To be annoyed by anti-Alabama posts?

[Bere111]

For context, I’m not prolife or pro choice...i wouldn’t have an abortion myself but I know that largely because I’ve never been in those desperate circumstances, so equally would never judge someone who had.
But all the anti-Alabama posts I’ve seen this week by women in the UK I find pretty ill informed.
For example, most not knowing it is still banned in Northern Ireland- part of the UK.
Also, people saying it’s ‘healthcare’ - I don’t believe this is true. I think it should be a crisis service, and making it sound routine trivialises it for me.
People saying it’s a women choice...again I don’t really think this is right. It’s a women choice to get pregnant or not get pregnant of course, but unless that girl or women fell pregnant through no choice of their own (in which can of course she should have access to abortion) I’m not sure once she’s actually pregnant she should then just be free to opt in or opt out.
I fell pregnant by accident with ds1, I was very newly married, had a well paid job and owned a house but was younger then I’d planned to be (27)- yet I had 3 people ask ‘god, what are you going to do???’ Which I found bizarre.
Most people’s opinion of abortion (including mine!) is formed on the fact that for those that are victims of rape or incest, or the health of the mother or baby is in question, or for example the mother is under 18 or even under 21, the time they need to have a safe solution to deal with an unplanned pregnancy.
However, I know that only about 3% of abortion happen for the reason above. The rest the nhs classify as lifestyle factors.
I’m sure many women may be masking issues by telling the motivating reason for the termination is just a lifestyle factor, but even so I still think many, many abortion take place because of poor planning and poor timing.
I’ve had 2 close friends have terminations in our late 20s, both of which went on to have children with the same partner a few years later. Although I supported their choice, I didn’t really understand it. They were both preoccupied with the idea that the timing wasn’t right- even though they wanted children and wanted children with the current partners.
I think we put far to much pressure of ourselves that we have to do things in the right order- so then when a pregnancy comes along that wasn’t on the timeline, we freak out- even if we are perfectly capable of parenting at that time.
I also think something most be going wrong with how we are approaching contraception, especially as the fastest growing segment of women needing abortion are 30+ and have ahead previous abortions. Can women not access contraception easily or could giving more education around ovulation cycles help this (this is pretty common place in countries like Germany from secondary school age, and women generally avoid sex when they’re ovulating- even when using another form of contraception)
I guess all in all I think it’s a really complex matter- and I don’t think we have it totally right in this country, and I find it a trivialisation to see my friends sharing handmaid tale’s pictures with ‘my body my choice’ tag lines...surely when a matter really is life or death, we shouldn’t simplify it as a women’s prerogative?
Or AIBU?

She has had a very bad reaction (nearly died) to anesthetic before so wouldn't have a hysterectomy, so she relies on contraception. She does not want to be a mother. Why should she be forced to if she fell pregnant?

Just a factual point, a hysterectomy has never been used for purposes of female sterilisation. Secondly, she needs to see a doctor because it's possible to be sterilised without a general anaesthetic.

Anaesthetists work with people who 'nearly died' every day and with people who are extreme risks but need GA for medical reasons.

The adoption system isn’t overwhelmed it’s underwhelmed- there’s a huge shortage of children, particularly babies, needing adoptive homes. ... I don’t blame women for aborting rather then adopting- I would do the same BUT don’t suggest that abortion eases pressure on an overwhelmed system. That’s rubbish

Well, it depends. Yes, if abortion were banned or severely restricted tomorrow, the healthy babies coming into the system as a result could probably be placed relatively easily. But what about the babies with problems? It's a simple fact that the babies with birth or genetic defects won't be placed nearly as easily, thus imposing even more pressure on a system which will also find it even more difficult to find families for older children. So, given that consequence, the availability of abortion is certainly helping to ease pressure in the care system.

@alienspring
I’m actually even vegan so no that doesn’t apply to me. Even if I wasn’t, surely we show more compassion to humans than other animals ?

If you are not in any way responsible for lives you did not create, why are you passing comment on those lives on the internet?

But individual choice does have an impact on society and on vulnerable people in society. We should discuss this and we should balance the rights of the individual with protections of vulnerable members of society.

Coming back to euthanasia - why am I prevented from having choice over my body? Why is that not the right of the individual, to do whatever they want? The answer is because that choice doesn't only affect the individual. It has wider implications, particularly for the vulnerable.

@mollysshadow
Sorry did what happened in America pass you by ?

I’ve never said I support alabama?

You said you were annoyed by anti-Alabama posts.

