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?

WestBerlin

You can't legislate against potential regret and no system will be perfect but I think it could be better than it is and yes, for women who choose to keep the pregnancy as well.

The process of abortion has got quicker and it is seen as wrong to question whether that is right or not.

I don't see it as wrong to just question whether the current system is serving women as well as it could or whether it needs improving.

But protecting vulnerable people is the objection to the right to die - that some people will be pressured into that decision by unscrupulous relatives or because they fear being a burden

It may be that they do, although often the lobby is coming from the self-same religious groups that oppose abortion, who as, so often, hide behind these kinds of arguments. That doesn't mean I agree that theirs is a valid argument, and I'm not alone, studies show that 80% of the British public agree with me.

At least there’s some consistency, although it’s taken god knows how many pages for it to be acknowledged.

Here’s a better idea for though, how about you just back off and leave women alone, trusting them to make their own choices? What about the impact you would be having on those women you would be forcing to continue unwanted pregnancies longer than they have to?

There is no perfect system, you’re right in that, but all you’re proposing to do is put a stumbling block in the way of women wanting to access abortion services quickly, and making it more of an ordeal than it has to be.

You cannot protect all women, all the time. There will always be women, indeed people, that will regret decisions they have made. That doesn’t mean their freedom to make those decisions should be curtailed or denied.

Oops posted too soon. It may be that those are the arguments being put forward but that doesn't mean that they are valid or that I have to agree with them.

WestBerlin

Read the posts on pregnancy choices and then come back and say that those women don't matter. That all that matters is that other women get their abortion slightly earlier.

The needs of everyone have to be balanced, not one group being more important than the other.

The process of abortion has got quicker and it is seen as wrong to question whether that is right or not.

Not according to the NHS who believe that for many women the process is still far too slow.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nhs-backs-faster-access-to-abortions-wqtg5t08t

WestBerlin - I guess the question is why the foetus shouldn’t have some rights if it is viable outside the womb (how are they different from newborn?)- ie the mother would not have to support them. But i agree that since the number of such cases is small, the current law seems to be working.

I can't read that, it's behind a pay wall.

Read the posts on pregnancy choices and then come back and say that those women don't matter. That all that matters is that other women get their abortion slightly earlier.

No thanks, I'd rather read an unbiased scientific, objective, study conducted under stringent research parameters.

I’ve read pregnancy choices. I stand by my opinion. The regrets of a minority should not have a detrimental impact on the majority of women who should have the right to access termination without having obstacles deliberately placed in their way.

The reason it’s hard to get sterilisations under 30 is probably because HCPs have seen people wanting reversals and it being difficult/unsuccessful.

This is probably what @decomposingcomposers has seen but with abortions. Perhaps better funding for prompt counselling would be good?

Amendments were needed to the 50-year-old legislation because some women, frustrated by long delays in obtaining a termination through the NHS, were instead resorting to obtaining abortion pills over the internet, she said.

Holdups were now so common, shortages of doctors trained in abortion care so widespread, and the process of obtaining pills so time-consuming and user-unfriendly that women’s access to early abortion was “at crisis point”.

www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/05/make-access-to-abortion-easier-uks-top-obstetrician-demands?awc=11152_1558305464_268a4776dd46e2e90032058e35e92177&utm_source=afl&utm_medium=awin&utm_content=Bauer+Media+Magazines

Draft guidelines related to Times article www.nice.org.uk/guidance/gid-ng10058/documents/draft-guideline

www.thesun.co.uk/news/8846582/abortion-national-guidelines-faster-easier/

Surely an answer to longer waiting times is to look at why so many abortions are needed and try to prevent those pregnancies, rather than concentrating efforts on increasing capacity in abortion clinics by compromising care?

In no other area of healthcare would a patient be able to rush through a procedure like that.

I just don't see that as progress. That to me seems like it will compromise women's health but no doubt it will go ahead.

