Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
General health

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

Abortion rate highest ever - I'm sorry I just don't buy the reason suggested for this...

875 replies

CountessDracula · 08/02/2007 11:39

"But pregnancy advice groups said the figures probably reflected poor access to contraceptive services"

What utter tosh

You can buy condoms in many loos in clubs and pubs. In any chemist or 24hour shop.

You have access to family planning clinics and doctors with free contraception

You can buy the morning after pill over the counter ffs

Shouldn't people take a bit more responsibility and get themselves to these places and get some bloody contraception?

OP posts:
paulaplumpbottom · 09/02/2007 14:11

I don't think its a religious belief. When do you think it starts then? Some people think its ok to terminate up to nine months because its not technically born. Do you agree with this? Is it when there is a heart beat?

swifterella · 09/02/2007 14:11

sorry who thinks it is ok to terminate at 9months???

lulumama · 09/02/2007 14:12

the heart starts beating at 4 weeks or so, it does not mean that baby can sustain life outside the womb because it has a beating heart

foxinsocks · 09/02/2007 14:14

it's a religious belief for you paula though isn't it? It's not always a religious belief but most who spout the life at conception do so with a religious backing.

I tend to agree with lulu and think it can probably be considered a life when it could be born and survive.

paulaplumpbottom · 09/02/2007 14:14

There are people in the States who advocate Nine month abortions. Even worse than that there are people who believe that at nine months if they survive the termination that they should then be killed. They think this because that doing any diffrent gives a nine month old baby rights, heaven forbid.

paulaplumpbottom · 09/02/2007 14:16

I am religious but my views on abortion have nothing to do with my religious views.

FioFio · 09/02/2007 14:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

lulumama · 09/02/2007 14:19

all the eggs i have in my ovaries have the potential to become a baby, should i let DH fertilise them , but i do not see every period as a loss of a potential baby....

nor is every one of DH;s sperm a potential baby

just as not every embryo will develop and become a viable baby

these are all possibilities, it is possible that these ova and these sperm , might meet, might make a clump of cells, then become a foetus, then an embryo then a baby...

a possibility is not the same as a reality and a foetus that cannot survive ex utero, is not a baby, in my eyes...it has the potential , yes...but until it reaches that potential, it is not a baby...IMO

a potential does not take over the rights of an actual viable being, ie the mother

lulumama · 09/02/2007 14:23

PPB..if you are referring to partial birth abortion, it has been banned, i believe

and i agree with Fio, that the abortion limit should be lowered

we are at a point where medical science is so far advanced that babies born around the 21 - 24 week gestation can now survive, with intensive help, yet a baby can be aborted too at that time..blurring the lines even further

i personally have not had a termination, i do not think i would be able to have one, i support the rights of woman to have access to safe abortion, but i find the idea of abortion as a form of contraception uncomfortable and something that should be unnecessary

paulaplumpbottom · 09/02/2007 14:32

My point was just that there are people who think it is ok because they don't think it a life till its born. These aren't people on the fringe either.Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama want this for instance.

SmileysPeople · 09/02/2007 14:37

Sandcastles did say in her post that she was thankful that her mother's attempt to abort her failed, and that is despite the intense unhappiness it has obviously caused her. Suffering potential emotional and psychological damage does not make a life worthlesss or pointless. Although many adopted children may have some difficulties in coming to terms with this, they will also mostly lead fulfilling, happy and purposeful lives in other areas, it doesn't make their life not worth existing.

TBH I find the attitude that because it may make people unhappy to some degree it is better to end the life, quite bizarre. You could extend that arguemnt to all sorts of situations where babies are born into difficult circumstances which are likely to make their lives and childhoods hard in some way and to some degree.

Does that make their lives worthless?

Aloha · 09/02/2007 14:40

Well, just because you have a religious belief that four cells in a petri dish is a baby, doesn't make it so either. Four cells in a petri dish wouldn't be a cat or a crocodile either.

foundintranslation · 09/02/2007 14:41

I'm 8 1/2 weeks pg. On my desk in front of me I've got a scan picture of a little foetus with arm and leg buds. As far as I'm concerned, it's my 'baby'. But my choice of terminology has much more to do with my emotional connection to the life in my womb than with any kind of scientific definition.
TBH I would support the lowering of the time limit to somewhere between 14 and 20 weeks, but the consequences of safe, legal abortion not being available to women are just too horrific to contemplate. I really think the only sensible position on this is to be pro-choice.
FWIW, I've had three miscarriages, and have never felt resentment towards women who have a termination. They're in their situation, I'm in mine.

Aloha · 09/02/2007 14:43

If a woman has a termination, there is no question of someone wanting to be alive. That just doesn't arise. The 'person' in this is non-existent. They cannot, by definition suffer. I find it really freaky that there are people out there who honestly think the right of a non-sentient being about the size of a 5p piece should overule those of an adult woman.

SmileysPeople · 09/02/2007 15:03

Then the argument put forward earlier for justifying abortion on the grounds that they will live an unhappy life is also a moot point.

