Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

Guest post: "Abortion must be decriminalised"

759 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 09/02/2016 15:07

In December, Natalie Towers, a young mother from Durham, was sentenced for ending her pregnancy at 32 weeks using pills she'd bought online.

When a woman feels she has no choice but to cause her own abortion in this way, you would hope that she would be viewed with compassion, and not treated as a criminal. Unfortunately, this is not the case: she was jailed for two-and-a-half years.

This tragic rare case highlights a broader issue that affects us all: from Belfast to Brighton, pregnant women's decisions about what to do with their own bodies are policed by the criminal law. In every nation of the UK a woman can go to prison for ending her own pregnancy without the legal authorisation of doctors – from the moment a fertilised egg implants.

The 1861 Offences Against the Person Act threatens life imprisonment to any woman who ends her own pregnancy. This is the harshest punishment for self-induced abortion of any country in Europe, bar the Republic of Ireland.

The 1967 Abortion Act is often seen as a victory of the women's rights movement, but it didn't actually overwrite the 1861 Act – rather, it opened up loopholes. Now, a woman is exempt from prosecution when two doctors certify that she meets certain criteria; most commonly that her mental or physical health would suffer if she were forced to continue her pregnancy. In other words, it is perfectly lawful for a woman to be forced to continue a pregnancy if doctors judge her able to cope with the child.

Women's agency is painted entirely out of the picture. Responsibility is turned over to doctors in a way that doesn't happen with any other routine medical procedure. While the work of committed medical professionals means that most women can get the abortion they need, this is beside the point. The criminalisation of abortion makes a mockery of the equal status that women fight for in every other area of life, represents discrimination against women, and stigmatises the one in three women who will have an abortion. Women should not have to battle outdated Victorian legislation for control over their reproductive rights.

Abortion is a medical procedure that has emancipated women, enabling them to have children at the time they think is right with the person of their choosing. It is accepted as a back-up when contraception fails, or when we fail to use it as well as we might; it is an established part of family planning, and is commissioned and funded by the NHS. It therefore makes no sense that it sits within a criminal framework. It runs entirely counter to all principles of bodily autonomy and patient-centred care to deny a woman the right to make her own decisions about whether to accept the physical imposition and risks posed by pregnancy and childbirth.

Our neighbours in France, Sweden and the Netherlands do not send women to prison for inducing their own miscarriages. Even Poland, where abortion is all but outlawed, does not prosecute women who cause their own abortions. The use of the criminal law to punish women in the UK serves no purpose. It is not a deterrent, as any woman who feels desperate enough to try to end her own pregnancy will find a way to do so, and it cannot be seen as an appropriate punishment for a heinous crime, given that legal abortions are approved every day.

Taking abortion out of the criminal law and regulating it like other healthcare services won't lead to unsafe care. Outside of the criminal law, abortion services are already tightly regulated, with regular inspections by the Care Quality Commission. Doctors, nurses and midwives work to strict guidelines and are bound by their professional bodies. Women do not currently turn to unqualified providers for any other form of NHS healthcare, and there is no reason why they would do so for termination services.

Taking abortion out of the criminal law would not lead to more women such as the young mother from Durham ending their pregnancies at home at 32 weeks, in the same way as keeping it there won't stop another woman in equally desperate straits from doing the same. But removing threats of prosecution and prison might make her more likely to seek help – and perhaps her story would have a different ending.

But above all, taking abortion out of the criminal law would be a statement of where we see women today – capable of making their own decisions in pregnancy as the ones who must carry the consequences of that pregnancy, whether it continues or ends. Changing this ancient law will be a symbol of just how far we have come since 1861.

Trust women to make the choice that is right for them. Please join the We Trust Women campaign today.

OP posts:
ispymincepie · 11/02/2016 17:08

I am curious about a point a pp raised earlier. To those of you who feel that women should have total control of what happens to their bodies at all times, what about this; I have worked in maternity and seen women begging to be induced at say, 35 weeks because they can't sleep/want a small baby/struggling to walk with spd/have a wedding to go to. Doctor denies this request as obviously it's not safe for the baby. Now these women might wish for a healthy baby and their reasons for requesting preterm induction may be extremely illogical, however, do you think they should have the right to do whatever they want because it's their body? We might as well go ahead and apply this to all healthcare. Can't be treated with antibiotics but want them anyway? Here.... Want a gastric band but surgery would be too dangerous until you loose some weight, never mind, if you want it you got it. Those last two would affect nobody but the stupid patient (and everyone who pays taxes) but when it comes to pregnancy related issues there is another human involved who will suffer detrimentally.

