Late term abortion, high court

[Anycrispsleft]

I saw this on the BBC this morning - it's High Court review of the rules on late term abortions. The campaigners are seeking to remove the exception to the ban on post 24 week abortion that allows it in the case of "non-lethal" disabilities. The woman who is asking for the review wants the law to be changed on the grounds that it's discrimination against disabled people.

Apologies if this case has been covered before, I'm a newcomer to FWR having been radicalised by you people on Twitter. I just wanted to express this thought that occurred to me: the trans debate has shown me that whatever good-thinking progressives think, rights are sometimes like pie, in that giving one person more rights can mean less rights for someone else. And this is also like that, isn't it? There's a balancing of the rights of the foetus (not that a foetus has legal rights, at least not yet) and the rights of the mother. Until now I used to sort of shy away from this bit of the ethics of abortion. I am very strongly pro choice, but I always wanted to be able to justify that stance in a sort of objective way, considering the cases of the foetus and the mother as though I had no skin in the game. And I realised I can't actually do that, because I do have skin in the game, because I am a woman, I have two girls, and I want all of us to have control over our own bodies. It's not that I think I am objectively right. I want to win this. I don't care about the rights and wrongs from an academic point of view. I don't want my children to have to carry a child they don't want to term. Full stop. I'm sure others would be able to put this in a much more eloquent way but I feel like I've reached a new point in my feminism and I wanted to share it. I'm not neutral. I'm team woman.

24 weeks is a viable baby, the point at which a fetus dependent on the mum transitions to high probability of survival in his own. So it'd be like killing a baby. Think that the baby is out, then is alive, and has to be killed by the nurse. Do you think that's ok to do, because he's disabled? Of course it's a horrible choice, but we can't ask the baby whether he wants to live...
The baby is out at 24 weeks, alive but has no family to care for him so is at greater risk od psychological and attachment issues, and a he has a higher risk of ongoing medical issues relating to premature birth. Do you think that's OK to do, because you won't permit abortion after 24 weeks? (That's without considering all the medical reasons why a mother would be considering late abortion in the first place )
Women aren't incubators. You can't just pretend the baby is viable so if it was born everything would be great.
All the reasons for the late abortion would still exist and all those reasons impact the child - including just not wanting it

@BosseFave

24 weeks is a viable baby, the point at which a fetus dependent on the mum transitions to high probability of survival in his own. So it'd be like killing a baby. Think that the baby is out, then is alive, and has to be killed by the nurse. Do you think that's ok to do, because he's disabled? Of course it's a horrible choice, but we can't ask the baby whether he wants to live...

If I had the chance I would have let my son have a dignified death. I would have terminated up to the moment I gave birth if I knew that the short life he had would have been full of pain. I wouldn't have killed him because he was disabled I would have let him go because a life where everything hurts, where someone touching your skin brings pain is not living. It is torture, no sentient being would choose to live like that.

As early as possible, as late as necessary.

@BosseFave

24 weeks is a viable baby, the point at which a fetus dependent on the mum transitions to high probability of survival in his own. So it'd be like killing a baby. Think that the baby is out, then is alive, and has to be killed by the nurse. Do you think that's ok to do, because he's disabled? Of course it's a horrible choice, but we can't ask the baby whether he wants to live...

The chances of survival for a baby born at a hospital with a top NICU 24 weeks with no underlying conditions or disabilities is 50%. The chances of those babies that survive then having serious problems later in life is more than 50%

So can we stop the idea that prem babies are all fine and just need a bit of time in an incubator and can then go on to live normal lives..?

And babies born at 24 weeks with underlying conditions such as DS are going to have a terribly bleak prognosis so it is such a ridiculous, ignorant and ill informed point to try and make on so many levels

I absolutely reject any further restrictions on UK women that can currently chose an abortion.

The thread went off tangent a little. So I want to consider a few points.

Are there any reasons that we as a society accept, beyond 24weeks that aren't already covered by existing legislation? The experiences women have shared on this thread are heart breaking. They do demonstrate that 'as late as necessary' is happening now.

Is sex selection in a misogynist society something we are comfortable supporting throughout whole term?

Are we comfortable with the combination of abortion as late as necessary with surrogacy? I'm reminded of the outrage expressed when a wealthy Chinese was annoyed she couldn't 'cancel' her baby order because it was too late. Are we now saying that surrogate women can abort as late as possible because the intended parents backed out?

