Best Amazon Prime Day deals: Mumsnet favourites

Best Amazon Prime Day deals:
Mumsnet favourites

Shop now

Please or to access all these features

Craicnet

Future Referenda - Remember this day

33 replies

ItsSupposedToBeSummer · 17/06/2026 22:22

This isn't meant as a debate about the rights or wrongs of the 3 day wait for an abortion.

Its just to say that in any future referendum when those pushing a yes vote give you assurances about how it will work and how they will implement it they are lying.

I've always been suspicious of how referenda are pushed and the lies that are spun. How lucky we were to vote no on the last one about removing mothers.

OP posts:
ItsSupposedToBeSummer · 21/06/2026 18:26

This is tedious @Gealach please read what I've said so many times and stop wasting your time telling me I wasn't paying attention. You clearly aren't paying attention .... I knew what was being proposed, I knew this would happen sooner rather than later. My thread is for those who are surprised and disappointed this week.

OP posts:
BruachAbhann · 21/06/2026 18:34

Gealach · 21/06/2026 18:12

@ItsSupposedToBeSummer but there was no commitment. Abortion legislation was due to be reviewed…that was clearly stated at the time. You just weren’t paying attention.

Not only was the review that was done, clearly stated at the time but you’d honestly be a bit mad to think legislation would stay in its current form. The 10,000 women who didn’t make it to the second appointment also include those who were timed out of having a medical termination, those who had a miscarriage, those who couldn’t have an medical abortion for medical reasons.

The independent legalisation review found that the 3 day wait caused stress to women particularly vulnerable women, women in domestic violence situations, younger women, women who live rurally. It also meant that some women were timed out of medical abortion. The 3 day wait was just barrier on access to abortion by removing it, the power goes back to women’s hands.

Where can I access this review and who was questioned about it? I would love to see the questions they asked!

ItsSupposedToBeSummer · 21/06/2026 19:40

Exactly @BruachAbhann!

OP posts:
ItsSupposedToBeSummer · 21/06/2026 19:41

Either way my only point is to state the obvious that critical thinking has to be applied when voting on anything and ask how do i want it to look in 5, 10 years etc

OP posts:
BruachAbhann · 21/06/2026 20:41

Reading through the report and found this:
'Women in the UnPAC study suggested that rather than being mandatory, the three-day wait could instead be operationalized with an option to waive it. Others felt that a shorter time period might be more appropriate. One woman felt that it should be waived in cases of sexual abuse or for women who were at risk of timing out of care under section 12.'

'could', 'might'
and I still don't know what questions they were asked or how biased they were. The report is based on a study of just 58 women and according to this paragraph, just 1 felt the 3-day wait should be waived in certain circumstances.

BruachAbhann · 21/06/2026 20:42

Thanks for the link @Tingledtangled

Gealach · 21/06/2026 22:14

The report just wasn’t about the research on women that you cherry picked. It also included research on healthcare providers and public submissions and overall it found that the 3 day wait was a barrier to care for some women.

To me it was obvious this would be removed at some point. There was never a clinical reason for the 3 day wait. Obviously everyone is free now to choose to have some time for reflection if they wish, but it’s not going to be mandatory. Most women who go to the GP have already decided that they want an abortion. They don’t need to have to make a second appointment and come back another time.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread