to think "no woman aborts a baby lightly" is untrue and unhelpful?

[ZoeCM]

I've noticed this phrase being used a lot following the news about Texas. I'm pro-choice, and I don't think it helps our cause.

There are women who have abortions lightly. It's not a myth started by the Daily Mail. I don't even think it's necessarily even that rare.

There are women who actively want a baby in the near future, are in stable relationships, aren't even using contraception, but still decide to abort because the timing isn't 100% perfect: they don't want to cancel their holiday abroad, or give birth until the extension on their house is finished. Trust me, it happens. Does anyone really think those women agonised over whether the holiday/extension was more important than the baby, before painfully including that abortion was the only option? Of course not. And that's fine. Women shouldn't have to ask if their reasons for aborting are "good enough".

Then there are the women who are on their fifth or sixth abortion - workers at abortion clinics will confirm that this does happen. It seems unlikely that those women agonised over their decisions either, because presumably they would have put some long-term contraception in place to stop it happening again. I expect most of them come from pretty traumatic backgrounds, but that doesn't mean their decision to abort isn't made perfectly casually.

This phrase is a gift for pro-lifers, because it's so easily disproved: many of them will have stories about women they know who've had abortions without a second thought. A better argument would simply be that it doesn't matter why a woman wants an abortion: she should be allowed one because it's her body and her choice.

I wonder if the expectation of suffering relates to religious heritage (cultural, if not personal). You can do something, but you must feel dreadful guilt and heartache as a necessary atonement for it.

There's certainly truth to that IME. When I went for a termination in Australia, I expected hushed tones and a few quiet, contrite looking women. I was most shocked to walk into a really busy, noisy clinic with people chatting like normal and no heads hung in shame. It was quite revelatory coming from Catholic Ireland where we were fed a completely different narrative growing up. I expected the process itself to be horrific and painful - again we were bombarded with this type of hyperbole growing up - again was very shocked to find it was nothing more than a heavy period. Expected huge emotions of guilt and remorse to plague me in the weeks, months and years after - well you can see the pattern!

Society depended on these false narratives to keep women in their place and control their reproductive lives. They achieved this through lashings of "morality" from primary school onwards. I thought I was "morally conscious" before going through process, I came out the other side "intelligent".

*You’re right - the OPs original point is right. If you truly are pro choice, you need to be pro choice regardless of the situation.

I’ve realised reading this thread, I’m not pro choice, because I can’t stand over that way of thinking. There’s no way I can say whatever your reason, it’s fine.*

In the case of first trimester abortions, sure. But insisting you have to accept every scenario? I don't believe in sex selective abortions; would morally oppose aborting a late term healthy fetus (for example of the mother found out late) in most cases.

I don't think the U.K. abortion law should be changed though. I wouldn't restrict everyone's right because of these scenarios.

But you can't seriously expect people to not have a private opinion, or at minimum a reaction, to what is often an emotive topic. It's just not reasonable to expect people to morally (notice, not legally accept, but actively support) termination in every conceivable scenario

@huniepop

*You’re right - the OPs original point is right. If you truly are pro choice, you need to be pro choice regardless of the situation.

I’ve realised reading this thread, I’m not pro choice, because I can’t stand over that way of thinking. There’s no way I can say whatever your reason, it’s fine.*

In the case of first trimester abortions, sure. But insisting you have to accept every scenario? I don't believe in sex selective abortions; would morally oppose aborting a late term healthy fetus (for example of the mother found out late) in most cases.

I don't think the U.K. abortion law should be changed though. I wouldn't restrict everyone's right because of these scenarios.

But you can't seriously expect people to not have a private opinion, or at minimum a reaction, to what is often an emotive topic. It's just not reasonable to expect people to morally (notice, not legally accept, but actively support) termination in every conceivable scenario

But why though? Why do you have some situations as ok and others that are not? If it’s just a selection of cells in the wrong place at the wrong time why does any of it matter? (I’m being intentionally black and white/argumentative for sake of argument - not having a pop at you).

When I think about it - and thinking of your point made about the moral aspect - but what does that say? - it’s because deep down I think it’s a baby, a little tiny baby.

I'm not saying people are hypocrites for judging me, I'm saying they're hypocrites for complaining about others judging when they do it themselves.

And what if they're complaining about your statements that women who have abortions deserve to be judged? As per your lovely line "I'm saying they don't get to do it and then whinge about people judging."

And before you say you're just stating a fact, "whinge" is a loaded word that makes it clear you think the judgement is something they deserve, rather than merely something that happens in objective fact.

