Girl challenging abortion law on grounds of disability

[User273648]

I've name changed for this. A girl is challenging the right to abortion on the grounds of disability as she has Downs. I'd be really interested in opinions.

Personally, I have a cousin who has Downs. She is low functioning (the girl challenging is clearly high functioning as she lives alone supported by carers). My aunt and uncle struggle with it. My aunt admitted once that she had cried for the first two years. They found out at birth. She obviously loves her daughter but given the choice of the same child not having Downs' Syndrome she would wish for that.

Obviously this a very sensitive topic - I'm not intending to upset anyone...just listen to other points of view.

YABU - the law should be changed so it's equal regardless of disability
YANBU - the law should stay similar to how it currently is.

www.dsrf-uk.org/downrightdiscriminationcase/

It would probably be easier if abortion was just removed from the legal system at all

I don’t follow. As in make the procedure illegal?

@pointythings I always thought it was barbaric but it seems even sadder now she is an adult and has come out as a lesbian, if she'd had the choice maybe she'd never have had the operation and would choose to live as a male or maybe she'd choose to live as a female with ambiguous genitalia or maybe she'd choose to have surgery to enhance the maleness or maybe she'd have the operation to make her genitals "acceptably" female. I don't know I just feel she should have had the choice. I'm not saying being a lesbian is the same as wanting to change sex but if genitals are ambiguous maybe the individual should be able to choose what they want rather than it being done to them when they are too young to express an opinion.

I think it is terribly hard to know what is best, I know her parents and probably the doctor thought it was best for her to "fit in" and that it would be easier for her. I just don't find it normal to do that to a baby.

I don't know, maybe I'm just to squeamish. I don't agree with circumcising baby boys either.

I'm on the fence. Absolutely against any reason any time. I just cant get on board with the idea that a 40 week baby could be killed just because the mother decided against it.late term abortions are rare in the uk because for the most part they are illegal. However in other parts of the world women can have abortions up to 40 weeks for any reason and the numbers are much higher. I just couldn't agree to that, I find it abhorrent. I dont know how to feel about the reasons for abortion. Is aborting babies because of an unquantified disability better or worse than aborting a baby because it's a girl, or any other reason? On reflection I'm not sure it is. It all feels a bit eugenics to me. That some lives are worth less than others.

But, until that baby leaves the mother's body, it is not a human in its own right with rights of its own. It is an extention of that woman's body, and so if she does not want to support that life in her body - for ANY reason - then it's her right to terminate that life. You can't tell someone what to do with their body

This isn’t the case though, you can’t abort a healthy after 24 weeks so society does have some say in this.

It would probably be easier if abortion was just removed from the legal system at all

I’m not sure. It’s easier for doctors to work within legal guidelines. You can’t have an ‘anything goes’ attitude to something that should be safe and regulated. Look up Kermit Gosnell if you want to know why there needs to be legally enforced boundaries around these procedures.

I'm just trying to sort this out in my head. What would happen if a woman close to term was attacked/killed and the baby died, is the death of the baby a separate crime?

I’m thinking very, very few terminations take place after 24 weeks, so the issue affects very few people but whilst respecting choice, I would want limits on choices.
I understand that people with disabilities should be of equal value to society and that different gestational limits for termination isn’t supporting the idea that all people are equal.
I think women have a right to choose until viability.

Looked it up it is child destruction, there have been cases where a woman was killed and the murderer was also charged with child destruction. So in some circumstances an unborn child does have rights, is that right?

If anything an implanted fertilised embryo is a parasite, if you want to 'call a spade a spade', that's what it is.

I agree, a baby is parasitic. But still a life though.

I suppose saying life starts at conception depends on how you want to define life. To me life has started, even though it's bunch of parasitic cells. To other life hasn't started until things like a functioning brain has developed.

But either way you can't force it woman to host that life is she doesn't want to. She has every right to refuse to have her body used as an incubator.

@HeatherIV

Although we disagree on when life starts I really respect your views on this and how articulately you put them across.

And I agree, no woman should be forced to be an incubator for a parasite she doesn't want to host.

Anything that takes away a woman's own right to choose is wrong. I hope this challenge fails.

However in other parts of the world women can have abortions up to 40 weeks for any reason and the numbers are much higher.

haggistramp could you substantiate this claim with links or evidence, please? Because other than in case of serious disability, I can't find any countries where there are no limits and a woman can just abort to term because she wants to.

late term abortions are rare in the uk because for the most part they are illegal

Are you sure? That that is the reason?

I would have thought that the reason late term abortions are very rare is that earlier abortion is legal, safe and available on the NHS, and that women really do not get to late stage, having carried their baby, felt it move, kick, etc, and then suddenly decide on a termination.

I don't think anyone is saying that at all. They are saying that men might also want a say over what happens to their potential child. An abortion isn't just another medical procedure.

Men get a say, they just don't get to compel a woman to continue with a pregnancy. Ultimately there's no room for compromise, and so the person who is taking all the physical risk must make the decision.

I actually agree that life starts at conception. I think people try and say otherwise to try to make abortion more palatable. Let's call a spade a spade, you are killing somthing that is your child, just in the very early stages of development

It's not a child. It is the potential for a child, 25% of pregnancies end in miscarriage.

I think the issue here is time. Ordinarily a woman has 20ish weeks on finding out she's pregnant to decide if she wants a baby. But after an anomaly scan, re-scan, referral to fetal medicine and amino a woman may only have days before the 24 week mark to decide if she can cope with a potentially very disabled baby. It's brutal bit it's reality.

If the harmony test could be offered on the NHS nationwide instead of nuchal screening at 12wks, it might be problem largely solved .