Klendraa, if these bills are about protecting the unborn, why don’t the bills include a ban on IVF?

Klendra, you do realise that in the ‘real world’, bills or no, your opinion still doesn’t matter to women facing unwanted pregnancy? The reality is that women still abort in countries where abortion is illegal, they just risk their health and their lives to do so.

So do the existing children pay bills? Lack of money is just about the worst reason I can imagine for ending a life.

People have to visit food banks. People have to choose between eating and heating. People are in debt just to survive. But if a baby is born then a magic money tree grows in the garden or something.

Laws that will result in unnecessary and preventable deaths of women like Savita Klendraa, well done you 👏🏻

You mean Alabama or New York, klendraa? Two different states, two very different abortion laws.

The Alabama bill is, thankfully, likely to be struck down on appeal like countless anti abortion bills have been before it.

Glad I was here to entertain you teyem

Surrounding tissue is the womb lining. The same is done after a late miscarriage

So what is different between having an abortion at 12 weeks and 24 weeks.

Also given the size of the baby at 12 weeks. How does it fit down the tube.

Tube is described as very slim on some websites and size of baby is 2 inches long and size of a plum.

Decomposing, my question wasn’t aimed at you. It was aimed at Pinky.

Of course people who feel responsible for vulnerable people want to protect them. But Pinky has said it isn’t her responsibility.

I struggle to understand how anyone can be hard lined on this subject on either direction. The idea of forcing someone to continue with an unwanted pregnancy is awful. The idea of terminating human life is awful. Of course people will seek abortions legally or illegally for all manner of reasons, and therefore safe and accessible terminations are necessary. But my god the people incredulous at any moralising on the subject are baffling. It's an emotive and difficult topic, to act like terminating human pregnancies is no big deal, is bizarre and worrying. It is a big deal. It's ok to accept that and for it still to be the right decision.

I know I wouldn’t exist, and therefore neither would my children, or any line of my family going forward if abortion was available on demand when my mother got pregnant

If if if
This is a moot point and an invalid argument. You could apply this to just about anything. My dad would still be alive if he had left the house 5 minutes earlier/later.

But for some of us it legitimately isn’t an ‘emotive and difficult topic’? I don’t see what’s baffling about that. What another woman does with her own body has absolutely nothing to do with me, you, or Mrs X down the road. Why should it?

The adoption system for healthy babies is underwhelmed now. This would change quite quickly if we stopped abortion, and there would also probably be an impact on the prospects of harder to place children: those older and/or with more complex needs.

There are 190,000 abortions performed in the UK each year, of which around 180,000 are performed on women resident here. Banning abortion doesn't make it less common, but even if we pretend it does and the number is halved, do people really think there are 90,000 people each and every year willing and able to adopt newborns?

We could certainly facilitate more adoption by giving more money and resources to people who want to do it but have practical constraints, and I'd argue we should do that anyway, but it's also about people actually wanting to do all the work involved with raising a child, especially one that's already experienced separation. This is not realistically likely, and as some of the people who now adopt older children would instead adopt a baby if they were able to, the prospects for older children needing families would get even worse than they already are.

Ultimately, bringing lots of children into the world that don't have people who want to look after them isn't a very good idea. We know what this looks like, we've done it before. It's orphanages, and worse.

So you would like to ban abortions and seek to force women to remain pregnant and give birth then, Pinky?
Yes this is exactly what I believe should happen

In every circumstance, Pinkyy? How about the situation where miscarriage is inevitable but the foetus' heart is still beating? Should that mother be forced to remain pregnant and accept all the consequences, even when they may lead to sepsis and an agonising death?

Is this one of those "pro-life yet anti benefits" attitudes where people would happily make women give birth to a baby they didn't want then go on to complain about women claiming benefits to stay afloat so they can bring up said child?

I have relatives in Alabama. If one of them was attacked and raped, and became pregnant as a result of that rape, then an abortion is now out of the question.

How can it possibly be right that the sperm of a rapist has more rights than the wellbeing of the victim of that crime?

When I had my miscarriage no one said ‘sorry you lost an embryo’, most people acknowledged that id lost a baby, and rightly so

Semantics.
Because anyone who would say 'Sorry you lost your embryo' would be an absolute cunt as you well know.
Be very careful here OP.

What is surround tissue?

A typo - should be ‘surrounding’

Myworstnightmare123

The analogies that my statement have spawned are not really relevant.

They are more to do with not doing something innocuous than killing someone.