Can I be a feminist and not be fully pro-choice until term?

[Moonfishstar]

As in to think there should be some restrictions on stopping a mother aborting their foetus very close to term if there is no reason other than the mother has decided not to proceed?

Yes, and I have once read a philosophy paper that made the suggestion that infanticide up to a certain point should be considered in the same way as abortion. Whether I agree with this or not, the point can be made. But my point above is that women do not go around willy-nilly having late term abortions or indeed, committing infanticide. The law, which was the product of decades of experience and campaigning, sets boundaries around this, which balance women’s bodily autonomy and reproductive rights with those of the foetus, therefore the law confers foetal personhood at a certain point. In this sense, the will to live or not is immaterial, foetal personhood is about viability, the ability to live outside the womb. I suppose that is why is see the word ‘will’ as erroneous and tone deaf in the context of foetal life.

That law, as we know from other countries, is vulnerable to challenge and overturning. That is the point we should be concerned about, not whether it is feminist or not to want no such limits.

And the fact that there are thousands of foetuses who are born alive after attempted abortions post-20 weeks every year in this country alone

Source?

Well, they'd currently be illegal, so probably not!

The issue is whether that should be made legal.

@ZebraPensAreLife

I don’t consider that position anti-feminist.

You are wrong.

No, such cases will obviously not be officially recorded.

"...substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped"

There are no legal definitions of 'substantial risk' or 'seriously handicapped', btw.

Abortions carried out after 24 weeks for conditions like cleft palate or club foot are reckoned to be significantly under-reported.

amp.theguardian.com/society/2003/dec/02/health.medicineandhealth

This article usefully details the Abortion Act of 1967, and the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Act of 1990 at the end.

This is what happens when abortion is banned. the baby was left with life long disability. She should have been offered an abortion when she first asked for it.

Abortions after 21 weeks are rare. And when people have access to safe, legal and free abortion- they overwhelmingly opt to have it early on. Restrictions to abortion cause later abortions. Abortions very late in pregnancy are usually due to a risk of life to the mother or other medical reasons and it’s extremely difficult to legislate for. It should be a decision between a woman & her doctors.

Do you think women would swan in at 37 weeks and say they changed their mind? And do you think a doctor would say oh grand so.

Hysteria around “late-term abortions” is just pro life propaganda

@OdinsHorse the RCOG guidelines I linked to upthread. I tried to cut and paste the relevant table, but the formatting went wonky. It's on page 40, Table 7, in the section on Feticide: "Live birth rates after termination for foetal abnormality in West Midlands 1995-2004".

Weirdly, I can't even cut and paste normal text from that document, but it states that 3.2% of fetuses in that category were born alive, which I find shockingly high.

Yes, people like the OP and I are not pro life - I want to keep the law as it is now. Late term abortions for medical reasons are fine in my book. The question is whether they should be allowed for any, non medical reason.

If that’s just a theoretical argument well, why not have it? Feminism is a philosophy, we should be able to discuss these things.

And some people on this thread think very clearly that if you do not agree with the position ‘a woman should be able to have a termination up to birth for no medical reason’ then you are not a feminist.

If you genuinely think it is a feminist issue that any abortion should be allowed for reasons of the woman’s bodily autonomy: why say ‘a decision for a woman and her doctors’? If you really think that, doctors should not have any part I the decision.

What do you mean obviously?

@mollyfolk

Do you think women would swan in at 37 weeks and say they changed their mind? And do you think a doctor would say oh grand so.

I don't get why pro-choice purists are so keen to stress this would never happen if the abortion question is genuinely a simple one-dimensional "my body, my choice"'issue. What would it matter if a woman did do this?

Also, why are pro-choice purists so keen to advocate for a right that they insist would never, ever be used?!

So your stats on later term abortions was over 9/10 years and you then compared with partners killing women over 1 year?

Apologies if I'm wrong, but I could say Sainsbury's is more expensive than Harrods as I spend £6,000 (over a year) but I only spend £500 (a week) in Harrods

@OdinsHorse because they're illegal, they happen under the radar, and no-one's looking for or recording that data.

Any comment on the rest of my post?

'So your stats on later term abortions was over 9/10 years and you then compared with partners killing women over 1 year?'

I think you're confusing me with someone else, @OdinsHorse - I've made no comments on partners killing women.

@DaffodilsAlready

The law, which was the product of decades of experience and campaigning, sets boundaries around this, which balance women’s bodily autonomy and reproductive rights with those of the foetus, therefore the law confers foetal personhood at a certain point.

It sounds like we agree then, and we believe that the current law is broadly reasonable in recognising the various moral, ethical and practical issues at play.

My issue is with those who believe there should be no law other than a very literal "my body, my choice" until birth. And that if you don't believe this, you are a misogynist and can't call yourself a feminist.

Simply put, because of the women in between who at the moment do not have that option.

And that's a good thing? If they happen anyway according to you, why not allow it to happen safely and legally for everyone's benefit?

It sounds very distressing. But it is worth remembering that sadly women can chose to carry to full term for severe fetal abnormality and their baby lives just a few minutes or short hours My aunt did that knowing her baby would live for only hours - something to do with the babies brain and central nervous system. she was offered an abortion earlier. So its possible her baby would have also been alive for a short time if she had chosen that.

I didn't say it was a good thing.

I'm not sure I follow your logic: something illegal and arguably immoral is happening, despite being illegal, so therefore we should make it legal..?

(That was in answer to @PaperDoIIs)

@PaperDoIIs

Simply put, because of the women in between who at the moment do not have that option.

In which case, why not argue for a relaxation in the current law to deal with these women, and a debate can be had on the issues, rather than get rid of the rules completely!

Yes @Spendonsend, my good friend's baby was diagnosed in the womb with anencephaly (where the baby's skull doesn't form properly). This is considered a condition incompatible with life, and she was told her baby would probably only live minutes, possibly hours.

She actually lived for 12 days, they were able to bring her home for most of that time, and are very grateful to have had that time with her.

Reading the RCOG guidelines, yes sometimes an aborted baby is 'allowed' to be born alive in cases where the medics are 100% sure that death will occur very soon after, but they don't seem to recommend it - perhaps due to the potential trauma (to all involved) of such a baby actually surviving much longer than was anticipated.

Apologies to you @HBGKC

This was the post I was referring to

If you care about safeguarding women and girls rather than criminalising and punishing them for choosing what to do with their body, then yes.

Tbh that applies in other cases , especially when it concerns vulnerable people.

So if they are illegal and not reported, then how many are really being done? Do you think 100s? I don't, I think most (nearly if not all) late term abortions are done for medical reasons.