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?

@OdinsHorse thank you for the apology, I appreciate it.

I have no idea what the numbers might be.

I would like to point out, though, that 'medical reasons' are not always as significant/serious as some posters might assume.

Currently in the UK one can abort at any point for Downs' Syndrome, cleft palate, club foot. There is a discussion to be had whether all these should be considered as 'serious handicaps' which allow abortions at any point in pregnancy.

I think what you are saying is that you should legislate for the scenarios where you think are abortions are acceptable after a certain week.

i don’t think that we should legislate for them. I don’t think doctors should fear criminalisation when making these decisions. And I don’t think it’s possible to legislate for these situations. In Canada where there are no legal restrictions on abortion there are still professional medical guidelines.

I think this point is so so important. And raises so many questions about he rights of disabled people in wider context.

Anyone who'd stop caring about women's rights and equality as some sort of protest against fringe views was never a feminist to start with.

yes and no, because I also think that women should not be criminalised if they do end their pregnancies outwith this period for the reasons I outlined in the rest of my post at 8.13.

Parliament poised to decriminalise abortion in historic vote

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a4d984fa-b8b4-401a-a9b9-707edcfd38de?shareToken=9c8a4a6fdc7bca94a4a890c33c85b7a7

I would agree with the views expressed in this article about decriminalisation of abortion beyond the 24 week limit. And I would suggest that this is a feminist position to hold.

Your characterisation of the very literal ‘my body, my choice’ position in the post I have quoted implies that women are - as a poster above suggested - having late term abortions (illegally) for shits and giggles. This is not what is happening; late term abortions are happening for complex social, economic, medical and often family or partnership issues, where I think the appropriate position is to seek to support the woman in question.

I also recognise that it is possible to be pro-life and feminist, which is a more complex argument than I have time to write at the moment around how abortion serves men and society, rather than women. I think it is possible to recognise both views and seek to genuinely improve women’s (genuine) reproductive choices and autonomy without suggesting either side is more or less of a feminist.

Canada isn't the haven some seem to think. Yes, there's no legal restriction. The reality is there are restrictions imposed by lack of service providers generally and the imposition of time limits.

Most states cut it off around 12-15 weeks. Only Quebec will go to 24 weeks and Ontario to 23.

Abortion provision in Canada

Abortion in Canada

Are you suggesting it is ‘hysteria’ (a misogynistic term) because there are only a few of them? Surely it shouldn’t matter if there were loads if there was no issue with aborting a health foetus at 39 weeks?

But how are you restricting women's autonomy with my view? My view is that a woman can end a pregnancy at any point. It doesn't restrict a women's bodily autonomy in any way whatsoever.

After the point of viability, I just don't believe you should kill the baby before forcing delivery if you want to end a pregnancy. I still agree with aborting/killing foetus before it's viable outside the womb.

I actually also think forcing a woman to birth a dead baby (late term abortion) sounds more traumatic than getting them to birth a live baby tbh.

Also, lots of people on this thread seem to think I'm pro-life because I don't agree with late stage abortion.

Just to clarify - I'm pro-choice, I'm a feminist. I think women should be able to end a pregnancy at any point - but I believe baby should be allowed/assisted to live outside the womb once it's viable.

I also personally would never have an abortion, but I am pro-choice for everyone else.

@SaffronSpice it's the opposing side that keeps introducing this argument again,and again. What about the women that will wake up one day at 39 weeks pregnant and decide they want an abortion? Like it's some kind of catch. That's why the low (possible) numbers get mentioned.

I actually also think forcing a woman to birth a dead baby (late term abortion) sounds more traumatic than getting them to birth a live baby tbh.

Where does the forcing come in?

Why do numbers matter though? Either it is ok to decide to do so, in which case thousands of very late term abortions are ok, or it isn’t.

Is it feminist to support a woman’s right to choose to abort a baby because it is female?

There isn't any other way to deliver the baby, so if they want to end the pregnancy, they'll be forced to go through that.

I doubt anyone wants to deliver a dead baby, even if they want to end the pregnancy. So yes, I would say they're being forced to go through delivery

But why does it matter if women did abort at that stage? If the ethics are purely and one-dimensionally "my body, my choice", why are you so reluctant to own your position?

A woman should have the option to induce labour at any point. I don't agree with using drugs to kill the foetus. If the baby survives it can be placed for adoption. What needs clear definition is the point at which medicine stands back and lets nature take its course.

Logically, if the aim of an abortion is to end the unwanted dependence of a foetus on its mother, it should make no difference to the woman if that foetus is born dead, or born alive and immediately removed into the care of social services. Either way, the woman is relieved of the unwanted burden of her pregnancy & child.

Human beings, though - and particularly pregnant women - are emotional and hormonal as well as logical.

And I suspect that the unspoken reluctance of many to allow the foetus to be born alive (past the point of viability, of course) is because it's implicitly understood that a mother would find it far harder to give up a visible, living baby than an invisible one which is already dead before she has to be confronted with it.

You can feel any way you like, but it is not feminist to act on those feelings and deny bodily autonomy to another woman.
The fetus could be dying and slowly poisoning the mothers body. It could have a catastrophic birth defect which means it will die within a short time of being born.
Whatever the situation, just say to yourself 'there but for the grace of god go I'' and pray it never happens to you.

@Moonfishstar it doesn't matter to me , it matters to you and others like you which is why you keep using it as an argument. Then faux innocence wondering why we're replying to that argument. If You don't want us to use it, then stop mentioning as a reason as to why late term abortions shouldn't be allowed.It's like arguing with a toddler, you can't have it both ways.

Most people believe a late term foetus IS a baby, and maybe one day we will reclassify it legally as one.

It is vanishingly rare, even amongst feminists to justify abortion in the ‘4th trimester’ (aka infanticide), so the hardcore use the (il)logical leap that breathing oxygen directly rather than being supplied with oxygenates blood somehow confers the humanness on a foetus.

For most in society (and even more for women than men) abortion rights a compromise between the mother’s rights and the foetus’s (limited) rights, so we end up with messy compromises. But messy compromise is so much better than either absolute.

With no financial support to ensure a woman is not disadvantaged by having a baby, there is no real choice. Forced abortion or forced birth.

OP is clearly a forced birther loon who wants to push the idea that women ‘are changing their minds’ at 39.5 weeks. No doubt provoked by the recent discussion about decriminalisation of abortion and wants to push the trope of irresponsible pregnant women.

No. The only abortions carried out late are for very sad reasons and because they are the least bad option. So just fuck off back under your rock and leave us alone.

We have already established that women are forced to give birth in late term abortions regardless so why the continuation of the ‘forced birther’ nonsense?

The only abortions carried out late are for very sad reasons

That is because late term abortions are only currently legal due to medical reasons.

No doubt provoked by the recent discussion about decriminalisation of abortion

Well yes, duh!

I agree. That's a shade of grey which those who think abortion should be allowed to term for no reason never address.