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?

Your tacit implication that women who do not have children aren't somehow empathetic is really disgusting

Because some posters seem to be unhappy with the idea of ‘healthy’ babies being aborted but are oddly silent on what their view is with regard to children with disabilities or life limiting illnesses, I intended that those categories were distinct as they offer two different examples but I can see how the brevity of my post may have looked like I was conflating the two. I would contend however that when some posters are talking about ‘healthy’ babies they are not including babies with either life limiting illnesses or disabilities and of course some disabilities can also be life limiting.

No. I couldn’t. Personally

However I fiercely defend that right to body autonomy. Whether I could do it or not is irrelevant.

I want my daughters and granddaughters to have the right to choose for themselves, and I will defend that right 100%.

I have 4 and I'm pro choice. Try raising a disabled child and that would open your eyes. Young teen girls hiding pregnancies until very late term. To many variables for me to set an arbitory gestation.

So you have a child already with say down syndrome and find at a late 20 week scan your next baby has a serious heart defect that will have a 10% survival rate and operation at birth at distant specialist hospital. You have 3 weeks to get a second option and make a life changing desision. No sorry I won't judge if you take time to get your facts and tests and decide if you could bring up possibly a very sick child and your child with ds. Sounds unlikely? Well life isn't neat and tidy.

I found out I had a genetic condition at 35 weeks pregnant with two disabled kids already with that condition. No one thought or informed me about genetic testing until i was already pregnant with my 4th. Itvwas all just random bad luck. I refused a cvs and frankly was horrified at the offer. But I'd never judge someone else in my shoes. You have no idea what you could cope with in my shoes for example. So I will not judge. A Dr still has the final say. It's not getting botox is it? It's never a whim.

I agree. I think part of the problem is that both the average person and the average lawmaker doesn't really understand much about pregnancy and often base their positions around their idea of foetal development, which often doesn't have any basis in reality.

Both sides are guilty of this.

Take a first trimester pregnancy, for example.

The people who believe that as soon as there is a heartbeat, it's a baby and having an abortion at that point is murder mostly don't understand that there is a heartbeat within as little as two weeks after getting a positive pregnancy test. That it has a heartbeat when it is both the size and the shape of a tadpole, and when in many cases the woman isn't even aware she is pregnant yet. (Early pregnancy tests are mostly used by women desperately trying to conceive, not the ones going, "Shit, wasn't I due on my period last week?")

But the people saying that a first trimester pregnancy is just a clump of cells are wrong too. I have a video of my son as a 10 week embryo, waving his beautifully formed little hands and feet around. He's clearly a perfect, very tiny human.

I think it would be more honest to say, "Yes, abortion is making the decision to end a human life, sometimes for a medical reason and sometimes simply because the mother for whatever reason does not want to be pregnant for nine months and give birth to it. In an ideal world there would be no unwanted pregnancies and no abortions, but we are not living in an ideal world, we are living in the real world where unfortunately this is sometimes necessary. So what are the reasonable parameters? How can we strike the fairest balance between a woman's bodily autonomy and not ending the life of a healthy baby which is, or soon will be, capable of surviving outside the womb. Because there isn't an identifiable point in pregnancy where it stops being a tadpole and suddenly becomes a fully developed baby with the right to be born. It is a continuous, gradual process, which is why it is so very difficult to draw a line in the sand and say, today it's fine to end this pregnancy, tomorrow it's not fine."

Texas wants to make abortion count as murder legally. Which potentially puts women who have abortions on death row.

So apparently its not okay to "expect someone to kill a foetus" but totally okay to expect someone to kill a women

Very much this. Women should have choices

I'm on the fence about late term abortion. I don't think the 'noone should be forced to give birth' argument holds up as the baby has to come out somehow.

Wow conversations about wills, where to go on holiday, how to cope after infertility and what we are getting up to this week is parent bashing?

Yeah, that comment puzzled me too. Granted I haven't read every page of every thread but I can't recall any comments about parents at all, let alone bashing. Perhaps that poster is just irked because we don't centre parents in our discussions? or more likely, hasn't looked at the board and just imagines that's what we spend our time doing?

@DyslexicPoster

So you have a child already with say down syndrome and find at a late 20 week scan your next baby has a serious heart defect that will have a 10% survival rate and operation at birth at distant specialist hospital. You have 3 weeks to get a second option and make a life changing desision. No sorry I won't judge if you take time to get your facts and tests and decide if you could bring up possibly a very sick child and your child with ds. Sounds unlikely? Well life isn't neat and tidy.

The law already allows for terminations post 24 weeks in those circumstances.

There is so much misinformation on this thread.

The most significant being that babies are born alive and are left to die. A procedure to stop the fetal heart in utero is performed to ensure this does not happen, usually from around 21 weeks onwards, the legalities surrounding termination is vast. What I struggle to understand about this thread is the vast majority of people choosing to pass judgement on a situation they couldn’t even begin to imagine themselves in.

