To not find the labels "pro-life" and "pro-choice" useful

[Middlelanehogger]

My position is that over the course of a 9-month pregnancy, the "thing" inside the womb transforms gradually from a ball of cells with value 0 (on the first day of conception) to a fully-grown baby (in the minutes just before it exits the birth canal).

There are some significant milestones, for me personally somewhere around 12 weeks after the risk of miscarriage dramatically lessens, and somewhere around 24 weeks when the baby is viable, but that doesn't lessen the "gradual" development of the life inside.

I don't have an issue with the current decrim legal framework in the UK. I think it's fine. I think abortion is sad and is taking a life. I think sometimes that's justified. I think even if it's sad, I'd rather the procedure be in the light of day with medical care. I think the closer you get to the end of the pregnancy the more the life inside starts to count in ethical calculations, such that there is an almost smooth transition for the rights of a baby 1h before birth vs 1h afterwards. I think it's similar to killing puppies - it's really sad, sometimes necessary, should be regulated, shouldn't be a free-for-all...

So I don't count as pro-choice or pro-life. But I don't think my position is all that different from a lot of people's.

It really concerns me that people want to push this "pro-choice means as late as necessary for any reason and that's the only feminist position" thing. It will damage our current status quo.

Aibu?

The burden of contraception, even in uk, falls mainly to women. Socially vasectomy is poorly supported, misinformed and avoided.

The NHS doesn't even fund it anymore where we live.

The binary approach to debating abortion has been around for decades and it doesn't feel like it's achieving anything. It's a shame there isn't more of a nuanced way to discuss it because it's just the same old argument. The law in the UK feels old fashioned and in need of an update but it would be a pointless culture war debating how to chang it.

I'm not a fan of the pro-life position but think I'd be open to talking about how they imagine such a stance would actually work, ie. would they also campaign for more investment in social services and maternity care for the women with unwanted pregnancies? How would risky behaviour during a pregnancy be regulated?

Yes I think they are extremists and I think it is morally very, very wrong to not allow a person in constant pain with an incurable illness to be euthanised. You can choose not to be euthanised yourself - but you should not be making that choice for others whose shoes you have not walked in.

But lets face it, at the heart of both issues are the religious right, in the US they are huge - here IMO they are underestimated. The church has a lot to answer for in both issues IMO. We know that the majority of people in the UK think doctor assisted suicide should be legal so why isn't it? MP's are supposed to represent their constituents, unfortunately all they care about are their own interests.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/health/articles-reports/2021/08/04/three-quarters-britons-support-doctor-assisted-sui

I genuinely have never seen a 'pro life' person say that they support abortion in some circumstances. It is always no abortion at all. There is no 'moderate pro life position', what you're describing is a restrictive pro choice position. Where are you seeing campaigners or groups who describe themselves as pro life advocating for abortion in some circumstances?

Who is actually forced though?

People are saying if you are going to CHOOSE an abortion why not decide BEFORE you get past 6 months pregnant. I don't think that is being unreasonable do you?

There are rules and protocols in life we have to follow for a reason. You can't just do whatever you want it's not how life works.

39% of doctors oppose changing the law when it comes to euthanasia. Some of this may well be due to religious beliefs but I think there is more to it than that. I find it hard to believe that all of these doctors are extremists.

As I mentioned, I like the vast majority of the population support euthanasia for many of the reasons you suggest but I also think it's wrong to accuse anyone that doesn't support it of being an extremist. There is nuance and genuine concerns about how it would work in practice and affect some of the most vulnerable people in society.

Autonomy is good, per se, but sometimes it's necessary to curtail it for the protection of others.

I find myself in agreement with the OP, that there comes a time where the foetus ceases to be a potential person and becomes an actual person - albeit an immature one - deserving of protection.

The point at which a foetus becomes viable outside the uterus would seem a sensible place to draw a line, then subtract a few weeks just to be sure.

The youngest live birth that I recall reading about, that survived, was 22 weeks gestation. So, taking that as a viability measure, if I were the law maker I would say that it should be unlawful to deliberately end the life of a foetus of more than 18 weeks gestation.

It's not ok to kill a person.

I believe this thread is about abortion/terminating a foetus.

The vast majority of people do exactly that. 90% of abortions happen during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.

The majority of people will agree that the earlier, the better but in a minority of cases it isn't always going to be possible and that's why I don't agree with a limit.

