Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Reform and abortion

650 replies

Craftymam · 06/12/2024 10:41

Just a public service announcement as I missed this last week and find it quite shocking that coverage was so low.

Nigel Farage has said he wants to ‘open a new discussion’ on abortion rights.

Considering everything that’s gone on in America, the rise in popularity of reform and this alleged 100 Million donation from Elon musk; I felt I had to bring this to everyone’s attention.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
TinklySnail · 06/12/2024 15:01

Fluufer · 06/12/2024 14:57

Have you ever read a history book or a newspaper?

History book yes. I’m talking about today’s society. So please, show me your reality

RamblingEclectic · 06/12/2024 15:02

since when is eugenic a bad word? For well over a century, as it was used and still is used in some countries to forcibly sterilize people against their will, among other atrocities.

Pronatalists have a tendency to have pro-natal rhetoric for particular groups only, the 'good' groups that birth 'good' children (hence eugenics). This is still demonstrated in the US with much talk of which groups have declining birth rates as part of pushing for abortion bans while rarely used to acknowledge which groups have more maternal deaths or which groups are impacted by forced sterilization. It may come out more as we see which groups are choosing sterilization (The Lincoln Project's work on sharing the stories of women who've had to flee states to find abortion care when they had a child dying in utero, and reports on women choosing hysterectomies in that situation for fear of going through it again is well done, if heartbreaking).

Julia34 · 06/12/2024 15:03

TinklySnail · 06/12/2024 15:00

I feel it is not a separate problem. Abortion rates have rocketed since two child cap. This is a big reason for the lower birth rates.

Like I said before many had kids for benefits if the benefit stop on any child they don't see any sense to keep the baby.

WhatUSeeIsWhatUGet · 06/12/2024 15:04

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 06/12/2024 10:51

You think a woman should be able to terminate a healthy pregnancy at term?

There are almost no jurisdictions in the world where that is legal.

It seems there should only be discussions and "debates" where everyone agrees... 🙄

ilovesooty · 06/12/2024 15:04

TinklySnail · 06/12/2024 12:27

Agreed. Its just a thread to put Reform down as a party and to start calling their supporters derogatory names.

Oh. Are they a party now?

Luckymama2014 · 06/12/2024 15:05

Dotjones · 06/12/2024 10:47

Well there probably should be a discussion on abortion, like how it should be easier to access and should be available at any point during pregnancy up to the birth. The laws we have at the moment are over fifty years old, they need updating. The 24 week limit is way too early and it shouldn't need the consent of two doctors, if the mother wants one that should be the end of the discussion.

REALLY?? up to full term a woman should be able to choose to terminate a healthy baby?? well at that point extend to after birth and we can just rid of people we aren't keen on. Nuts!

Fluufer · 06/12/2024 15:06

TinklySnail · 06/12/2024 15:01

History book yes. I’m talking about today’s society. So please, show me your reality

Take it you don't follow international news then.

TinklySnail · 06/12/2024 15:06

Julia34 · 06/12/2024 15:03

Like I said before many had kids for benefits if the benefit stop on any child they don't see any sense to keep the baby.

They aren’t all on benefits. The two child cap has impacted working women too. Maybe they aren’t earning huge amounts but the cap will have had an impact on family planning for them.

TinklySnail · 06/12/2024 15:07

Fluufer · 06/12/2024 15:06

Take it you don't follow international news then.

You are sounding like a politician and avoiding.

RingoJuice · 06/12/2024 15:09

RamblingEclectic · 06/12/2024 15:02

since when is eugenic a bad word? For well over a century, as it was used and still is used in some countries to forcibly sterilize people against their will, among other atrocities.

Pronatalists have a tendency to have pro-natal rhetoric for particular groups only, the 'good' groups that birth 'good' children (hence eugenics). This is still demonstrated in the US with much talk of which groups have declining birth rates as part of pushing for abortion bans while rarely used to acknowledge which groups have more maternal deaths or which groups are impacted by forced sterilization. It may come out more as we see which groups are choosing sterilization (The Lincoln Project's work on sharing the stories of women who've had to flee states to find abortion care when they had a child dying in utero, and reports on women choosing hysterectomies in that situation for fear of going through it again is well done, if heartbreaking).

Abortion of severely disabled fetuses have a eugenic effect on society, this is not a bad thing at all. Forcing women of disabled fetuses to have abortions is not permissible in a free society however.

But I wanted to draw a distinction here, in that pronatalism is not eugenic. I don’t see how the two concepts are compatible.

SerendipityJane · 06/12/2024 15:10

ilovesooty · 06/12/2024 14:59

Any change in the law would have to go through Parliament and the last time I looked it comprised both male and female MPs.

There was a fuckload of fuss over "English Votes for English Laws".

Maybe we should have "Womens Votes for Womens Laws" ?

ilovesooty · 06/12/2024 15:10

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

But I'm sure someone will be along to tell us that Reform know what a woman is 🙄

TinklySnail · 06/12/2024 15:10

ilovesooty · 06/12/2024 15:04

Oh. Are they a party now?

Yes

RingoJuice · 06/12/2024 15:10

Luckymama2014 · 06/12/2024 15:05

REALLY?? up to full term a woman should be able to choose to terminate a healthy baby?? well at that point extend to after birth and we can just rid of people we aren't keen on. Nuts!

Honestly they really don’t know how this plays to the general public.

TinklySnail · 06/12/2024 15:11

SerendipityJane · 06/12/2024 15:10

There was a fuckload of fuss over "English Votes for English Laws".

Maybe we should have "Womens Votes for Womens Laws" ?

Not a bad idea to be honest.