@Gimmecaffeine

I don't think anyone is saying that at all. They are saying that men might also want a say over what happens to their potential child. An abortion isn't just another medical procedure.

Men get a say, they just don't get to compel a woman to continue with a pregnancy. Ultimately there's no room for compromise, and so the person who is taking all the physical risk must make the decision.

I actually agree that life starts at conception. I think people try and say otherwise to try to make abortion more palatable. Let's call a spade a spade, you are killing somthing that is your child, just in the very early stages of development

It's not a child. It is the potential for a child, 25% of pregnancies end in miscarriage.

Yes but some people are saying that fhe potential father should have no say at all and has no right to an opinion.

Yes but some people are saying that fhe potential father should have no say at all and has no right to an opinion.

What 'say' do you want him to have?

How would his 'say' or 'opinion' be implemented? If it was the opposite of the woman's? Would anyone (outside of a raving cracker state in the U.S, or under Taliban rule, for e.g) seriously say that a woman who desperately wanted a termination should be forced to proceed with her pregnancy because the man wanted a say and disagreed?

You know what I see? When many men 'have a say'?

Women on MN being pressurised by men having their say and trying to persuade them to abort foetuses they don't want to pay towards or commit to.

Women bringing up disabled children as single parents because the fathers (ones that up until that point ) couldn't cope or didn't want to cope.

No one has rights over a woman's body and therefore no one is entitled to an opinion. That may seem hard on men, but I am one and to me it is the only way to look at it.

In practise of course a woman may discuss it with her partner, family or anyone else. It just can't be a condition that she does.

Yes but some people are saying that fhe potential father should have no say at all and has no right to an opinion.

So what happens when they disagree? You can insist men have a say but it's a 'yes' or 'no'.

The woman is the one that must continue with the pregnancy and live with any complications or injuries afterwards. She also tends to have a minimum 50% custody if they separate. Society appreciates and is set up for fathers leaving the family, but mothers leaving their children entirely is very rare.

Ideally no one need an abortion after 24 weeks (well I suppose ever in an ideal world) as problems would be identified before this point allowing women to decide what to do before this point. However a quick scan of pp has shown that this isn't always possible in cases where the women discovers a disability after 24 weeks. If a change of law makes it impossible for even just one women to access an abortion post 24 weeks for medical reasons then in my opinion it can't be passed.
Now my own personal experience, I had issues identified on the 20 week scan. NHS keen to rush for an amnio to find out pre 24 weeks, this tells me that in reality the majority of late abortions are probably carried out somewhere between 20 and 24 unless there are exceptional circumstances. Therefore a change in the law is actually be pretty pointless.
What I will say though is that I found the NHS to be very pressuring when it came to having an amnio and abortion. I ultimately refused. On this basis I do think an attitude change is required. Some people (like myself) have made a decision that a pregnancy will continue if the baby has DS therefore I do think it's inappropriate for abortion to be pushed once the women has expressed this opinion. Often women who have a child with DS are met with 'I'm so sorry' vs 'congratulations' - if the woman has known the baby has DS and has continued the pregnancy it's safe to believe they want the baby so commiserations are inappropriate. Medical professionals should be providing the facts about DS but should withhold emotional pressure.
(I have focussed on DS as that is the disability the lady has).

Because other than in case of serious disability, I can't find any countries where there are no limits and a woman can just abort to term because she wants to

Canada oddly enough has no federal restrictions on abortion; ostensibly you could get a very late-term abortion legally, but no one would do it. Medical ethics are real, and in fact, there’s a such a lack of provision for late-term abortions in Canada that they often have to travel to America to get it done:

www.globalnews.ca/news/4354376/donald-trump-abortion-rights-canada-access/amp/

I keep namechecking After Tiller, but it is essential viewing for anyone wanting to understand the reality of late-term abortion.

It also opened my eyes to the relative restrictedness of abortion in Europe; I don’t think you can get an elective abortion in France past 12 weeks, so this one French woman was literally calling a clinic in New Mexico desperately inquiring about an abortion. The clinic ultimately refused her (they seem to be pretty selective about who they take on as clients, which is a problem they fully acknowledge), but it shows how we really don’t talk about European restrictions at all, many of them like France don’t allow electives past the first trimester.

The whole world seems to complain about US abortion laws and then get their late-term abortions done there ... very odd situation.

@1forsorrow

All medical procedures should be normal! Everything? Extreme plastic surgery, FGM, genital reassignment.

Those are cosmetic procedures, not medical. Stop being obtuse.

Yes but some people are saying that fhe potential father should have no say at all and has no right to an opinion

He has no say. He has the right to an opinion, but you must see how that doesn’t carry any weight whatsoever.

We simply cannot encourage situations where a man can have a say over a woman’s body because that is what having a say in this circumstance would mean. His chance to “have a say” as to whether he wants a pregnancy or not is before penetrative sex.

Of all abortions performed in the UK in 2018, only 0.1% were performed after 24 weeks. The stats don't specify at what week of pregnancy they were done, but I think it's safe to say most of those were done soon after 24 weeks. Interestingly, 111 selective reductions were performed in the same year, which is almost half of the number of late abortions, andnthe vast majority of these were in women who had had IVF to become pregnant.

I understand that it must be very upsetting to have a condition that pregnant women are tested for with the view that it is better that they aborted. I imagine it is like living with the message of 'you shouldn't exist you know'.

But I don't think women should be forced to continue pregnancy to save the feelings of others. I've also noticed that a lot of non-disabled people who support this are just against abortion full stop but that's not socially acceptable.

It would be better to focus on ensuring services to support women who do (knowing or unknowing) have children that need it.