@SouthLondonMum22 can you please elaborate on why you feel abortion should be allowed past 6 months? (Medical issues and tragic things like rape aside).

There are rules and protocols to follow in life like anything the line has to be drawn some where it can't just be free for all. These things have to be manged how can you not see that?

There does have to be a line drawn somewhere, for me that is as long as a woman is pregnant. It doesn't have to be a free for all but it can be decriminalised and be between a woman and her doctor. It would be incredibly rare.

Also, surely a baby is a baby? If you believe abortion is wrong after 24 weeks, why does it matter how the pregnancy happened regarding rape? Makes no sense to me unless the idea is to punish women for having consensual sex.

@SouthLondonMum22 you are assuming it would be rare. As we are well know people push boundaries if they can. Rules and regulations are in place for a reason.

You are being unreasonable infact I'm going to be blunt you are being selfish. Why exactly would anybody terminate at 8 months pregnant? For what reason?

Your coming across as entitled. Where is the mother's accountability factor here??

Are you willinging to listen to my opinion as I have listened to yours and try gain an understanding or was that you jumping the gun because YOU don't want to take my view point on board?

Medical conditions or rape is a valid reason.

Terminating a baby at 8 months pregnant because you couldn't be arsed to have an abortion is IDOL bone IDOL. Hope I've made myself clear!

The US pro life lobby is not pro life, speaking as someone who would call myself pro life. If you are pro life, then you must rationally support the abolition of capital punishment, be pro BLM, support gun restrictions and anything else to make children safer in schools, pro maternity leave and other employment rights to help families look after these children and bring them up out of poverty once they're born, pro universal health care, supportive of refugees...
Oh wait, it seems they are only pro unborn life. It's like it's about control of women, children, poor people, minorities.:.

If you can't comprehend the difference between women being allowed to have an abortion at 24 weeksor under and 8 months pregnant..

You are the reason why rules need to be put in place. You clearly lack a lot of understanding to the point it's dangerous. I'm astonished I'm having to point out to you that it's unacceptable to want to abort a full term baby almost when the women had the CHOICE to do it sooner.

The current law is 24 weeks. 90% of abortions happen during the first 12 weeks. Where are all these women running out getting abortions at 23 weeks just because they can?

So it is about punishing the woman? That isn't about the foetus at all then, is it?

If it was about the foetus, how they were conceived would be irrelevant.

@camieandatop who is forcing the woman?

Most people think 23 weeks if horrendous but we accept this as the limit as few people do it (99% medical reasons).

There is no need to increase it any further. 23 weeks is hard enough to swallow. We have free contraception and abortion for 6 months.

Where did I say 24 weeks is fine? I actually think 6 months is a lot but I don't make the rules. Perhaps you should of asked me first... I put 24 weeks because that is the rule. Not my rule.

Perhaps I hit a nerve.

and few people would also do it with no limit. There is no need to have a limit.

If it was about the foetus, how they were conceived would be irrelevant.

I think if the pregnancy is caused by rape the woman did not consent to the risks of pregnancy. If a woman consents to sex she consents to the risk of getting pregnant, and consents to taking appropriate and timely action.

I don't understand your reasoning here. I think you are saying medical conditions or rape are acceptable reasons for abortion after 24 weeks - but abortion after 24 weeks is already restricted to essentially medical reasons.

So you answered your own question, late term abortions are done for medical reasons, not because women are 'IDOL' (sic).

Nobody has a late term abortion because they couldn't be arsed to have one earlier, do you really think women are doing that, or would if they had the opportunity? You don't seem to think much of women, if so.

@nothingcomestonothing yes correct as it stands the rule is 24 weeks. I think most of us are aware.

However there is some people on the thread saying that there should be no limit for abortions as in 8 months if needs because "no woman should be forced to give birth" What exactly don't you understand?

Circumstances change
Not everyone finds out they are pregnant within the current time frame

It would be in rare cases since most abortions do happen within those first 12 weeks but it should be an option.

@SouthLondonMum22 Abortion to term is already available if there is serious risk to the mental/physical health of mother or baby. If a person who has been raped does not realise until after they are 24 weeks I imagine serious risks to their health would be assessed and a later abortion would still be available if it was necessary? If not they would have to give birth, which would be terrible, but I think once they enter 3rd trimester they would be most likely to have to give birth anyway. It would certainly be a difficult case, but very rare as you say. I would be interested to know how a case like this would be dealt with in the UK.