To find it utterly chilling that Tory MP Danny Kruger has said that he doesn’t believe women should have absolute right of bodily autonomy?

[AngeloMysterioso]

During a House of Commons debate yesterday Danny Kruger, MP for Devizes said-

“I recognise the degree of distress and concern felt by many members in the house on the supreme courts decision… I probably disagree with most members who’ve spoken so far about this question.

“They think that women have an absolute right to bodily autonomy in this matter, whereas I think that in the case of abortion, that right is qualified by the fact that another body is involved.

“But we can disagree on that question, and I offer to other members who are trying to talk me down, that this is a proper topic for political debate, and my point to the front bench, is I don’t understand why we are lecturing the United States on a judgement to return the power of decision over this political question to the states, to democratic decision makers, rather than leaving it in the hands of the courts.”

(underlining is my own emphasis)

Telegraph - Women do not have ‘absolute right of bodily autonomy’, says Tory MP Danny Kruger

Daily Mail - Prue Leith's religious Tory MP son Danny Kruger says he doesn't agree that 'women have an absolute right to bodily autonomy' in debate over US abortion ban - and British MPs should not 'lecture' US over their democratic process

Evening Standard - “Women ‘don’t have an absolute right to bodily autonomy’, says Tory MP Danny Kruger”

Spectator- “In defence of Danny Kruger”

AIBU to think this is rather terrifying, in light of what’s just taken place in the US and the fact that, with BJ’s Tory leadership hanging in the balance there are rabid pro-lifers like Jacob Rees Mogg ready to take his place?

He's my MP. I never have, and never will vote for him. His response to the Sue Gray report was pathetic. This news doesn't surprise me at all.

There was a midwife on the AMA topic a couple of years ago. She dealt with women who had late term abortions and had specialized in that.

The dedication, compassion and kindness she brought to those women made a big impression on me. Her firm conviction was there should be no upper limit imposed. She was very very clear, as late as necessary. The individual circumstances being so rare, so traumatic and so specific that to refuse a termination is utterly inhumane.

It made me want to look at the issue down the other end of the telescope if you like. Why would a woman want a very late stage termination and what sort of society would refuse point blank to assist her. What would forced birth in those circumstances actually entail. I will always support women with choice for whatever reason and whenever. No question and no judgment.

I very much doubt this will be a reason he'd be voted out. Far fewer of his constituents will care than would be hoped.
Many won't understand it, others will see nothing in it that affects their life (they don't anticipate wanting an abortion themselves and can't see the wider ramifications) still others will agree with him. This is a big deal on a woman centred forum but in the general population there is much less interest and less outrage.
Sadly, by the time he's up for re election this will have largely gone the way of BLM. That is, for most people it will no longer matter.

@TheRealShedSadie

This is so so sad to read

I appreciate that you have tried to empathise with women who are in real trouble but I am so perplexed as to how a late term abortion is not in your eyes murder. I will never be able to understand the logic of someone finding it inhumane to the woman to refuse her one at a late stage - even taking into consideration all her circumstances...but not inhumane to a baby in late term pregnancy...by the same logic it would be inhumane to allow a mother to kill a live born baby because of an array of special, specific and terrible circumstances.

A baby is housed in the whomb of a woman in the latter months of pregnancy, and could healthily survive outside it at that stage. I have to ask - is it not a human until it actually comes out of the woman's body in your opinion? One second it's a human, the next it isn't?

I will not and cannot ever understand or justify what the midwife you've mentioned has said. And it is so utterly devastating that some people think that way.

There was an excellent thread on here a couple of days ago about the ‘Overton window’ and how it will move in relation to abortion.

This is the Overton window moving. Before our eyes.

Who is looking at moving the window?

Oh, for goodness’ sake.

Late term abortions are permitted by law in the UK in certain circumstances (with no upper time limit), but they’re really rare. And they don’t happen because a woman just decides she doesn’t fancy having a baby. They happen in the most utterly devastating circumstances.

Pop over to the ‘Antenatal Tests’ board and read the threads about women needing ‘terminations for medical reasons’ (TFMRs). Read their stories. Learn about the utter agonising choices women in that situation face. And stop creating non-existent bogeymen.

@FunDragon the conversation is about the poster supporting any woman choosing so for whatever reason, whenever without judgment.

That is what I am responding to.

Quite right

That’s right

Scooby I will try to respond to your post addressed to me.

I am so perplexed as to how a late term abortion is not in your eyes murder

Abortion isn’t murder because the foetus is not a full human with independent human rights. Murder can’t be applied as a legal term. Again, look at it the other way around, should a woman be held to account in a court of law for something she does to her own body? No. That is a dangerous road to travel down imho. Under what circumstances do you think a woman would decide on a whim to end a pregnancy after many months?