If you can't argue they may be happy and fulfilled in some areas, you can't use unhappiness as a justification.

It's off the point of the OP of the thread, but the painting of adoption as a terrible fate for anyone I think is really not a balanced one.

I have firends who were adopted and have have friends who have adopted. I would agree that the adopted children have a large psychological and emotional issue to come to terms with. But also IME the amount of love and happiness that exists in those familes is immense and hugely worthwhile.

Friends who have adpted ahve given children unconditional love, unwavering stability, and to be honest it's one of the most beautiful things I've seen. So to portray all adoptive childen as ending up suicidal is wrong. Some do and it's desparely sad, just as sad as all the suicides of non adpted children.

expatinscotland · 09/02/2007 15:05

But it's not a one-size fits all option, that's why it's called pro-choice.

The choice to continue the pregnancy and keep the baby or adopt it out, or the choice to terminate.

Giving a baby away for adoption isn't an option for some women who fall accidentally pregnant. The mental and emotional damage to her could destroy her. And what if other children are dependent on such a woman?

See, it's not all black and white.

When you take away a woman's right to control her reproduction, you enslave her.

SmileysPeople · 09/02/2007 15:09

Women can control their reproduction, with contraception.

twoisenoughmum · 09/02/2007 15:11

I am pro-choice, not pro-life. I am not religious, but I do think 4 cells in a petri dish are "alive", therefore to destroy them is to kill them.

We kill germs with bleach, we kill headlice by combing them out of our hair or suffocating them, why can't we say that we kill something alive when we talk about abortions? We're killing the foetus, even if we're not murdering it.

And since when has anyone ever had an abortion that was 4 cells? As has been pointed out earlier, an embryo is at that stage only days after conception. If you have an abortion, then you are killing something far more developed than that.

I simply cannot understand why we can't say this. Is it too uncomfortable to acknowledge?

But anyway, as NotAnOtter said earlier "This debate is not about whether abortion is right or wrong - but is the right to abortion being abused - misused or over-used. I believe it is"

and I agree with her.

expatinscotland · 09/02/2007 15:13

It can fail, Smileys. It's not 100% effective.

So people - I'm not going to restrict it to women b/c it takes two to make a baby - should just pay the price if this happens by having a baby they don't want?

As punishment for contraceptive failure?

I mean, WTF, let's just start letting people die from illnesses brought on by drinking, smoking, eating too much, drugs, etc.

Provide healthcare only for the sanctimonious and to hell with everyone else!

Mog · 09/02/2007 15:16

Aloha - I mentioned further down that you have your facts wrong.
An embryo is 4 cells at 2 days after conception. Two weeks before a missed period.
A 5p piece is roughly 1mm. At 30m days after conception embryo is 12mm and 12 weeks is 90mm.
Of course size of foetus isn't the issue but you are throwing misleading and wrong information into the debate.

Aloha · 09/02/2007 15:19

I am debating the idea that any conception is a 'baby' and so to have an abortion at ANY stage is 'killing a baby'. I am saying that it isn't. Personally, I'd hate to have a termination. I'm very glad I've never had one. But that doesn't mean I think anyone else should feel the same.

Aloha · 09/02/2007 15:19

I do not have ANY facts wrong, actually. You are quite wrong to say so.

Aloha · 09/02/2007 15:20

And a 5p piece is not 1mm wide!

3andnomore · 09/02/2007 15:52

lulu,
"at what point does the right of the foetus overrule the rights of the mother...at what point do we say , this is a baby..well , i believe it is at the point it is capable of being born alive ,so around 24 weeks or so.... "
as much as I agree with you, however, a Baby can be aborted even at duedate...this sadly is possible, and is done, and is NOT a great thing, and not always because of disabilities, or things like that, but due to choice, a difficult choice, of course, I am in no 2 minds about this.
However, this exact right to have an abortion till it's born has it's psotives of course, as this si also which enables us choice of Birth, etc....I sppose it would be a rocky road to go down that way, i.e. peopel overruling the choice (no matter how distasteful one finds such a late abortion), because it would lead down to giving HP's to much power, i.e. overuling a mothers will to have a Homebirth, etc....!
Not that that really has anything to do with the original discussion.

I agree with NotanOtter, the discussion isn't really abortion in general, but it's overuse/misuse.
However, sadly I don't think it's possible to regulate this, without making the process even more painful, then it clearly must be for a large number of women.
Saying that, I know of a girl, that had 2 abortions in less than a year and she is the first to admit, that she didn't really sort contrtaception out ( I mean, she has 5 children already, so, knows how this all works), etc...and that just shouldn't happen.There is no excuse to be this careless.
I think it is a whole different matter if a pregnancy occurs unwanted, if all measures possible were taken and it happened dispite that, or one of the many other valuable reasons why someone might need an abortion.

NadineBaggott · 09/02/2007 15:53

to the OP

Yes, absolutely