Wonder how they are going to increase post abortion counselling provision?

Currently four out of every five abortions occur when women are under 10 weeks pregnant, but the kinds of changes envisaged by some posters would mean that women would be forced to be further advanced in their pregnancies before terminating. So at risk for more pregnancy-related health risks as well as common symptoms such as morning sickness, be more likely to undergo physical changes, removing their option of privacy - abusive partners might for example be more likely to find out that they were pregnant and that might have serious consequences such as DV...And the evidence being presented for why this change should happen? A few posts on an Internet forum, which are, let's face it, just as likely to be a form of catfishing as they are to be genuine. The evidence against making changes that prolong the process of obtaining a termination: healthcare providers, NHS advisors, actual funded studies that demonstrate that the percentage of women who have serious post-abortion regrets are miniscule. And as other posters have noted these regrets may relate to the consequences of decision-making rather than actually wanting to have continued with a pregnancy...

actual funded studies that demonstrate that the percentage of women who have serious post-abortion regrets are miniscule.

Do you have a link to these studies?

Here are links which will lead you to just a few, if you want any more learn to use Google:

www.guttmacher.org/perspectives50/emotional-and-mental-health-after-abortion

theconversation.com/some-women-feel-grief-after-an-abortion-but-theres-no-evidence-of-serious-mental-health-issues-95519

I am going to bed now.

But what I would say is that your posts around so-called regret sound suspiciously like a familiar tried and tested anti-abortion strategy– despite your claims to the contrary – used as part of an attempt to ‘tug on the heartstrings’ and one which many are adopting as part of their anti-abortion arguments, as it’s a way of trying to appeal to people who are not likely to respond to and/or be interested in the religious arguments:

“States have enacted laws around "abortion regret," which focuses on the idea that abortion causes long-term health problems for women, said Alesha Doan, associate professor in the School of Public Affairs & Administration and Department of Women, Gender & Sexuality Studies. Scientific evidence has largely discredited the idea, but it remains an effective anti-abortion advocacy tool, Doan said, because regret narratives involve people discussing their own experiences, which are emotionally compelling stories that are persuasive to the listener.”

wgss.ku.edu/professor-alesha-doan-and-gta-carolina-candal-publish-important-article-disputing-abortion-regret

I will read those and I did Google actually. Plenty of studies come up but difficult to know who funded them and whether they are impartial.

And I assure you that I am not anti abortion but I do believe that safeguards need to be in place. But that's just my opinion. It doesn't have any effect on the services that are available so why does it bother you what I think? My opinion is not going to affect any woman seeking an abortion.

There's too many unwanted and uncared for children in the world already, why on earth would it be a good idea to ensure that more unwanted children are born.

YABVU
Women are not obligated to gestate, it is a choice. One we can get out of via contraception or abortion.
Your not pro choice at all. Your post screams anti choice.

I don't care if I had all the money in the world, I never want to be pregnant again, I never want to go through labor again. Nothing will change that. If contraception fails, I will abort. That's my choice, not ANY other person gets a say, including dp

@pointythings I'm here on a green card so (given the current political climate) don't even feel I can post about it on Facebook let alone fight or go on a women's march.

Watching friends sob last night over their fears for their 5 year old girl's futures was not something I thought I'd ever see.

@Peopleshouldread
One of the senators from Ohio has tacitly stated that the laws don't apply to an IVF embryo because it isn't in a woman - "she's not pregnant"

Brilliant post, absolutely brilliant. Especially the line above

This is the outright, in black and white proof it's not life they care about, its about punishing and controlling women who dare have sex.
How people can't see it is beyond me. They been like it since day dot, now they are openly saying it, how much more do people need to see to know these people are pure evil

The op is absolutely not pro choice at all. Her spiteful, cruel (and since deleted) comment to me earlier made it very clear what side of the fence she is on.

@squeekums I posted this earlier but feel some haven't seen it