To hope this very sad case stops them giving out abortion medication without scanning

[Greenmascara]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10711221/Baby-died-doctors-gave-30-week-pregnant-mother-abortion-pill-thinking-12-weeks.html

Extremely sad for mother and baby, mother is likely completely traumatised by this.

This isn't an anti abortion thread. Whilst never desirable, abortion needs to remain a safe, legal, NHS funded option so women aren't forced into buying illeagal/ dangerous pills online or having dangerous/ unsanitary abortions from backsttreet "doctors."

But I have been really, really concerned how at the start of covid, any safeguarding/ care in abortion went out the window. Pills posted out with no safeguarding concerns, and no scans to confirm pregnancy is within the legal limit.

Am I right in saying tragic, traumatic cases like this happen when you don't scan to check the gestation of pregnancy before handing out this medication ?

I imagine this is a very rare case.

This is a tragic and unusual case. It’s not enough of a risk, for me, to start a requirement for a scan before anyone can access abortion medicine.

Women already have to jump through enough hoops to access it as it is. A requirement like this would lead to more later abortions as women had to wait. Who is going to do all these scans? It’s not difficult to understand that an abortion which might have taken place at 6 weeks could end up taking place at 12+ as a result of waiting for a scan.

Vanishingly few women seek late term abortions. The idea that there are going to be loads of women somehow cheating the system is a nonsense. Very few women have pregnancies which present as less than 12 weeks when they’re actually 30 weeks, so the idea that this could happen regularly by accident either also isn’t valid.

Another Example.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8349739/Police-investigate-death-unborn-baby-woman-took-abortion-drugs-home-28-weeks-pregnant.html

Quite often women with irregular periods are not going to be able to date a pregnancy accurately, and I can only imagine the horror of thinking pills are going to induce a 10 week miscarriage to actually giving birth to a 28 week baby.

It’s extremely rare. It also says in the article that whether she was scanned or not is unknown:

“The woman went for the treatment at York Hospital on October 26 last year but scans were either not carried out or were done erroneously.”

The vast majority of women that have used the telemedical service have found it to be overwhelmingly beneficial. Rare cases such as this shouldn’t be used as justification to deny women options.

@BobbinHood

This is a tragic and unusual case. It’s not enough of a risk, for me, to start a requirement for a scan before anyone can access abortion medicine.

Women already have to jump through enough hoops to access it as it is. A requirement like this would lead to more later abortions as women had to wait. Who is going to do all these scans? It’s not difficult to understand that an abortion which might have taken place at 6 weeks could end up taking place at 12+ as a result of waiting for a scan.

Vanishingly few women seek late term abortions. The idea that there are going to be loads of women somehow cheating the system is a nonsense. Very few women have pregnancies which present as less than 12 weeks when they’re actually 30 weeks, so the idea that this could happen regularly by accident either also isn’t valid.

Surely a women could/ should be scanned on the day of a face-to-face consultation with a nurse/ midwife. Prior to covid it was deemed necessary, so I'm not sure why it isn't now.

This has nothing to do with abortion law in the UK and everything to do with a shortage of staffing, overworked staff, and poor oversight and management and care of women who are are pregnant - as we see over and over again.

Scans not carried out. Tick.

Other tests not carried out. Tick.

Inappropriate medication given out while other care withheld. Tick.

Safeguarding basics not undertaken. Tick.

Woeful management. Tick.

If this story is accurate, there was/is an absolutely dreadful state of affairs in that ward.

I agree OP. I also entirely support abortion but this is not a safe option for women or babies. This baby must have died an awful death. Very sad for the baby’s mother

Because people can’t get appointments in time? Keep it accessible.

@SpinningMeSoftly

This has nothing to do with abortion law in the UK and everything to do with a shortage of staffing, overworked staff, and poor oversight and management and care of women who are are pregnant - as we see over and over again.

Scans not carried out. Tick.

Other tests not carried out. Tick.

Inappropriate medication given out while other care withheld. Tick.

Safeguarding basics not undertaken. Tick.

Woeful management. Tick.

If this story is accurate, there was/is an absolutely dreadful state of affairs in that ward.

How is this nothing to do with abortion law in the UK? Women are able to access abortion medication over the telephone in this country, without being scanned. MPs have just voted to continue with this practice post Covid

I agree it's horrific. But as others have said it's rare. There's lots of medications we take at home that could have disastrous, rare side effects. I think women should continue to have the choice of taking the pills at home for their dignity and comfort. I can see the argument for requiring a scan but can also see why women seeking an abortion might find the process traumatic.

Surely a women could/ should be scanned on the day of a face-to-face consultation with a nurse/ midwife. Prior to covid it was deemed necessary, so I'm not sure why it isn't now.