CultureSucksDownWords · 11/02/2016 18:02

To me, bodily autonomy means me being the person who makes an informed decision about what medical procedures I choose to have. Abortion should be available to all women without condition, and women should be the ones who decide if that's appropriate for them based on their informed consent. That's why I object to the current situation where under 24 weeks women have to persuade 2 doctors to agree with their decision. It is also why I object to abortions being provided to full term, but only under very limited set of conditions. The decision is not made by women, it is made by doctors and the legal framework on their behalf.

You can't compare abortion to things like demanding antibiotics, or a gastric band. Abortion is an entirely elective procedure provided by the NHS for any women who needs it.

Sparklycat · 11/02/2016 20:36

She killed a baby at 32 weeks, of course she must go to jail. It's murder. The baby would most probably have survived being born then. If she didn't want it then put it up for adoption.

NameChange30 · 11/02/2016 20:42

Yawn. It's all been said several times already on this thread.

christinarossetti · 11/02/2016 22:40

Bodily autonomy doesn't mean 'having total control of what happens to your body at all times'. None of us can do that - we can't control if become ill or not, or pick and choose exactly what medical procedures we want.

Bodily autonomy means being able to make informed choices about medical procedures and interventions eg if a doctor suggests something be it antibiotics, induction of labour or surgery, I have the right to find out and think about it and make a decision. Of course, this may have to be done very quickly in life-threatening situations.

In the context of pregnancy, it means being able to decide whether or not to continue with a particular pregnancy. At the moment, the law requires that women have the consent of two doctors before 24 weeks to end a pregnancy and only in certain circumstances after this time. Body autonomy would mean, amongst other things, to decide at any point in a pregnancy to end it.

differentnameforthis · 12/02/2016 12:07

harrasseddotcom
tiredandhungryalways
PurpleDaisies
Jw35
Sparklycat

How many unwanted babies are you willing to adopt?

If I was infertile, I would adopt. So none then? yet you want all these unwanted babies born to be born & what?? Thrown at the state?

If if if ... the world isn't built on ifs. The fact is that you are advocating that women not be given a choice to end an unwanted pregnancy, and yet, as usual, you & the rest of the anti choices have NOTHING to offer expect "have it adopted" which is a stock response and helps exactly no one & solves absolutely NOTHING. It is easy to say when faced with prospect of lots of unwanted babies, yet as proved by this thread no one is prepared to step up!

Me? None. But then I am not advocating that women be forced to continue with a pregnancy that they can't support for whatever reason!

duckyneedsaclean I am pleased for the outcome of your pregnancy, and sad for your sil.

But don't you see....YOU HAD A CHOICE, YOUR SIL HAD A CHOICE!! And that is EXACTLY what you are denying all women.

Imagine being denied that choice & you & your SIL forced to terminate your pregnancies.

Does that seem fair to you? Denying you the choice as to how to progress with your pregnancy? No, that wouldn't be fair, would it?

But that is what YOU are advocating, right here, on this thread - DENYING WOMEN A CHOICE!!!

BeyondBootcampsAgain · 12/02/2016 12:14

I had severe antenatal depression with a wanted child. The fact the child was wanted was the only thing that kept me from suicide. Had the child been unwanted and i was refused an abortion, i would be dead.

Yay for "pro life" Hmm

PurpleDaisies · 12/02/2016 12:16

How many unwanted babies are you willing to adopt?

We are looking into this right now. Not that's any of your business.

I was responding to the situation in the op where a woman was 32 weeks pregnant with a healthy foetus. I do not think that she had the right to decide that the foetus should be born dead when she would have to give birth to it either way. The law agrees with me and I would not want to see it changed.