..by the same logic it would be inhumane to allow a mother to kill a live born baby

No that’s not logic, that’s nonsense. Of course killing a born child is different. No comparison.

A baby is housed in the whomb of a woman in the latter months of pregnancy,

No a baby isn’t ‘housed’, a foetus has grown within and is completely supported by the woman’s body. There is no point at which it suddenly becomes an independent person until birth.

is it not a human until it actually comes out of the woman's body in your opinion? One second it's a human, the next it isn't?

it is a human foetus yes. If you mean when does it become a human being with human rights then I would answer at the moment of birth. Not before. When inside a woman then she must have precedence and the right to bodily autonomy.

After 24 weeks (the point of viability currently) I understand that women would undergo either natural labour or cesarean in any event. So a live birth is probable. Even at that point there will be circumstances when there are complications for mother and/or baby which thankfully are extremely rare.

My point is, setting an arbitrary limit is wrong. There will always be awful exceptions and the consequences don’t bear thinking about. That midwife and others like her were there when those exceptions were real and devastating for some women. I would be too.

And further to my ‘whatever reason’ point that you pulled out. Yes I stand by that too. I don’t profess to be the holder of a comprehensive list of permitted reasons and circumstances. Her body, her choice always. I believe that is the position of least damage, both in likely real life consequences and as a principle.

@TheRealShedSadie I'm going to have to leave it there because I really cannot agree with you. I cannot see how it is a "foetus" without human rights one second and the next second a human with rights essentially based on the severing of an umbilical chord.

We’ll respectfully agree to part ways then Scooby

I know you mean well, but it's often better not to direct people like this to that thread.

They just turn up, call us murderers and evil baby killers who don't deserve to be mothers, upset everyone and then leave us without a safe(ish) space to talk.

This woman agrees that a woman or a little girl are not human, just an incubator. She and ''pro life'' people have no problem murdering women with forced pregnancy to save an embryo.

Just look at women's deaths and near deaths because of the abortion ban and these pro life people's reaction.

Recent one was Izabela Sajbor.

Texted her mom ''My life is in danger, because of this new law, they can't help me, a woman is like an incubator, let's hope I don't get sepsis or I will never leave this place''

She died of miscarriage sepsis.

A whole woman, a whole human was murdered because of the anti abortion law.

The reaction of pro life people?? Oh well it's sad, but women die at childbirth, it happens, let's move on now, forget about it, let's not exploit her death.

Brushed off woman murder like it's nothing.

And how many talks and many of them voted and called for no ''life of mother'' exception in many states?? ''If a woman dies, it's God will, a good mother is willing to give her life for her child''

If this was a woman or a little with a sign written on her ''NOT HUMAN, JUST AN INCUBATOR''

I bet you wouldn't have a problem with that.

Well, nobody has the ABSOLUTE right to bodily autonomy. Society/the State restricts that right in many ways.

But I agree with you on the actual topic here.

The guy doesn't have a bloody clue and probably hasn't thought one jot about the real implications of what he's saying.

This is yet another case of a privileged male having the power to have a soapbox and pass laws on something that he is 100% unqualified in, and has no experience of, yet feels happy to speak with complete authority on!

This is weird. You can't say automatically that a late stage abortion is murder, as it might be happening because of terrible medical reasons, for example, that would hold awful consequences for mother &/or baby. To go through that would be horrific, can you imagine being called a murderer on top of all that! We need to all step off, appreciate every situation is unique and not judge.

Many people agree with his statement just the language is just different

many people are of the opinion that terminations should only be carried out under certain circumstances or terminations shouldn’t be carried out after x amount of weeks

this is restricting womens autonomy

UMM, why on earth is there talk about late term abortions when this is not what this man wants and means???? This man is a religious nutjob, he believes life starts at conception, abortion is a sin and wants to ban all abortion from conception, no exceptions.

He doesn't mean what you all think he means.

By the way, just look at what happened in places where they limited to first trimester.

They find severe/fatal/lethal birth defects later in the pregnancy. So the couple can't abort and have to carry and birth a suffering, deformed, dying baby and watch it suffer and die in horrible pain.

I think in the UK abortion is permitted if there's substantial risk that, if the child were born, they would "suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped".

The woman in question is a "pro-choice" protestor.

He’s an absolute shit. He opposes assisted dying too. Nasty, nasty piece of work.

But he’s not wrong, is he? Am I the only person who thinks that the woman who was jailed for causing her daughter to be stillborn by taking abortion pills at 32 weeks should have been punished?! She literally caused the stillbirth of her own child who would have been born a mere 8 weeks later, maximum. It’s cruel and bewildering and unnecessary and shocking and just … not okay?