Because women shouldn’t have to wait to have a face to face consultation with a nurse or midwife. And frankly there aren’t enough midwives to safely care for women who want to have their babies never mind scanning women who don’t want to continue their pregnancies.

Plenty of women have irregular periods. How many women get to 30 weeks with no pregnancy symptoms, no movement and no bump? Not enough to warrant removing the remote provision that’s provided a much better service for many women over the last 2 years.

‘MPs have just voted to continue with this practice post Covid’

Because it was found to be overwhelmingly beneficial for women, compared to the older system. The NHS is underfunded and understaffed, and because of this women were having to jump through hoops and wait far longer than they should have done.

Exactly @Piper22.

My concerns with that are:

1. As the need for scans have been dispensed with, BPAS et al do not seem bothered about identifying ectopic pregnancy, molar pregnancy or pregnancies over the 10 week limit for home abortion, causing a very significant risk to the health/ safety of vulnerable women.

2. No check the person obtaining medication is actually pregnant at all, and is not obtaining the medication to either administer by stealth or force/ coerce/ pressure a vulnerable person, ( often child), into taking.

3. The ease this gives for abusive parents, families, partners, ex-partners to bully women into abortion; the provider has no idea whether the women has someone in the room with her during a telephone consultation preventing her from talking freely.

4. The ease at which this system allows the mass cover up of trafficking and the abuse of underage girls , women wit mental health problems, learning disabilities etc.

Brian might quite like having sex with his learning disabled neighbour Linda, but knows he may get arrested for abuse if this becomes public knowledge due to the extent of Linda's learning disability/ lack of capacity. If Linda has to visit BPAS face to face, some serious questions about who got her pregnant would be asked and she would likely be safeguarded. But now pills by post exist, Brian can get his girlfriend Louise, ( whom he also abuses), to ring BPAS and request pills by post for herself. Regardless as to whether Linda is past the 10 week gestation or has other medical conditions that make this completely unsuitable for her.

But she wanted an abortion and she got an abortion? What is tragic about that? The hospital should have been more rigours with their checks

The counter argument is that many women are forced to become and continue pregnancy because they can’t access those appointments outside of the home.

@NorthSouthcatlady

But she wanted an abortion and she got an abortion? What is tragic about that? The hospital should have been more rigours with their checks

She wanted an abortion when she thought she had a 12 week pregnancy Nothing to suggest she wanted an illegal 30 week termination, or wanted to give birth to a dead child. There is a difference between a 12 week miscarriage and a 30 week stillbirth.

Prior to covid there was no issue with the scans being necessary to access this treatment

Convenience should never ever come above duty of care and this seems to be what’s happened here.

Saying it’s rare or unusual is not acceptable as this could have been prevented.

The reality is what should be happening is more locations/ centres opened for this service so women can access it quickly but more importantly safely.

No, women should not be forced to have a scan in order to exercise their right of body autonomy.

^again, the vast majority of women that accessed the service reported it to be beneficial to them.

Alternatively, what about women that are coerced into continuing unwanted pregnancies? Access to telemedical abortion is the only way some women have of getting the treatment they need.

Worst case scenarios, that occur in a tiny minority of cases, should not be used to take options away from the majority of women women that need this service, and would find it better for them.

Abusive men can already buy abortion pills online. Making women jump through hoops will not prevent a man from getting his hands on them if he really wants to.

I think its likely she knew she was exactly as pregnant as she was but for some reason could not face an abortion earlier or face to face at a facility in which case, it might have been exactly what she wanted. She obviously felt very desperate and utilised the options at her disposal, albeit illegally if she knowingly lied about dates (which is a whole other post).

@Greenmascara agree tragic if accidentally given some medication, that caused the baby to die. I’m pro-choice but ultimately she did go to the hospital for an abortion. I doubt 12 or 30 weeks is pleasant.

Nobody was complaining about it pre covid though?
Now there’s an easier more convenient system are we just meant to ignore things like this or potential identification of ectopic pregnancies etc

@Stompythedinosaur

No, women should not be forced to have a scan in order to exercise their right of body autonomy.

But it's quite normal for doctor's to do diagnostic checks before providing medication.

An early pregnancy unit won't give me pills for a "missed miscarriage," I've self diagnosed without a scan.

I can't just tell a GP I think I have chlamydia/ gonoreah / syphilis and demand medication . I have to wait for swab/ blood tests to be returned. It's completely normal for doctor's to refuse medication unless a scan/ blood test / swab test confirms diagnosis.

It has to be a rare event, most women had an idea about how pregnant they are (roughly) most women have symptoms at 30 weeks.

If she was unsure about dates she could have requested a scan. It's very sad but I'm sure it's v,v rare and sadly in medicine these things happen.

@Brogues

Because people can’t get appointments in time? Keep it accessible.

Yes we should be campaigning for better SAFE access to abortion services and for women to be safeguarded with the appropriate checks and scans done