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?

But this debate isn't between "pro-choice" and "pro-life" positions, it's between "pro-choice" (as understood to be broadly agreeing with the law as now stands) and the extreme "pro-choice" brigade who you correctly say most people disagree with.

@Justfinking

By the way, I nearly did adopt a disabled
baby boy a few years ago. For various reasons it never actually happened, but it so nearly did. I certainly don't believe that gives me a monopoly to have views on the subject!

I think there is an argument for saying that the logical positions are that abortion for no reason at any stage should always be allowed or abortion should never be allowed.

But, they might theoretically be logical positions but they don't take account of reality. The position in the UK is a pragmatic, for want of a better word, fudge, which the majority of people in the UK accept.

It's interesting that those who very confidently and stridently pronounced that I was a misogynist and unfemimist for not holding the "no if, no buts" dogma of choice have gone quiet.

Maybe they can see that the position is a little more nuanced than they had realised, and have reflected?!

Yes, the reality of life means that rigid black and white thinking very rarely can withstand examination, especially in complex ethical matters such as abortion.

I think that while some feminists argue “as late as necessary, for any reason” they cannot also argue that late abortion is so rare as to be irrelevant. In many ways this is a philosophical debate with real world implications.

I very much consider myself a feminist. I support in abortion for any reason prior to viability outside the womb. Abortion for only extreme reasons after that. There is never going to be an easy decision on exactly where to place the boundary of viability, or how to define an acceptable extreme reason. UK laws are, I think, in approximately the right place.

Women are affected by our reproductive capability. It both uplifts and limits us. It is what defines us as a sex class from men. I find the insistence on bodily autonomy at any cost oddly dismissive of this. If we get pregnant we cannot just ignore it the way a man can. To attempt to pretend we can is, to me, an erasure of what it means to be a woman, not a celebration of it.

Do I think a woman aborting late for reasons other than those incompatible with life is doing so lightly? Absolutely not. Does she need help? Absolutely. But what about a woman who kills her young children? Has she done that lightly? Does she need help? We can’t legalise things just because the justice system is in a mess.

"But this debate isn't between "pro-choice" and "pro-life" positions, it's between "pro-choice" (as understood to be broadly agreeing with the law as now stands) and the extreme "pro-choice" brigade who you correctly say most people disagree with."

The pro-choice absolutists/purists would say that being only conditionally pro-choice (ie up till viability) is an oxymoron, internally inconsistent and philosophically unjustifiable.

I agree that the current UK legal approach is a fudge that works only if you don't think too deeply about it for very long.

That's an incredibly nihilistic and bleak perspective, all in the service of an absolutist pro-choice position. 😔

Foetuses and babies have an instinctive urge to live, as we all do, so to say they don't want to live is very inaccurate.

If you mean that they don't have a conscious appreciation of life and death, and therefore their will to live is merely instinctive rather than a conscious desire, then you're effectively saying that it's of no consequence if any child under the age of 3 lives or dies, and anyone with severe mental incapacity too.

Completely agree with this!

Do I think a woman aborting late for reasons other than those incompatible with life is doing so lightly? Absolutely not. Does she need help? Absolutely. But what about a woman who kills her young children? Has she done that lightly? Does she need help? We can’t legalise things just because the justice system is in a mess.

Very true.

Also, not every woman/ mother is "good". Evil female monsters do exist -
and to pretend that any and all problems can be fixed if only she is given enough help is naive.

This with bells on.

Afraid I couldn't consider you a feminist.

I believe it would take a lot of desperation to abort a term foetus.

In the vast, vast majority of cases, I agree... but there are female psychopaths... The idea that only men are "bad" is naive.

I think it's the "dogmatic purity" that the more vociferous feminists insist upon, and is seen on multiple posts, is why the number of women identifying as "feminist" has declined.

Yes

👏🏻 👏🏻 👏🏻

Is there a difference between aborting a 24 week old (6 months) foetus, and a 30 week (7.5 months) foetus?

If so, what? Both are physically viable.

The current UK limit (excepting those cases where there is 'substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped') is 24 weeks, btw, and this is later than many other Western/European countries.

So women shouldn't be allowed to have late term abortions because some women are pure evil and psychopaths, so instead we'll force those women to give birth to a live baby and possibly raise it?

That makes sense...

Yes, the reality of life means that rigid black and white thinking very rarely can withstand examination, especially in complex ethical matters such as abortion.

Tbf, saying no abortions past 24 weeks(except for medical reasons) is black and white thinking. It's as early as possible,as late as necessary that actually allows for all the greys.

The UK and the Netherlands have the longest time limits in Europe at 24 weeks. Iceland is 22 and Sweden, 18.

These are outliers - all other countries where abortion is legal are 10- 12 weeks

Absolutely. The most vocal pro life person I know has adopted children. Many people have the courage of their convictions, and live life ethically. Some of these people disagree with you about things. Get used to it.

We don't often gather to vote on whether someone can call themselves a feminist or not, but as you've asked, my vote is no you're not, as you want to limit a woman's bodily autonomy.

You suggest that women should continue their unwanted pregnancies so they can give them to deserving families. They'd have to be kept somewhere safe, in case they forgot their higher calling of forced continuation of an unwanted pregnancy, and sure they could put a few washes on while they wait for the baby to come , to get the full Magdalen Laundries experience.

Well that's a really well argued rational response. I'm sure that hyperbolic twisting of what has been said will change minds.

I find it somewhat disingenuous to ask repeatedly why another pro-choice poster would care about the lies regarding dismemberment in late-term abortion, but I suppose I'll bite in the hopes it answers your question and moves the topic away from harmful misconceptions. Personally, as someone who would not want a late-term abortion unless absolutely necessary for health reasons, I do find the idea of a dismembered foetus distressing. However, I don't think my subjective feelings and the fact I personally find it distressing should be a reason to prevent other women from making choices regarding their own (and the foetus') health. Focusing on that particular myth can make late-term TFMR even more traumatic for women going through the process than it already is, especially when I believe the focus on abortion as a feminist issue should be centred on fighting for better mental, emotional, physical healthcare provision and support for all women who need or want a termination.

It was late night in the UK when you posted this.

And on the flip side, it’s a beautiful summer’s day down my part of the world.

Maybe people have better things to be doing than sitting on MN on a Saturday night, or a sunny Sunday?

I haven’t changed my position - it’s 100% the individual woman’s right to choose what’s best for her, regardless of my personal feelings on the matter.

Her choice - no ifs, no buts.

That's great, I'd say it's very, very rare! And I'm sure they don't foster each and every child who ends up in a shitty situation they don't deserve