Another point (not related to being childfree or not) is that when it comes to abortion, what I support is specifically woman’s right not to continue a pregnancy. Or, where it’s early enough to avoid, not to have to give birth. So I would not support abortions at 39 weeks, but would certainly support the right to give birth early in that situation. Before a foetus is able to survive outside the womb or to survive without medical intervention that is going to cause suffering, abortion should be available.

I also think that people confuse supporting the right to late abortions with having sympathy with women who have them illegally and are then prosecuted. It seems fairly clear to me that these cases involve a tiny number of desperate women or girls not thinking straight and punishing them benefits no one.

I guess give the thread about childfree politicians and the idea that leaving your money to charity was inherently selfish maybe the will thread was rage inducing from all the overwhelming selfishness?

Well I’ve been proven right! (In terms of etiquette, searching is a no-no btw)

Late term abortion because the mother has changed her mind or doesn’t want the baby is horrific and barbaric. For anyone who isn’t aware, if youre terminating a pregnancy after 23/24 weeks, an injection is administered through the mothers stomach and into the baby’s heart to stop it. This procedure is called feticide. Abortion at 35, 36, 37 weeks? Really? What if she went into labour and gave birth on the way to have that abortion? Should they inject the babies heart and stop it once it’s born? Because it’s exactly the same thing.
I have one living child and one child born at 21 weeks. My baby at 21 weeks was fully formed and very much a baby which I held, wanted and love.

Being pregnant and giving birth made me feel more strongly pro-choice actually.

I used to think I was pro choice but now I have children I find the idea of abortion unthinkable.

I think once there’s a heartbeat it must be devastating for the mum to choose abortion. Once the baby is pretty much formed it’s unthinkable, at 23/24 weeks it’s essentially murder. The only exception would be if some awful immensely painful / terminal issue was picked up at the 20 week scan and there’s limited chance of survival without severe life limiting issues imo.

I think the lady who aborted late on recently absolutely deserved jail. I’ve seen 24 week old babies in nicu and am disgusted by someone who could kill their child in that way.

Most people are somewhere in between, and don't see it as quite so black and white. Thank goodness.
Agree with this. Most people are capable of viewing moral decisions as difficult and a weighing up of multiple points.

Having a black and white view on either 'side' always strikes me as an extreme view.

I didn't need to search I have a good memory for names and I remembered your many posts on that thread

Not quite sure how you have been proven right by my post though?

I have kids. I love my kids very much. The OP's premise that this should make me anti-choice is bizarre and ugly.

I support a woman's right to choose 100% and am horrified at the increased restrictions on abortion access, and criminalisation of women seeking abortions.

As early as possible, as late as necessary.

When I was at school a girl a year or two above me - still a child - killed herself when she realised that she was pregnant too late to terminate.

It transpired that she'd been raped and the thought of carrying and birthing her rapists's baby was so horrific to her, that when the medical professionals denied her an abortion, she took her own life.

Her story, and millions of stories like hers, is why I do think it IS black and white: the woman's right to life is more important than the foetus, every time, always.

I knew it as a child, I know it as a mother, if the time comes when I'm a grandmother I'll still know it.

Our bodies, our choice.

I have changed my mind on late term abortions since having a baby but not on what’s currently legal. I do think “aborting” at 32 weeks should be illegal but prison doesn’t serve anyone. It’s so bad for her existing children who were at no risk from her. One of them has special needs and is highly dependent on her I think. I think she needed help and compassion rather than making an example of. Mercy is shown to men in the justice system alllll the time but never to women.

Well I’ve been proven right! (In terms of etiquette, searching is a no-no btw)

What have you proved? making an assertion without evidence isn't proof.

I'm sure you're right that it's unlikely that would happen.

But I don't want that scenario to be legal. If you dislike the example being used because it's unpalatable, I don't think it's reasonable to argue that it should be legal but we (society) just trust that people won't do it.

No woman should be forced to continue a pregnancy. There comes a point, in my view, where the solution to unwanted pregnancy is induction or c section, under general anaesthesia if necessary, instead of the barbaric alternative I'm not going to describe here. Individual circumstances would then dictate what happens to the baby next, and who makes those decisions.

I think 'forced birth' is alarmist language when taking about a pregnancy that's reached the point of viability. If there's a baby in a woman's body it's coming out one way or another, via one of two places. As OP said, the only difference is whether it's alive or in pieces.

Prison serves everybody. It’s punishment for murdering a baby who was well past the viable stage. It’s a strong message to everybody that this is illegal and you will go to jail If you do this.

Nobody has the duty to support another person with their body ever. If you’re pro life and you still have two kidneys and aren’t regularly donating blood then frankly you’re not pro life.

Whether you should have the right to end the life of a viable fetus before you expel it from your body is a far more complex question. What are the alternatives? What is in the child’s best interests? Who should decide?

I’m always amazed how disablist pro choice until viability people are. That it’s fine to end the life of an infant with disabilities at 35 weeks but not a healthy baby? Why? For the baby unless the condition is painful there is no difference. It is entirely about the worth of the child and the inconvenience to the parents. For me either we support abortion up to term or we don’t regardless of disability.