Are we happy for an abused women to face an entire pregnancy under pressure to abort from her abuser? Or a teenage girl's family to pressure her right up to birth?

I think we need to step back and consider the ways totally unlimited access to abortions could be abused. I really don't like "it will never happen" or "no true woman" arguments - we need to think about worst case scenarios when we're considering the law of the land.

The thread went off tangent a little.

The thread is about a court case in which the claimants are arguing that abortion past 24 weeks for reasons of disability should be criminalised, and even more alarmingly, are arguing that a foetus should have legal personhood and all the human rights that go with that.

The claimants are arguing that the current law is discriminatory against people with disabilities because abortion is only allowed at all after 24 weeks due to the mother's life being at risk or that the baby will have a severe disability.

One way to make the law not discriminatory is to allow abortions generally for any reason after 24 weeks and until birth.

This would have the advantage that it would be less likely again to indirectly discriminate against potentially disabled babies as the parents could take time to have thorough investigations and counselling rather than rushing to abort before the cut off.

Yes, I agree. There would be nothing to stop a clause being added to criminalise coercing a woman into having an abortion. I think Diana Johnson's proposed amendment contained such a clause (she withdrew without a vote on Monday).

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/feminism/4288388-Proposed-new-abortion-laws

@BosseFave

24 weeks is a viable baby, the point at which a fetus dependent on the mum transitions to high probability of survival in his own. So it'd be like killing a baby. Think that the baby is out, then is alive, and has to be killed by the nurse. Do you think that's ok to do, because he's disabled? Of course it's a horrible choice, but we can't ask the baby whether he wants to live...

Have you read the thread? Have you read the accounts of women who’ve had to take this excruciating decision to save their babies from short lives filled with pain? How the delays in the diagnostic process are what causes late term abortions? You should be ashamed of coming into a thread full of these stories and making such comments.

Thats a very rose tinted glasses view of premature births, the percentage of babies that survive - let alone without any kind of disability as the result of being born so early - is nowhere near 100%.

One of best friends in her 40s will be looking after her brother with DS at some point soon (has shared care) and she'll likely be the one making all his medical decisions soon. For most of her life she has been her mum's backup carer for him. It's so tough on siblings, staying near home has reduced her choices and her fun in life.

I'm Team Woman.

@Enough4me

One of best friends in her 40s will be looking after her brother with DS at some point soon (has shared care) and she'll likely be the one making all his medical decisions soon. For most of her life she has been her mum's backup carer for him. It's so tough on siblings, staying near home has reduced her choices and her fun in life.

I'm Team Woman.

But that's just one sibling's experience? Doesn't mean it's the same for everyone.

I am so shocked at the number of usually forward thinking friends sharing support for this court case. The spiel that keeps being shared is about how disabled people should have equality and yes they should - abortion should be allowed until birth for any reason and that would be equality. The spiel also has NO MENTION of mothers and fathers, their rights, how they would cope with a child with severe disabilities, how this would impact the family as a whole. Just force women to have a baby they know they can't cope with and that's alright is it because babies with Downs Syndrome are cute? It's made me really angry actually.

I trust women and I stand by any woman who seeks an abortion at any stage, for any reason.

@Mylovelyhorsechestnut it does really affect siblings for their whole childhoods and lives though.

@BastardMonkfish

I am so shocked at the number of usually forward thinking friends sharing support for this court case. The spiel that keeps being shared is about how disabled people should have equality and yes they should - abortion should be allowed until birth for any reason and that would be equality. The spiel also has NO MENTION of mothers and fathers, their rights, how they would cope with a child with severe disabilities, how this would impact the family as a whole. Just force women to have a baby they know they can't cope with and that's alright is it because babies with Downs Syndrome are cute? It's made me really angry actually.

I trust women and I stand by any woman who seeks an abortion at any stage, for any reason.

It's actually upset me the number of friends who have shared support for this case. I'm not easily upset and I'm surprised by my strength of feeling to be honest.

I don't think it's wrong to hold a different view to me, but I do think it's wrong to force that opinion on me through law.

But that's just one sibling's experience? Doesn't mean it's the same for everyone.

How many do you need? I could give you hundreds. Almost exclusively sisters, even when brothers are around.

