeks' gestation, 6% between 14–20 weeks, and 2% (n=96) at a later stage. Of the 96 abortions carried out beyond 20 weeks, 53 were due to actual or probable fetal abnormality." wiki

In sweden i think it was, apparently they on track to be free of downs in near future cos apparently most women who test

It’s Iceland. I personally would abort a fetus that tested for Downs, and think it should remain an option. It’s a controversial topic, and I expect a variety of opinion on it though. If NGOs/disability rights groups want to try to convince us not to terminate, they can feel free to do so, and I will feel free to ignore them.

24 weeks is enshrined in law in the UK; while personally I feel it a bit too long (most EU countries set the limit for healthy fetuses at 12-16 weeks) I wouldn’t support a rollback.

I wish I had not googled intact dilation & extraction after reading that term here. I feel quite sick.

ChristmasFan2018

There's a reason on why the "pro life" brigade show posters of aborted foetuses and as nasty as some people find it, that is the reality of abortion. Someone has to see it.

I'm not sure why pro abortionists are not comfortable with it, but there you have it..I think it's possible to accept the reality and still be in favour of some abortion. If you cannot accept it at all and think that bodily autonomy means that the pregnancy should be terminated and the reality of what that means hidden, then I think that's a pretty disgraceful attitude.

The argument is basically that the medical professionals who have to deal with this stuff "consented to it" and therefore it's ok..it makes abstract theory about bodily autonomy sound pretty meaningless IMO.

There’s an old but interesting article in the NYT about “late-term” abortion (mostly between 20-24 weeks) and it is really challenging. But I feel it was balanced as it only interviewed doctors themselves about the procedures they use and why they use them (or their preferred methods and why). Essential reading for anyone interested in learning more about second trimester abortions.

Link: www.nytimes.com/1997/03/21/us/doctors-say-it-s-just-one-way.html

Anyone else find it odd all the doctors willing to perform late term abortions in that article are men ?

“so what, you think people should be born to suffer?”

Do you agree with euthanasia at birth for children born with disabilities?

A few were anonymous. You have to recall that they get harassed and targeted much more in America, so perhaps men are more willing to be open about it. You’ll note that Dr. Tiller was interviewed for this; he was famously shot by a pro-lifer. Unless we have actual stats, I wouldn’t read too much into it.

PineapplePower

What does "autonomy" mean ? To be free from external control right ?

Logically, how can a man provide women with "bodily autonomy" ?

This is obvious nonsense. The argument about bodily autonomy is silly.

Elon think you might be replying to the wrong person said nothing on autonomy

I am comfortable with it. I view abortion as killing and I am glad it is lawful and support our current law and have no problems seeing pictures of it. It is consistent with my view that if you are prepared to eat meat you should be perpared to kill animals - it just goes with the territory. People can be very morally inconsistent on these topics eg happy that anything that is not cute and cuddling can be killed like a fish but not happy when the animal being killed is a furry bear and ditto abortion - antyhing looking like a cute large baby they don't like but happy to kill a smaller less cute looking version.

Xenia I'm confused now. You seem to be saying you are happy with the current law which bans late terminations unless there is a medical necessity ? In other words, the law represents exactly the moral inconsistency you object to ? That it is ok to kill little a very little and un-baby like foetus, but not an older one.

Using your own analogy, would you personally be willing to perform a late term abortion ? I mean supposing you had the skills etc. I wouldn't, so therefore beleive it unreasonable to argue it is my right. I think to most people late term e.g
30 weeks plus, is basically infanticide. The argument about it not being a proper life and etc kind of goes out the window when people see what it looks like.

I would be prepared to perform it.
I support the current law as it is a reasonalbe compromise between the various different moral viewpoints people have in GB, not because it is perfect. i certainly certainly understand the state's utilitarian argument that disabled children are in a sense worth less (according to the state, not me) and thus can be done in at 39 weeks even but not in most cases those without serious disabilities. I think it is life whether disabled or not and whether 1 week or 39 weeks of gestation. I see no moral difference in killing it at 1 week or 39 weeks (or even a day after birth - although that goes further than current law).

or even a day after birth - although that goes further than current law

Infanticide of disabled babies

Where do you draw the line? 1 day, 1 week, 1 year?!

I didn't say disabled, did I? I said the moral position on killing at 39 weeks which you can in some cases do lawfully in GB with non disabled babies and eg 2 hours later - where do we draw that line? How does the UK decide before the baby emerges it is fine to kill it but not 2 seconds later? I said it was klling whether at 1 week gestation or 39 or post. All of it is killing.

We seem to have a reasonable compromise in GB which most of us can live with so best to leave it alone (oh I suppose other than the babies as they don't live with it they are killed by it). Also late term abortion is so rare in the UK is it s a bit of a red herring and not a major issue.

Xenia

You'd personally be prepared to kill a 1 day old baby ?

As for the moral difference I think it is to do with instinct and perception. People know, and will have always known what was under a pregnant woman's bump. I personally would be unmoved by the site of a very early termination but would find both the act of killing a late term baby in the womb and viewing the 'evacuated' contents very disturbing. Most people are the same and I believe morality quite naturally follows instinct. The desire to have sexual intercourse but not get pregnant is strong enough that it's morally excusable to some people to kill an early stage foetus for any reason at all.