AIBU to think throwing a mum-of-four in prison for having an abortion is never the answer?

[therescoffeeinthatnebula]

Spotted this on Twitter and haven't seen it already being discussed.

Apparently, a woman is being sentenced today for having an abortion over the limit during lockdown. I don't know of the circumstances (can't find anything other than the Sunday Times article), only that she already had four children and claims she didn't know exactly how far along she was.

I think most of us would agree making medical appointments during lockdown was bloody difficult and that it's even harder to attend any appointment if you have children, given you're not normally allowed to take them with you.

Whatever the truth, I'm appalled to see a woman potentially thrown in prison for trying to seek an abortion during lockdown, especially when you look at how violence against women is treated. I'd have thought referring her for mandatory counselling would be more of an appropriate outcome than prison because finding out you aborted what could have been a viable baby has got to mess with anyone's head.

It's all very sad - she should have been able to access proper services earlier - but prison, to me, should never have been on the table as a consequence.

I didn't actually realise that abortion in this country was blanket illegal and that our rights to seek abortions up to the limit are actually exceptions to that law rather than a piece of legislation that stands on its own.

She was 32-33 weeks when she took the pills. And apart from comments about her going back to her ex but being pregnant with someone else’s child, there isn’t much in terms of mitigating circumstances to justify her actions or any explanation why she didn’t get an abortion before 24 weeks. I don’t think anyone can compare that to your abortion at 8 weeks or comment on big families.

@Mary0nTheHandlebars Healthcare services were not equal in London during lockdown, let alone across the whole of the UK. It is perfectly feasible to surmise that someone living in a different postcode to you had different options available (perhaps fewer options). I do not personally know anyone who tried to seek an abortion during lockdown, but I do know an alarming number of unrelated people who were diagnosed with the same life-threatening disease and received different levels of care. Some went into remission, others... did not. As I said, healthcare was dependent on postcode. Healthcare has always been dependent on postcode.

It is also reasonable to suggest that a woman with three children, including one with SEN, would have found it difficult to attend an appointment, even if one had been available, especially if she was trying to conceal the pregnancy in the first place.

The timeline is less clear based on the additional reporting. It sounds like she fell pregnant before lockdown was on the cards, but she thought (or perhaps hoped) she had miscarried. Then by the time she revisited abortion again, it was too late, lockdown was upon us, she felt she had to move back in with her ex, and she felt generally desperate.

We're not suggesting that this woman was necessarily a victim of DV, just pointing out how our laws are not fit for purpose. Our laws have the starting point that all abortions are illegal, then backtrack some exceptions. That is a ridiculously outdated and patriarchal approach to it. Abortion should be legal as a starting point, and then exceptions written for when it shouldn't be.

Prison should be for people who are at risk of reoffending and who need rehabilitation. Putting anyone else in is a cost that does not carry a net benefit.

@TidyHomeTidyMind I am not handing her a sainthood, but I am prepared to make the assumption that any woman would not try to abort that late in her pregnancy unless there were some very complicated circumstances. I think this is a woman who panicked, was under pressure, and made a bad decision which has haunted her ever since. I don't think she deserves to be locked up for that. I think she deserves counselling.

And I certainly don't think her children deserve for her name, address, and photo to be reported in the name of journalism. Shame on all the 'journalists' who did that.

I also think this could all have been avoided had she been given access to a scan before the pills.

I had some appointments in person during lockdown because they were essential (doctor needed to examine me in person to determine treatment). It really does feel like a scan to date a pregnancy should have been treated as essential too.

I think it's very sad all round. Personally I don't think any woman should be imprisoned for having an abortion, I think access to support should be much better.

The fact that someone is able to lie and obtain these pills online is the real issue. Of course the ideal is that everyone is honest, but the reality is when women are in what they feel is a desperate situation of course it's tempting to obtain these by any means possible. There have also been reports of women being coerced and forced into them, I think the online service whilst it might have a purpose for part of the process isn't fit for purpose overall and I hope its reviewed.

I am conflicted as I am pro choice but also feel uncomfortable with abortions up to term. I do however also recognise that life isn't always that straightforward and that we shouldn't judge others as we never know the whole picture.

But, did she know how far along beforehand or not?

Infant Life Preservation Act only allowed for saving the mother's life as grounds. Health didn't come in as grounds until 1967.

It has nothing to do with lockdown. She would have passed the 24 week mark before we even went into lockdown.

If anything, it was lockdown that allowed her to do this.

The woman stated she thought she had miscarried, which is why she did not terminate earlier but that her bump kept growing which is when she began to fear that may not have miscarried.

