to think they would feel differently if they had children?

[Violetbeauregardesgum]

Just reflecting that the three most vehemently pro-abortion, abortion on demand up till 40 weeks women I know are all child free. Was talking to one the other day and was taken aback by how uncompromising she was. The 32 week old baby that the woman was imprisoned for aborting was not a baby, all women have the right to end a pregnancy at any point.

I am pro choice but think the 24 week cut off is about right. AIBU to think they would feel differently if they had gone through a pregnancy to term themselves?

*It does and thats partly what people mean when they say "as early as possible as late as necessary"

But those who seek to take away as late as necessary are seeking to take this away. Because the reality is this makes up the vast majority of the as late as necessary group.*

This doesn't make sense. Late term abortions in the UK are only performed if there is risk to the mother or child, so of course the statistics will show that those in that group fit the 'late as medically necessary'. It's not possible to have an abortion post 24 weeks just because you've changed your mind.

I don't agree with 'as late as necessary' but I wholeheartedly support 'as late as medically necessary' and would never want that removed.

Sorry, meant to tag @Catchasingmewithspiders

Yes, but they’re allowed as much pain relief as an adult can have with no worries about the effect on the baby.

I'm sorry about your regrets over your abortion. I don't think taking that choice away from you would have been the right thing, though.

No one who supports abortion rights does so in the spirit of it being an easy or pleasant thing to do, or right for all unplanned pregnancies. It's a choice that should be available. Women regret abortions, but let's be honest - they also sometimes regret motherhood, or the timing of a child (eg when a relationship has broken down).

Late term abortions are very rare and usually occur in awful and compelling circumstances. An abortion is traumatic late term, buts it's judged to be the least worst option.

This

A baby born at 24 weeks onwards gestation has a chance of survival. I felt my baby kick from 20 weeks gestation. I think it's fine for a woman to have an abortion before this point for whatever reason, but not any later unless the foetus is deformed. That is plenty of time to decide that you don't want to be a mum.

🤔 eh?

I can only speak for myself however my personal opinion is that a woman should be able to seek an abortion for any reason up until a certain limit. Post that limit (let's say 24 weeks for arguments sake seeing as that is what it's currently set at), then I don't agree with up to full term for healthy foetuses. However if a foetus has a severe disability or condition that is incompatible with life, then I do support abortion at any stage. I assumed that's what most people believed, I could be wrong.

I don't agree with 'as late as necessary' but I wholeheartedly support 'as late as medically necessary' and would never want that removed
I agree with this, and most countries acknowledge there is a big difference between 8 weeks gestation and a viable healthy baby that could survive outside the womb.
Most people tend to draw a line somewhere along that journey.

It's only on Mumsnet that I've heard people arguing that it would be totally fine on principle for anyone to kill a baby at 37 weeks gestation for no other reason than mum has changed her mind.

I agree with the law. Abortion up until 24 weeks, with exceptions made for particular medical cases. You shouldn't be able to have a late abortion at 34 weeks because your crazy ex might not let it be adopted in my opinion. However, I would be in support of women in these abusive situations having the legal right to override the father's request and allow automatic adoption.

I also don't think the woman that was setenced for her late-term abortion should go to prison. I just don't think doctors should be able to knowingly abort a fetus outside of the current law.

I would protest for women to maintain their current legal rights if it came to it, but no more.

I voted yabu because I know childfree people who were outraged at that woman in the news.

If it gets to the point where you could be induced or have a c section instead, resulting in a healthy baby, it's not an abortion it's a stillbirth.

The case of the woman who took abortion pills late in pregnancy was so incredibly rare that's why it was a high profile news story.

If there are 100s of women queuing up to have late term abortions where are the late term backstreet abortion clinics?

And if there aren't 100s of women wanting late term abortions for spurious reasons why is as late as necessary an issue?

I don't agree with 'as late as necessary' but I wholeheartedly support 'as late as medically necessary' and would never want that removed

@lemmein you've summed up exactly what I think/feel on the matter.

I don't know whether it has anything to do with not having children or not.

I do think the 24 week limit is very liberal. In most countries you cannot terminate a healthy pregnancy at 23 weeks. If I'm honest I think 24 weeks is a bit too late and I would probably support a lower threshold if I were writing a new country's laws from scratch. But I'm pretty sure very few women are actually terminating healthy pregnancies at that gestation.

I’m still a bit raw from the bashing childfree women are getting on another thread, then I see this one which labels us ‘babykillers’ Some mothers truly despise the childfree.

Exactly.

90% of abortions happen during the first 12 weeks. That wouldn't change.

But people ARE trying to take that away and have accomplished this in many places. Look at America, in some states women are being told they cannot have an abortion even because of an ectopic pregnancy.

Having limitations on abortion just opens up the potential for women to be denied medical care.

Very very very few people are trying to abort healthy pregnancies past 15 weeks gestation, even less at 23 weeks and 6 days. The number past this point would be teeny tiny yet these mythical 'monsters' are always talked about in these threads like it's every pro choicer!

You shouldn't be able to have a late abortion at 34 weeks because your crazy ex might not let it be adopted in my opinion. However, I would be in support of women in these abusive situations having the legal right to override the father's request and allow automatic adoption.

Great, then all you have to do is change the whole court system, and way of thinking in this country so all abuse is recognised, recorded properly, these men are charged accordingly, and that abusers actually get their parental rights taken off them, because, currently, even paedophiles don't have their parental rights removed as a general rule.

'You'd feel differently if you had kids' is condescending BS and please don't say that to child free people”

Exactly this.

I am so fed up of people telling me that I have to have kids to understand something. “You don’t know the meaning of the word tired until you have children” “wait until you have children and then tell me you are busy”

Why would someone without children’s opinion and life be any less valid than someone who has them?

I think it's odd that you don't understand why childfree women would be on a forum with a board specifically for childfree posters

I also find it odd that you think a conversation about abortion is mums having discussions about being mums

Thinking a discussion about abortion is a discussion only for mums is very odd behaviour

Thinking a discussion about abortion is a discussion about being a mum is even odder behaviour

Extreme circumstances to ME means the mother would not survive - or the baby can not survive or would die very quickly and be born into pain. I can imagine either circumstance being incredibly difficult for all parties.

People are actively campaigning to change the laws on abortion when it comes to disability and what can be classed as an extreme circumstance, so these babies are more protected and it is more regulated.

This as ‘late as necessary’ idea overall however frankly scares me and is going in totally the other direction. It’s extreme and wrong.

I also agree with OP that I feel very strongly about this because I am a parent now.

A women’s choice is SO important, but when it goes against what it ethically right then boundaries should be in place.

I asked a genuine question, and I will ask again in the hope or a less hostile answer. I have a child with disabilities, he is not ill and nor are many people with disabilities. Why are you conflating the two things which are totally different issues?

I agree with this.

I completed agree.

Being pro choice means you can terminate up to a certain amount of time or you can give the baby up for adoption.

It does not mean you can continue to full term and then decide to kill the baby.

This woman in particular chose to keep her pregnancy until she got with her new boyfriend and then decided it was an inconvenience.

I think you’re mixing quite a few things up but I’ll leave you to it