Are those people nasty hypocrites?

*Why do you care if that's what people think? They are entitled to think that.

Some people don't think taking drugs is a big deal. Others think it's morally very wrong. Some people don't have a problem wearing clothes made in sweat shops. Others find it wrong. Some people don't have a problem eating meat. Others find it wrong.

Why is it only this topic which suddenly means nobody is allowed to feel differently to you?*

People are of course entitled to feel what they like, but it’s when they project that onto other people’s personal medical decisions that problems arise.

YANBU and I know women who have had terminations in circumstances such as you mention.

For me personally there is a BIG difference between have an abortion ‘lightly’ at 7 weeks and having one ‘lightly’ at 17 weeks - which is why I don’t describe myself as being pro choice even though I agree with termination on demand, because I think there is a gradual tipping point where you should have a damn good reason as opposed to earlier when really it’s totally up to you.

Having worked in women's health for many years there definitely are some women who have early terminations without worrying too much about it. I've met many that have have several terminations one had had 9 over a period of 5 years not all women feel torn over it some just can't wait to get rid of a pregnancy so they can go back to ' normal'

But I've also met many who have been devastated that they have fallen pregnant but can't continue with that pregnancy.

Maybe some women do need a patronising lecture, yes.

Wow. Just wow.

And my point was that the MEDICAL STAFF wouldn’t be lecturing a driver from an RTA. Of course actions have consequences - the consequence of abortions is that women don’t have to go through unwanted pregnancy.

If it’s just a selection of cells in the wrong place at the wrong time why does any of it matter?

From pretty early on, it's clearly not just a collection of cells, any more than you or I are. I mean, by 10 weeks in, it has its fingerprints.

Saying it is a baby is clearly not right, but its clearly not just some kind of blob of cells either. Its an embryo/fetus - the name we give for a human at that stage in development. If born, it will be a newborn, then a baby, toddler and so on. When old it will become a geriatric. There's nothing magic about the word fetus or embryo which means it's less human then any other named stage of human development.

Oh and I’m amazed at the various posters claiming to be medical professionals who judge for various reasons - perhaps women’s health/abortion services isn’t the best area for you ?

It's like every other debate these days, it's become polarised. You either support a woman's choice to abort a term baby the day before birth, or because a child is the 'wrong' sex, or even, theoretically in the future, for having the 'wrong' hair or eye colour. Which I absolutely cannot agree with. Or you force women to go through dangerous pregnancies with no other options or support.

Whatever happened to seeing abortion in certain circumstances as choosing the lesser of two evils? To balancing the rights of the woman and the foetus - and even the father? To supporting women to be able to raise children alone where it's mainly financial or career concerns?

The world's gone mad.

@Moonbabysmum

If it’s just a selection of cells in the wrong place at the wrong time why does any of it matter?

From pretty early on, it's clearly not just a collection of cells, any more than you or I are. I mean, by 10 weeks in, it has its fingerprints.

Saying it is a baby is clearly not right, but its clearly not just some kind of blob of cells either. Its an embryo/fetus - the name we give for a human at that stage in development. If born, it will be a newborn, then a baby, toddler and so on. When old it will become a geriatric. There's nothing magic about the word fetus or embryo which means it's less human then any other named stage of human development.

It wouldn't have any of it's parts without the mother as the host, growing and nurturing it. Therefore, the mother gets to decide whether that is a process she wants. The life of a fully grown and developed human being takes precedent over a foetus whose existence is dependent on a host.

Why do you have some situations as ok and others that are not?

Because that’s what the legislation says. As I noted earlier we seem to have completely lost sight of what constitutes legal grounds for abortion. Here they are in case anyone needs a reminder.

www.bpas.org/get-involved/campaigns/briefings/abortion-law/

*But why though? Why do you have some situations as ok and others that are not? If it’s just a selection of cells in the wrong place at the wrong time why does any of it matter? (I’m being intentionally black and white/argumentative for sake of argument - not having a pop at you).

When I think about it - and thinking of your point made about the moral aspect - but what does that say? - it’s because deep down I think it’s a baby, a little tiny baby.*

////
My personal objection is to do with second trimester and onwards, which I would argue is a baby, an unborn one. I accept abortion in many cases but not others. Same way I can accept euthanasia, for the greater good: and in the case of abortion, for the mother and fetus' sake.

