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?

Using higher doses of opiates also benefits a womans psychological wellbeing/distress

Epidurals come with their own risks in addition to possible injuries you've mentioned

Nobody is forcing women to give birth. Contraception is free, and abortion is legal for any reason for 20 weeks from the day the woman most likely misses her period.

What more do they want?

Because if the answer is, "The right to end the life of a completely healthy foetus at full term", the reality is that most people will think, "No, you made your bed, you lay in it until you were 24 weeks pregnant, which is twice as much time as women in most other comparable countries get to decide, you will have to lie in it for a little longer because it's not all about you anymore."

Epidurals are perfectly safe. You are only told otherwise in the UK because the NHS doesn't want to pay for every woman to be able to have one.

This the part that doctors play. They should be assessing the impact on the mother’s health including her mental health and if they think that the impact of having the abortion would be greater than giving birth they should not grant an abortion. This should be entirely between a woman and her doctors.

You may not realise this but this phrase really does sound like you want to punish women:

"No, you made your bed, you lay in it until you were 24 weeks pregnant, which is twice as much time as women in most other comparable countries get to decide, you will have to lie in it for a little longer because it's not all about you anymore."

I can assure you that my severely disabled child has good quality of life and isn’t suffering. He’s seems very glad to be alive. However those who support the current law believe that he has less rights to life because he could have been aborted to term but his non-disabled brother had that right to life at 24 weeks.

Do you disagree with the current law then? Unless you're pro-life/anti-abortion, you must also believe in TFMR?

If we're being honest, disabled children and adults struggle. Even in the happiest home, there are lifelong hurdles, worries and uncertainties. Some people just don't want to have to see that through for themselves or the child.

They don't choose to terminate that late, it's the limits of medical diagnosis and the gravity of such a decision that means it may exceed 24w

So you think a doctor is able to assess that do you? You think a doctor, a human being who has just met a woman can help her decide whether killing her baby is better than letting it live?
I would love to meet one of these magical insightful doctors and what a situation to put a doctor in! Here is a healthy woman with a healthy full term baby, do you think it should live or die?

And what would that same doctor say one week later when the baby is outside the womb? Would he let her kill it then? Or would he direct her to the many mental health services out there. She can then get the appropriate support which could take weeks, months, years but she has a chance of getting through it. But once her baby is killed, that's it, no going back. The woman in the news recently who performed her own late term abortion said she has never recovered from the flashbacks of seeing her dead baby's face.
Noone can know how they will feel when they meet their baby for the first time.

I've know too many babies born around 30-34 weeks to think that it's ok to abort them. They are babies, able to live without intervention and they feel pain and fear. They are no different inside the womb than out.

From my understanding in late abortions you still give birth. So either way you would be giving birth, just to either a living or dead baby.

Two doctors must agree every abortion in this country so that already what doctors are being asked to do (this is over and an over every other medical procedure).

Yes but I'm talking about late term, about making a decision that a baby that is able to survive outside of the womb, should be killed rather than be born and whether the mother can cope with that.
Nobody, no woman, but especially no man with any level of qualifications could have prepared me for what it feels like to see your baby for the first time and how that will impact you.
There obviously has to be a line drawn somewhere, but it absolutely shouldn't be anywhere near as late as 'birth'.

Do you disagree with the current law then?

Yes I disagree with current laws. I think that all foetuses (disabled and those that seem healthy but may have undiagnosed disabilities) should be treated the same way because I believe that disabled children have the same right to life.

Lots of women may not be able to decide to abort before 24 weeks (maybe they don’t know they are pregnant) or don’t have access to medical care (why is an abused woman whose partner won’t let her see a doctor less deserving than one who wants to wait for test results?) so need longer. So I don’t think that 24 weeks is an appropriate limit.

Doctors don’t want to have to approve abortions at all. The BMJ is campaigning to have the requirement removed all together in the first trimester but we aren’t listening to what doctors want here.

With a late term abortion, doctors would need to assess the overall benefit to their patient (the woman for the avoidance of doubt, not the foetus) and I’m guessing that only in the most unusual circumstances would they think the overall benefit of abortion for a near term baby would be greater than the mental health impact. Doctors are high qualified individuals that have to assess cost/benefit to their patients in other circumstances so I’m hoping they can do so here too.

