Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

306 replies

Greenmascara · 12/04/2022 18:05

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 ?

OP posts:
dworky · 13/04/2022 08:58

I don't. You are ridiculous.

HardyBuckette · 13/04/2022 09:26

The thing with discussion of abortion is that it involves acknowledging some very unpleasant realities. It's easier to say well we should have a system where all women can access early scans, because yes of course we should, that part isn't actually wrong. And when you say that, you don't have to make your peace with the fact that we don't, clearly aren't going to at any point in the near future and that even if we did, there would be women not allowed to access it.

It's not actually a very palatable reality that being coerced into taking abortion pills at home is some poor women's least worst option (see posts upthread from women who experienced forced DIY abortion at the hands of abusers). Easier not to think about that. Easier just to say how awful it is that their abusers could misuse the NHS telemedical option and not finish the other half of that discussion.

TalkingCat · 13/04/2022 09:28

The problem is these scans are usually promoted the the far right and the Christians and anti-choicers, because they think once the woman sees it on the scan, she will change her mind and keep it. It's a form of emotional manipulation. It was brought in over in America by the far right anti-choicers that a woman cannot have an abortion unless she is forced to endure a scan first. Not only is it an attempt to emotionally manipulate and bully a woman into seeing it as a 'baby', but it is very traumatic for a woman who doesn't want to be pregnant. Luckily where I am a scan is not performed unless the woman wants a scan done.

HardyBuckette · 13/04/2022 09:30

Yes, for better or for worse there is a context to scans. It doesn't stop existing because some people would prefer it didn't.

pointythings · 13/04/2022 09:49

I just knew someone would bring up Kevin Duffy as an 'independent'. Disgusting behaviour.

SevenWaystoLeave · 13/04/2022 09:56

@Whatalovelydaffodil

There was a thread recently discussing why so many women are asked to do a pregnancy test.before having an xray, even though they knew they weren't/hadn't had sex for years/had had a hysterectomy. Most people on that thread thought it was fair enough for hospitals to ask for this as "otherwise they might get sued" and "better safe than sorry".

Yet on this thread the general opinion seems to be the opposite, i.e. we should trust women to know their own bodies and let them make their own decisions.

MN is strange sometimes

There isn't a contradiction here. Abortion should always be an informed choice. If someone has an x-ray not realising they are pregnant and the foetus is harmed, that is not an informed choice.
Whatalovelydaffodil · 13/04/2022 10:05

There isn't a contradiction here. Abortion should always be an informed choice. If someone has an x-ray not realising they are pregnant and the foetus is harmed, that is not an informed choice

How is it not an "informed choice" if you know you can't be pregnant because you haven't had sex for five years or you have had a hysterectomy? Shouldn't we trust women?
If someone takes an abortion pill when they are 30 weeks pregnant, but they thought they were 12 weeks because they haven't been able to have a scan how is that an "informed choice"?.

HardyBuckette · 13/04/2022 10:18

This is going to turn into a TAAT...

SevenWaystoLeave · 13/04/2022 10:28

@Whatalovelydaffodil

There isn't a contradiction here. Abortion should always be an informed choice. If someone has an x-ray not realising they are pregnant and the foetus is harmed, that is not an informed choice

How is it not an "informed choice" if you know you can't be pregnant because you haven't had sex for five years or you have had a hysterectomy? Shouldn't we trust women?
If someone takes an abortion pill when they are 30 weeks pregnant, but they thought they were 12 weeks because they haven't been able to have a scan how is that an "informed choice"?.

I've had a hysterectomy and if I'm asked before a medical procedure if there's a chance I could be pregnant, I simply reply "no, I've had a hysterectomy" and that's that. But if I hadn't, and they didn't check, and it turned out I was pregnant, but that foetus was then killed by x-rays, clearly I have not been able to make an informed choice about that pregnancy. This is a vastly different situation to someone who wants an abortion and I'm honestly baffled as to why the two situations have been compared. Routinely checking if a woman might be pregnant before a medical procedure and having an elective abortion are two very different situations. I really see no contradiction between believing it's best to check there's no risk of pregnancy before a medical procedure and also believing women should be able to have an abortion if they want one.
Whatalovelydaffodil · 13/04/2022 10:31

I really see no contradiction between believing it's best to check there's no risk of pregnancy before a medical procedure and also believing women should be able to have an abortion if they want one
Well, no but that's not what I said.

SevenWaystoLeave · 13/04/2022 10:37

@Whatalovelydaffodil

I really see no contradiction between believing it's best to check there's no risk of pregnancy before a medical procedure and also believing women should be able to have an abortion if they want one Well, no but that's not what I said.
Then why have you even brought the first scenario up?
HedgehogToes · 13/04/2022 18:04

I'm really confused as to how this woman fell through the cracks for a scan.

I've been pregnant four times in the last 18m. One chemical, one MMC and 2 second trimester TFMRs. With the MMC I had to be scanned at a two week interval to make sure the pregnancy hadn't progressed before I could be given the medication.

The TFMRs, I had to be in hospital to give birth, but I had to go through scans, confirmations and multiple signing of documents. They had to be sure I absolutely wasn't past 22 weeks as after that, feticide is used to stop the heart.

Something has gone very badly wrong in this woman's care and needs investigation.