It just is, it's just the normal human reaction to seeing a fully formed fetus being killed, in the case of more developed fetuses. The only difference between a 22 week fetus vs micro preemie is where it is located, so naturally people will feel a certain way

In the case of later healthy fetuses, they can be delivered (if the mother found out late, whatever other reason). The law as it stands is fair, IMO.

People are of course entitled to feel what they like, but it’s when they project that onto other people’s personal medical decisions that problems arise.

This is completely fair, mine and others frustration is from people who imply you must agree with a woman's reasoning no matter what. Without even saying she shouldn't be legally allowed, just saying it makes them uncomfortable or whatever else, or you're anti choice.

I don't have any stats but I don't believe most people in this country, certainly not in the world, believe in unrestricted abortion for any reason. Most people are not completely detached either. And this spans people in every religion and political persuasion because it's just a human thing.

It wouldn't have any of it's parts without the mother as the host, growing and nurturing it. Therefore, the mother gets to decide whether that is a process she wants. The life of a fully grown and developed human being takes precedent over a foetus whose existence is dependent on a host.

I didn't say anything about the morality of destroying such a being. If we are to allow abortion, and especially upto 24 weeks, on demand, then we are just fooling ourselves if we think it's just some blob of cells. We are also made of cells.

It's perfectly rational to decide that yes, its a human being at an early stage of development, with organs, limbs, blood etc, but also think that it can be terminated if the mother no longer wants to support that life.

@huniepop

*But why though? Why do you have some situations as ok and others that are not? If it’s just a selection of cells in the wrong place at the wrong time why does any of it matter? (I’m being intentionally black and white/argumentative for sake of argument - not having a pop at you).

When I think about it - and thinking of your point made about the moral aspect - but what does that say? - it’s because deep down I think it’s a baby, a little tiny baby.*

////
My personal objection is to do with second trimester and onwards, which I would argue is a baby, an unborn one. I accept abortion in many cases but not others. Same way I can accept euthanasia, for the greater good: and in the case of abortion, for the mother and fetus' sake.

It just is, it's just the normal human reaction to seeing a fully formed fetus being killed, in the case of more developed fetuses. The only difference between a 22 week fetus vs micro preemie is where it is located, so naturally people will feel a certain way

In the case of later healthy fetuses, they can be delivered (if the mother found out late, whatever other reason). The law as it stands is fair, IMO.

Thank you. Think I agree on the whole with you. Food for thought.

(I’m quite uneasy discussing this on a forum, I’ll probably bow out now, but wanted to say thanks for your thoughtful reply).

[quote Blossomtoes]Why do you have some situations as ok and others that are not?

Because that’s what the legislation says. As I noted earlier we seem to have completely lost sight of what constitutes legal grounds for abortion. Here they are in case anyone needs a reminder.

www.bpas.org/get-involved/campaigns/briefings/abortion-law/[/quote]
I think you’re quoting my post there possibly and your reply is out of context - we were talking about our moral responses to it and how that sits with us - not the legal grounds.

I apologise. The legal grounds still seem to be stretched to breaking point and, morals aside, I feel very uncomfortable about that.

As a few PPs have said, the issue is complex. I am pro-choice but uncomfortable with the idea that having an abortion is like cleaning your teeth. I have friends who have found it to be way more serious/nuanced/problematic than that. And that has not been down to any undue or insensitive pressure from others.

It can be particularly difficult for those with close family/friends who have miscarriage issues.

I genuinely do not care what another woman's reasons for choosing abortion may be. I'm not living her life and I'm not offering to bring up her or anyone else's unwanted baby. No woman should be forced to go through a pregnancy she doesn't want to proceed. I only care that safe abortion is available to women, and I don't need anyone to prove their 'trauma' in order to avail themselves of the process. That's just a relic of punishing women for having an active sex life.

The dilemma I see is that a late abortion can result in a baby lying in a sluice room, denied any care and left to die. A pre-term baby of the same gestation can be provided with all the resources of a whole medical team, incubator and round-the-clock intensive care.

The only difference is that one is wanted and one is not. I'm not sure how that can be right.

And that doesn't make me someone who is trying to make women who have abortions guilty or having to agonise over the decision. It's just a really difficult moral question. To deny this is to live in unreality.

In the UK a late aborted child is not denied care and left to die by standard practice. Feticide is usually used, or not if the baby is highly unlikely to be born alive due to any deformities.
There may be a small number of botched jobs where the child lives for a short time after birth and wasn't expect to, but they are not common.

No problem, thanks for reading the whole thing!

@KimDeals