How is it punishing anyone when they have more time than women living pretty much anywhere else in the world to decide whether they want to keep their baby or not?

Where would you draw the cut off point? Are you in the "until the baby has passed through the birth canal" camp too?

Then perhaps you could answer the same questions I asked another poster on this thread.

If a woman who claims not to know she is pregnant presents at A&E in pain and is told upon examination that she is in labour, should she be allowed to request an injection to stop her baby's heart before it is born?

If no, where would you draw the line? Presumably somewhere between 24 weeks and when she's in labour, but when?

If yes, would you force doctors to carry out this act against their will?

It’s a bit of a straw man isn’t it? I don’t believe in reality this will be a problem if abortion laws are less restrictive.

How do you feel about the abused woman who is denied medical treatment and presents at 24 weeks? Because she really does exist.

@Violetbeauregardesgum your post is so offensive that I cba to list the reasons why.

What is a straw man is advocating for abortion at any gestation to be legalised, because there will be nobody to carry it out…

Perhaps you'd do me the courtesy of answering my questions before I answer yours.

It's not a straw man. You think the cut off point should be later than 24 weeks. Where do you think it should be?

I’ve answered your question. I don’t think it will happen.

My scenario is actually real.

Right so it's pro choice until the baby is born, unless two doctor says no? So different doctors will make different decisions based on very little evidence or experience. Because what evidence is there? Previously full term abortions have been illegal, noone (especially no man) can possibly know the impact on a womans mental health of killing her full term healthy baby just before it's born and having to witness its birth.
and these doctors, probably have a high case load, probably over worked, probably don't really know that woman THAT well, are deciding to kill her baby because they think 'on balance' it will be better for her.
What about if she instantly regrets it when she sees it? Can you possibly imagine that pain? There literally is no going back. When you are pregnant you are in a fog, it can feel like you're heading for disaster. There is a reason why we would gasp in horror at someone killing a newborn baby, I am flabbergasted that so many think it's ok a few weeks before.

I'm neither a doctor/midwife nor a train driver, and I would be very surprised if there is anyone who is both and could give their view on this, but I imagine that the psychological impact of delivering a stillborn baby for a doctor/midwife is similar to the psychological impact of hitting someone who throws themselves in front of a train for a train driver. You know it's something that could happen in your line of work, but it is thankfully rare and utterly awful when it does happen.

We recognise that this is a highly traumatic event for the train driver. They get counselling and paid time off afterwards to help them process it.

I suspect that doctors and midwives get less support due to lack of resources and the perception that death is a normal, everyday occurrence for medical professionals and they should be able to deal with it, even though it isn't actually an everyday occurrence for midwives and obstetricians the way it is for, say, oncologists, palliative nurses and paramedics.

If you said to a train driver, "Someone wants to off themselves, they've had counselling and they're sure they want to do it, they'll be throwing themselves in front of the 8:36 to Bolton so make sure you don't try to stop", I think anyone in their right mind would think that was barbaric.

Asking a doctor to stop the heart of a full term healthy human baby and then deliver it dead rather than alive would also be barbaric. No one is going to want to do it, or feel any moral obligation to do it. So unless you want to force them to do it, making it legal for them to do so is a waste of time.

If you don't think it will happen, why do you think it should be legal?

As for the woman denied medical care who presents at 24 weeks, she could just as easily present at 34 weeks or 38 weeks so there still needs to be a cut off point, doesn't there? Otherwise there's nothing to stop the thing you say will never happen from happening.

What are feminist extremists?

'At this rate we will have newborn babies being killed' is nonsense, I have not seen one person on this thread arguing for that. It is playing into the hands of anti choice rhetoric to suggest that that is what pro choice advocates want or that this is being suggested as an option. It isn't. And at what rate? This is just a discussion, there is no plan I know of to change current law or practise on abortion, don't try to suggest pro choice equates to killing born children,it doesn't.

And if you think all women who become pregnant do so through consensual sex, or all women who become pregnant are able to access the means of preventing pregnancy, you live a life far removed from some womens' reality.

Indeed. 🙄The thread has ramped up into things that no one said.