IDontHaveAnOutingHobby · 14/04/2022 00:15

I think it is symptomatic of a dysfunctional hospital
Sadly it is the hospital which has probably killed my DH due to incompetence .

I could write a book about York hospital and it wouldn't be good
My advice- avoid at all costs

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 14/04/2022 14:47

@SW1amp

The problem with your hypothetical arguments is that none NONE of the charities and organisations dealing with the people who would be victims in these cases agree with you.

Take a look at the list of charities that signed the letter to government to maintain the pills by post services
It’s Womens Aid, Refuge, countless medical Royal colleges, Rape crisis centres

They all deal with the actual reality of victims of coercion and abuse and all the other what-abouteries that you listed

And if they all think pills by post are a good idea, I’m more inclined to agree with them than someone who can only find a couple of Daily Mail articles to back up their case…

Yes, yes & yes
MyrtlethePurpleTurtle · 14/04/2022 15:32

@Hopspinach

Interesting that the majority of voters agree with you, but the comments are dominated by people attacking any skepticts as being "forced-birthers" and anti-woman.

Clearly the subject has become so politicised and partisan it's impossible to have a nuanced and reasonable discussion around it. Plenty of people agree with you, OP. But people are scared to voice their opinion because they see how they will be attacked. This makes the debate more and more one-sided and means we increasingly only hear one opinion. It's basically another, more insidious form of cancel culture.

I suspect the majority of posters agrees with the OP as her opening post was based on a false premise - ie that the tragic incident reported was a result of telemedicine - which it was not

< OP’s assertion: Pills posted out with no safeguarding concerns, and no scans to confirm pregnancy is within the legal limit

Original poster
Greenmascara · 14/04/2022 19:56

And I find the forced birther insults particularly bizarre. The woman was forced to undergo a 30 week stillbirth in a hospital toilet as pre abortion scans weren't thought to be essential. A scan would have completely avoided this forced stillbirth experience.

OP posts:
SW1amp · 14/04/2022 20:00

@Greenmascara

And I find the forced birther insults particularly bizarre. The woman was forced to undergo a 30 week stillbirth in a hospital toilet as pre abortion scans weren't thought to be essential. A scan would have completely avoided this forced stillbirth experience.
The actual link you posted says the scan may have been done erroneously

So that’s some bold fucking statement from you to say ‘a scan would have completely avoided this’

EmeraldShamrock1 · 14/04/2022 20:01

The poor woman must have had a horrendous time.

Original poster
Greenmascara · 14/04/2022 20:13

@EmeraldShamrock1

The poor woman must have had a horrendous time.
Exactly. It must have been horrendous for her and highlights why the government shouldn't be cutting back on safeguards and doing away with basic necessities such as scans in this situation.
OP posts:
Original poster
Greenmascara · 14/04/2022 20:15

Erm @SW1amp, the link is very clear that a scan may not have been given. Highly unlikely it was, given that even a non medical person could tell the difference between a 12 week and 30 week pregnancy on a scan.

OP posts:
Mummyme87 · 14/04/2022 20:22

I booked a TOP during covid, I called at 5weeks pregnant, but they wanted to scan me first, not sure what the criteria was, I had two prev children, x1 prev CS, bled 1litre and 2.5L with babies requiring blood. Ended up with a ruptured ectopic a week before appt. not sure what would have happened had I not been put in for a scan

Wannakisstheteacher · 14/04/2022 20:31

I don’t really believe she didn’t know she was 30 weeks. But at the end of the day she wanted an abortion and she had one.

Original poster
Greenmascara · 14/04/2022 20:31

Furthermore, @SW1amp, a 12 week foetus measures approx. 5.7 cm, and a 30 week foetus measures approx. 38 cm; so I think we can be pretty sure a scan wasn't carried out in this particular case, as that's well, quite a big difference for a sonographer to miss.

OP posts:
Original poster
Greenmascara · 14/04/2022 20:37

@Wannakisstheteacher

I don’t really believe she didn’t know she was 30 weeks. But at the end of the day she wanted an abortion and she had one.
I would believe that.

If she wanted to hide a 30 week abortion, ( which is illegal), she would have said she was 7/8/9 weeks and been given the pills to take at home.

The fact she said she was 12 weeks, ( knowing it would take place in a hospital setting and be unable to cover it up), suggests she very much did think it was 12 weeks. This sounds like a very traumatic experience for the woman and she was failed by a negligent termination provider. Consenting to a 12 week termination does not mean she would have consented to a 30 week labour in a hospital toilet, with her baby being resuscitated in front of her and spending four days in NICU.

And many women struggle to date a pregnancy. Some have irregular periods, on/off bleeding, ( those who got pregnant using hormonal contraception might not have had regular periods for years). Not everyone experiences sickness, symptoms etc and if this was a first pregnancy movements could have been confused for indigestion etc . This is why a scan to date a pregnancy accurately pre termination is vital .

OP posts:
Wannakisstheteacher · 14/04/2022 20:41

Why are you calling it “her baby”, she didn’t want a baby, she wanted an abortion. To me, it seems likely that she wanted the abortion in hospital because she knows she was over 12 weeks and the risk to her health.

The chances of getting to 30 weeks without knowing are incredibly small.