MistressoftheDarkSide · 06/12/2024 15:11

RingoJuice · 06/12/2024 14:48

Pronatalist is like, the opposite of eugenicist tbh. Abortion has a eugenic effect on society if we want to be totally honest. And since when is eugenic a bad word?

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2023/apr/20/pro-natalism-babies-global-population-genetics

Both movements are all about who gets to have babies from a political / religious perspective.

Currently women have the right to terminate their own unwanted / unviable pregnancies. They are able to make a decision based on their own needs, own circumstances and within pretty fair parameters in the UK.

Eugenics / pronatalism seek to take the decision away from individual women framing it as a societal issue. One woman, fully informed, having an abortion, is nothing like eugenics. You may argue that it leads to more abortions in some demographics, but of course no-one wants to address why that might be - such as the inherent economic unfairness that mean women don't feel able to support a baby.

No woman should be forced to have an abortion; no woman should be denied the right to choose one.

The decision to have or not have a baby should rest solely with a woman, not used as the basis for depopulation, or repopulation, or because "God" or "creating more smart people" or for political point scoring.

‘Hipster eugenics’: why is the media cosying up to people who want to build a super race?

There’s a thin line between the ‘pro-natalist’ movement and the ‘great replacement theory’

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2023/apr/20/pro-natalism-babies-global-population-genetics

Julia34 · 06/12/2024 15:11

Luckymama2014 · 06/12/2024 15:05

REALLY?? up to full term a woman should be able to choose to terminate a healthy baby?? well at that point extend to after birth and we can just rid of people we aren't keen on. Nuts!

Aborting baby until full term pregnacy should be counted as murder unless the mother is at risk. For me only psychopatic women will be able to abort perfectly healthy baby with not any risk for herself at the end stage of pregnancy. I aganist abortion but I have more understanding for women who make abortion early as possible to minimise the pain for the babies rather they are waiting to make the baby suffer in pain. I know some women will do abortion as punishment for man when he leave her. I know one women did she was happy she pregnant until 15 weeks pregnacy her partner leave her she do abortion and tell him lies she lost baby

altmember · 06/12/2024 15:12

I think the vast majority of people in the UK are fine with the current abortion rules, and I certainly don't think there's much appetite for an outright ban. If this is what farage is thinking of adopting as his policy it'll do more harm to his party than good. They'll lose all the mainstream voters they had at the last election and turn themselves into a fringe party.

SerendipityJane · 06/12/2024 15:13

MistressoftheDarkSide · 06/12/2024 15:11

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2023/apr/20/pro-natalism-babies-global-population-genetics

Both movements are all about who gets to have babies from a political / religious perspective.

Currently women have the right to terminate their own unwanted / unviable pregnancies. They are able to make a decision based on their own needs, own circumstances and within pretty fair parameters in the UK.

Eugenics / pronatalism seek to take the decision away from individual women framing it as a societal issue. One woman, fully informed, having an abortion, is nothing like eugenics. You may argue that it leads to more abortions in some demographics, but of course no-one wants to address why that might be - such as the inherent economic unfairness that mean women don't feel able to support a baby.

No woman should be forced to have an abortion; no woman should be denied the right to choose one.

The decision to have or not have a baby should rest solely with a woman, not used as the basis for depopulation, or repopulation, or because "God" or "creating more smart people" or for political point scoring.

I would suggest that the greatest advances in [human] genetics have their roots in eugenics and the scientists who were researching and advocating it.

TinklySnail · 06/12/2024 15:15

SerendipityJane Ouch that’s harsh. Do you not think there may be more depth than just punishment?
If it’s true then that person is a minority surely to have an abortion purely out of spite?

Fluufer · 06/12/2024 15:17

TinklySnail · 06/12/2024 15:07

You are sounding like a politician and avoiding.

I didn't really think it was a question that needed answering given most women already don't have these rights.

Ladamesansmerci · 06/12/2024 15:18

ilovesooty · 06/12/2024 14:59

Any change in the law would have to go through Parliament and the last time I looked it comprised both male and female MPs.

Politics have historically been dominated by men almost in their entirety.

I just think only women should be allowed to vote on abortion laws 🤷

RingoJuice · 06/12/2024 15:19

MistressoftheDarkSide · 06/12/2024 15:11

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2023/apr/20/pro-natalism-babies-global-population-genetics

Both movements are all about who gets to have babies from a political / religious perspective.

Currently women have the right to terminate their own unwanted / unviable pregnancies. They are able to make a decision based on their own needs, own circumstances and within pretty fair parameters in the UK.

Eugenics / pronatalism seek to take the decision away from individual women framing it as a societal issue. One woman, fully informed, having an abortion, is nothing like eugenics. You may argue that it leads to more abortions in some demographics, but of course no-one wants to address why that might be - such as the inherent economic unfairness that mean women don't feel able to support a baby.

No woman should be forced to have an abortion; no woman should be denied the right to choose one.

The decision to have or not have a baby should rest solely with a woman, not used as the basis for depopulation, or repopulation, or because "God" or "creating more smart people" or for political point scoring.

The overall point here is that abortion truly does have a eugenic effect on society in the macro sense and giving women the freedom to choose has been a large part of that. Some of the earliest proponents of abortion has used eugenic arguments and … they weren’t wrong, it’s just unseemly to mention.

So I really don’t think you can frame pronatalism as eugenic. IMHO.

Gingerbee · 06/12/2024 15:19

MrRobinsonsQuango · 06/12/2024 10:42

Why is wanting to have a discussion?! He’s male so literallly nothing to do with him

Exactly.

MistressoftheDarkSide · 06/12/2024 15:19

SerendipityJane · 06/12/2024 15:13

I would suggest that the greatest advances in [human] genetics have their roots in eugenics and the scientists who were researching and advocating it.

Examples please? And a human cost / benefit analysis?