No dates were given as to the search history. It is perfectly plausible (and likely, imo) that she did not realise the miscarriage was a false alarm until it was too late to abort legally.

I'm sorry but I refuse to believe that a late-term, self-induced abortion is an action any mentally well woman would take were it not borne from sheer panic and lack of other viable options. This is a desperate woman who needs help, not a hardened criminal.

The court heard between February and May 2020 she had searched "how to hide a pregnancy bump", "how to have an abortion without going to the doctor" and "how to lose a baby at six months".

guilty - every day of the week.

100%.

@Mary0nTheHandlebars not sure if I've ever seen a post so dripping in judgement. Better be careful up there on your high horse.

People make shit choices for many reasons. She MAY have been a victim in multiple ways and equally she may not have been. I agree with those suggesting that a controlling husband or abuse would justify this, are undermining their own arguments.

I do not know this woman's personal circumstances. My personal opinion is that she did something awful, having made some potentially stupid choices and mistakes but it's difficult to see that she did it out of malice. All i see is desperation.

I'm not saying she's not deserving of help and sympathy

She's clearly very mentally ill, but she took deliberate steps to abort a foetus out of the legal window

How would you have felt if you were the abortion?

FFS 🫠🥱

She wasn't entirely sure how pregnant she was, and she thought she had previously miscarried.

The only certainty in this case is that if she had received a scan and her pregnancy had been dated, she would not have been able to carry out an illegal termination.

Either a medical exception would have been found, or she would have carried the child to term.

The lack of scan is key.

I agree with this.

I don't think anyone is saying its aspirational for women to have late abortions but they recognise things aren't always straightforward.

Autopsy said the baby was 32-34 weeks old. The judge said if she'd pleaded guilty earlier she may have been given a suspended sentence. In the circumstances the judge had to follow the law and give a prison sentence. He said she was a good mother of her 3 children and it was a tragic case.
Really the law from 1861 needs changing, its archaic to say the least

How on earth can she be a “poor woman”?

She KNOWINGLY took those drugs (way) past the legal limit. She murdered her child.

She knew how far along she was. She googled what would happen if she took those pills as far along as she was.

At 32-34 weeks gestation that child would have had an excellent chance of survival. I'm sure it's mother had reasons for what she did, but so do women who kill their children. I'm just not sure it's enough to explain it all away.

I think the sentence was spot on though.

Yes!

Well, no. That’s not quite right. She found out she was pregnant in late December. A scan during lockdown wouldn’t have changed her access to an abortion. She was still over the 24 week mark when we went into lockdown. If she thought she had miscarried without passing any materials, then that would have happened in early pregnancy and she could have been able have a scan to check.

She had access to all the necessary services at the right time.

I don't think making those searches is proof she knew.

It's proof she wasn't sure.

Personally, I suspect she was burying her head in the sand and acting out of sheer panic.

If you think you've miscarried and your belly keeps getting bigger... you have to be doing some serious osteriching to hope you're not still pregnant. I think she is a woman who was mentally in a bad place and made bad decisions because of it.

I don't think she's a risk to society.

I was going to be graphic about all the things that can happen to a corpse that demonstrate a complete lack of bodily autonomy, but decided against in the interests of discretion. But rest assured, there are an awful lot of nasty things that can happen to a corpse that either can't happen lawfully to a pregnant woman, or can't happen without her consent.

Great post @Mary0nTheHandlebars . Concur with everything you have said.

This……too horrifying for words

We keep talking about weeks. She was over seven months pregnant. I don't think the fact that she illegally aborted a seven month old child in is doubt, whatever the circumstances that led her to that. Is prison appropriate - that is far more debatable, and the point of the thread. I just don't know, I think some form of custodial sentence is justified, twelve months to be served seems about right to me. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I had to terminate my 22 week baby due to medical reasons in the middle of lockdown. She wouldn't have survived birth, and my life was at risk. Yes, accessing care was hard, I did a lot of the process (scans, tests etc) on my own without my husband by my side due to restrictions but it's bullshit to argue it wasn't available if you wanted it.

She would have had access to medical care and support - of which there was plenty, albeit not standard. But she didn't reach out for it, instead she took the decision she did.

Signing those forms was the worst thing I have ever had to do in my life, making that decision is the worst thing a mother can do.

My daughter (allegedly, that's what they told me) could feel no pain at that gestation, but didn't make the procedure easier.

However. To knowingly do it to a viable baby, that CAN feel pain, when you could have made plenty of other decisions, that's fucking sick. The pandemic messed with everyone's head, it's not an excuse.

To all those wittering on about the risk of dying in childbirth, she still had to bloody give birth. The risk is still there, so that argument is bollocks.

She made a shit decision, and is being rightfully punished for it.