Termination of pregnancies - too willing to terminate, maybe there are other choices?

[Ilovepastafortea]

I have trouble with the issue of terminating pregnancies.

For context I had 5 miscarriages & 1 baby born 'sleeping' at 29 weeks.

Also 2 of my (3) husbands were adopted-well DH's mother was adopted in the 1920's. The point is if abortion was available in 1963 & 1926 neither of them would have existed. Their childless mothers wouldn't have had babies to love & care for.

If my first husband had been aborted my lovely son wouldn't exist. He killed himself at the age of 32 leaving me with a baby. But at least I had my baby which was part of him.

If my DH's mother had been aborted my 3 lovely step children & 7 gorgeous grandchildren wouldn't be here. Both of my step sons served in the Royal Navy - one in special forces & got his Green (Marine) beret. My Step daughter is a nurse & worked in A&E for many years, is now a Matron. She has saved many lives & made a difference to many other people's lives including taking unpaid leave to be there when her grandmother was dying.

But then I understand why some people do it.

I can particularly understand it if the woman has been abused or raped - who would want to bring their abuser's or rapist's child into the world. I get that.

I just wish that they would think about having their unwanted baby adopted so that someone who can't have a baby can love & care for it.

My heart goes out to those with an unwanted pregnancy & facing this.

I don't know what I'd do to be honest.

I have no doubt that most women terminate a pregnancy after much heart searching & grief. However, I also hear about women who are terminating their 3rd or more pregnancies & using it as a method of birth control.

So brings me around to AIBU to ask if people terminate a pregnancy number 3 or 4 are being unreasonable?

Or not.

Just canvassing opinions.

Again, no woman goes through woman would go through 38 weeks of; weight gain, back aches, blood pressure, nose bleeds, Hyperemesis and possible hospitalisation, gestational diabetes, pelvic inflammation and preeclampsia - all of that for 38 weeks, just to.... suddenly.... change their mind.

No woman. Ever.

And you know it.

Where is the nuance in not supporting Gestational Slavery?

Except life clearly does not begin at conception. Science shows this. No heart or heartbeat, no brainstem, no nerve receptors, = no sentience.

Further, if life began at conception, miscarriages wouldn't be a thing.

I’m guessing this is the point you’re ignoring any point which makes you feel uncomfortable. By repeating yourself you feel safe in that argument.

As far as I’m concerned you’re more pro life in reality than pro choice. Otherwise your answer would be simple. Yes it’s a woman’s choice and she is more important than a baby in utero.

Gestational slavery. For goodness sake. You don't tolerate emotive turns of phrase from the other side, "murdering babies".

Look if you don't agree with abortion then don't have one. Noone has the right to dictate to a woman what they do with their own body.

I missed this. I'm only posting to say that viruses grow and live and mutate. They survive. They are living things.

A lot of abortions/terminations wouldnt happen if we had decent contraceptive services available. So many services are closing particularly those that were open evenings and weekends.
At least the POP and morning after pill is available through pharmacies which helps.
Plus baby number 3 or 4 can be daunting for some women because of the two child benefit cap.
Note I didn't say all but a fair few.

I'm just going to leave this here, since I rewatched it last night and then came across this thread. It's one of my favourite films but please don't watch if you're sensitive, easily upset or think it might be triggering (there are scenes of a backstreet abortion)

I think all world leaders should watch it but of course this isn't an old white man's problem so things will never change.

We cannot go back to these times. I think we're lucky in the UK, as religion doesn't have such a hold over us. But you can bet your bottom dollar there are things like this happening in countries where abortion is illegal, like Malta, Poland...

What women do with their bodies is up to them. This isn't up for debate.

The same people who say things like this also want to isolate unvaccinated people from society and vaccinate their children against their consent. It's such a hollow thing to say as the principle goes straight out the window the second it suits another argument.

Removing the right of a woman to terminate and forcing her to gestate against her will, is gestational slavery. Whether you want to admit that or not.

Eh? Why are you talking about vaccination? You posted about people missing "nuance" which you were asked about, but haven't replied to.
What did you mean by that?

And killing babies is killing babies - whether you like it or not. We can both play this very same game.

I must have missed replies then, was I tagged or quoted? I do try and reply if I see someone has responded to me

People need to stop framing Adoption as a straightforwardly positive alternative to Termination.

I have worked with many Adopted and care-experienced children and young people. Firstly, there are many children in the system who never get adopted. There is also a shortage of long term foster placements so many of these children never have a stable home with secure attachments, they can be bounced around between distant relatives and temporary foster carers, childrens homes, back to foster care only to be chucked out of the system and into the real world with a fuck-load of trauma leaving them hugely vulnerable. In our LA there have been cases of children sleeping in the Reception area of the Children's Services offices supervised by two Support Workers as there was literally nowhere for them to go.

I've seen Adoptions break down, which is hugely distressing and inevitably has lasting Mental Health consequences, immense feelings of shame and sadness, for all those involved.

I've worked with children who have been abused by their adoptive parents and by long term Foster carers. I've also seen adoptive parents who have been absolutely broken by the demands of caring for hugely traumatised children with complex needs with next to no support.

I remember a particularly sad case where a woman had adopted as a single parent believing she would never have her own children, then years later she met a new partner had a baby with him. Her adopted child was rejected, scapegoated, emotionally abused, and eventually the adoptive Mum and Step Dad voluntarily placed her back into the care system. There were no foster placements available so she had to go into a Children's Home.

The emotional impact of carrying a baby inside you for 9 months, going through childbirth and then handing that baby over to strangers or a faceless 'authority' cannot be overstated. I've worked with women who have fully intended to give up their baby for adoption, for very good reasons, but changed their minds, sometimes under pressure from a controlling partner or family, resulting in them having a baby they do not want and/or are ill-equipped to care for. In some cases, these children end up going into the care system anyway, but not before much damage has already been done. In other cases they are just left to endure the adverse circumstances (poverty, lack of stability, domestic abuse, substance misuse or simply not being wanted) that led to adoption being considered in the first place.

I am not 'anti-adoption', it can of course be a wonderful thing and the majority of people who adopt do so for the right reasons. But to say that people should consider adoption as an alternative to Termination with seemingly no regard for the complexities, risks and far-reaching implications that such a decision could have is childish in it's simplicity.

I'm not talking about vaccinations I'm talking about how many on this thread who are cleaving to arguments of bodily autonomy are so quick to abandon this principle on other matters

A baby is defined as a born human being from the age of birth to 12 months.

No one is advocating killing a baby.

But you are advocating killing the woman. Either through her suicide or through her dying in a back street abortion. Or in the Sepsis Wards (google them).

No, you are assuming they do to form a false narrative. I know of no one who wants unvaccinated segregated from society. It's more likely to be a lie you made up on the spot.

Who has done so on this thread?
Which of us has been "quick to abandon this principle"? I can't find it on this thread?

So, @GermaneRomaine , you still haven't clarified what you meant when you said that some people lacked "nuance" on here.

Who on earth wants the unvaccinated segregated in society?! That's a new one on me!

I honestly can't understand what clarification this requires unless you don't understand what the word nuance means... what ambiguity are you struggling with?

Do you have evidence of that claim?

It's been a long time since "evidence" settled any kind of dispute. Can you think of any recent cases?

The difference is that an unvaccinated child can be a danger to thousands of other children that they come into contact with, because of herd immunity. Abortions are not contagious.