@TentTalk yes this is the situation for my friend, her other brother was allowed to have choices, she has been opted in as the youngest brother's carer. It meant she missed school days, freedom to go out, was expected to do her bit - all the time!

@TentTalk

But that's just one sibling's experience? Doesn't mean it's the same for everyone.

How many do you need? I could give you hundreds. Almost exclusively sisters, even when brothers are around.

You know hundreds? Is this just siblings of people with DS? Are Timmy Mallet and Jamie Foxx amount the hundreds you know? They don't seem to be doing too badly

[quote Enough4me]@Mylovelyhorsechestnut it does really affect siblings for their whole childhoods and lives though.[/quote]
Agreed, but everyone's experience is different. You can't say that it is a negative experience for everyone. I'm unclear if you are referring to siblings of those who have DS, or disabilities in general? I know many people with a sibling with DS, and most say that their sibling has been an overwhelming positive in their lives, and say they are happier for having their sibling in their lives.

Is this just siblings of people with DS? Are Timmy Mallet and Jamie Foxx amount the hundreds you know? They don't seem to be doing too badly

Jamie Foxx was 18 when his DS sister was born, he had his entire childhood without having to be his back up carer

If you honestly think that’s a good example of the impact on siblings, you know absolutely nothing

Competing rights is always complex.

Where we are now is about right. I do not approve of changing the law further in either direction.

You will always get the extremes of ‘life from conception’ is sacred to ‘my body, my right to abort a healthy foetus until the day before birth’.

Neither of the above will ever gain traction. The latter is not a women’s rights issue as the vast majority of women are against it (actually a higher percentage than men).

@Mylovelyhorsechestnut what do you think happens to severely disabled children when they become adults and their parents can no longer care for them or die? What happens when there is no sibling to help care for them? Since you seem so knowledgeable on the subject, perhaps you could tell me as I am terrified of what will happen to my children when we die.

Have you not read about the many cases of abuse of disabled people in care homes? Having a disabled child is not just about caring for them when they are a small child - you have to consider their whole life.

Should we perhaps have more children and hope they’re not disabled too so that we have some potential future carers?

There has to be a point where you say no even if it is only a miniscule number of cases

For any reason or none, otherwise you are denying women autonomy.
I haven't looked since the last time this issue came up, but when I did there were no late term terminations after a certain week (which week eludes me) I looked as far as I could into it and there were none near term. Theres no need for a law in that case.

It would be a whole lot better if tests could be done sooner, if we know sooner we can make choices sooner, all of which is better for women and potential baby.

I think women could be exposed to even higher levels of coercion around pregnancy if there wasn't a cut off date beyond which abortion isn't available except to save the woman's life.

@Congressdingo,

There are vanishingly few cases of infanticide. This does not mean it should not be illegal.

The bodily autonomy argument (for me) fails on two counts. There is the conflicting right of the near-term foetus. You can axiomatically make this zero, but the vast majority of the population disagree with you.

Also, this is not autonomy in the normal sense of the word. I do not have the autonomy to demand a (free) medical procedure on my body for any other reason.

There will always be those who say ‘as early as possible, as late as necessary’, but they are in the minority, especially among women.

[quote SinkGirl]@Mylovelyhorsechestnut what do you think happens to severely disabled children when they become adults and their parents can no longer care for them or die? What happens when there is no sibling to help care for them? Since you seem so knowledgeable on the subject, perhaps you could tell me as I am terrified of what will happen to my children when we die.

Have you not read about the many cases of abuse of disabled people in care homes? Having a disabled child is not just about caring for them when they are a small child - you have to consider their whole life.

Should we perhaps have more children and hope they’re not disabled too so that we have some potential future carers?[/quote]
I am also terrified of what will happen to my child when I die, and am very aware of recent cases of abuse in supported living (Winterbourne View, etc).

My point is that not every sibling is negatively affected by having a sibling with DS. Every family is different. I will certainly not be expecting my other children to care for my child who has DS when I am gone, and would not ever want them to feel obliged to.

As I have a child with DS, I know lots of local families, including some grown-up siblings, who have said they love their sibling, yes it can be hard at times, but they wouldn't change their situation/wouldn't be without their sibling. A couple have actively chosen to support their sibling, after their parents have died.

This isn't everyone's experience, but as I said, everyone is different and it is in my opinion unfair to make a blanket statement that having a sibling with DS=having a crap life.