I am not opposed to abortion at any point if the mother's life is in danger or the foetus has a medical condition such as anancephaly. I am also not opposed to abortion in the early stages of pregnancy when the foetus is not viable outside the womb, and I would support the campaign to remove the need for two doctors to sign off.

BeyondBootcampsAgain · 12/02/2016 13:44

Purple, if a woman was 32w pregnant and had no access to abortion and tried to kill herself, yet she killed the baby and survived herself, would you prosecute her?

duckyneedsaclean · 12/02/2016 13:46

I'd planned to leave this, but I'll just add one more thing. Although we seem to have got sidetracked into tfmr, we were responding to the situation of a woman poisoning her viable, healthy foetus. Which, no matter which way you look at it, is the ending of a human life.

"Any person who, with intent to destroy the life of a child capable of being born alive, by any wilful act causes a child to die before it has an existence independent of its mother, shall be guilty of felony, to wit, of child destruction, and shall be liable on conviction thereof on indictment to penal servitude for life" Infant Life (Preservation) Act

BeyondBootcampsAgain · 12/02/2016 13:51

I'm sure i remember reading that the whole point of the infant life preservation act was to prosecute anyone who killed a foetus without the mother asking (say a man beating his wife), not specifically to prevent planned abortion? I've googled but cant find where i read it. (Think it may have been related to a pregnant woman being killed local to me?)

PurpleDaisies · 12/02/2016 13:54

If she was suicidal then I don't think so-I'm in no way a legal expert but I'd have thought being mentally ill at the time and the intent being to harm herself would make her not guilty of an offence. The situation you describe seems highly unlikely to happen in England.

I'm not against abortion-just abortion on demand for healthy foetuses right up to term.

ispymincepie · 12/02/2016 14:27

No pro-choicers have any thoughts on my hypothetical early induction question?

BeyondBootcampsAgain · 12/02/2016 14:34

Of course a woman asking for early induction should be allowed it! I would have thought those who are against late abortions would be very for the idea of the little babies just being born a little earlier to save the woman any distress? Confused

BeyondBootcampsAgain · 12/02/2016 14:37

After all, the argument is always "but a baby born at 24 weeks could survive with care". That kind of implies that you are pro-induction?

Now a dr should be able to advise against it, but to not allow it is despicable.

MaryRobinson · 12/02/2016 14:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

harrasseddotcom · 12/02/2016 14:48

I'm not against abortion-just abortion on demand for healthy foetuses right up to term. And thankfully this seems to be the mindset of the majority. I think that BPA should think very carefully about any campaigns for full term abortions for viable babies. I think the public is generally happy with abortion laws at present but i think pushing for something that the majority does not wish could end up in backlash against them. If there was a serious campaign towards free for all full term abortions, I possibly would join a campaign to not only oppose it but reduce the time limit.

itsbetterthanabox · 12/02/2016 17:46

The question actually is:
Is it better that the very few women who want late term abortion have it done safely in a medical setting or is it better that they perform at home abortions and then get put in prison? Because they will do it either way and prison is definitely not any kind of deterrent.

BeyondBootcampsAgain · 12/02/2016 17:59

I think that sums it up quite nicely.

ispymincepie · 12/02/2016 18:12

It rather seems on one hand that people don't think many women at all would require a full term abortion and that legalising it would only make it easier for the handful of extreme cases and then in the same post 'but who will adopt all of the babies that are forced to be birthed instead of terminated?!'

christinarossetti · 12/02/2016 18:22

What hypothetical induction question?

Do I think women should be allowed to be induced when they like? No, but I think the reasons for their request should carefully considered.

Seey previous post re the difference between bodily autonomy and being granted whatever medical intervention you ask for.

Doctors acting within the Abortion Act are not culpable under the Preservation of Infant Life Act.

sparechange · 12/02/2016 18:24

harrassed WTF?
"If there was a serious campaign towards free for all full term abortions, I possibly would join a campaign to not only oppose it but reduce the time limit"

So "I'll let you have what you want for now but you chippy little women get ideas above your stations and try and get more rights, and I'll be taking away the ones you already have as a punhishment"

You know that is what the apartheid movement did? Threatened to remove existing rights if people campaigned for greater freedoms

fakenamefornow · 12/02/2016 18:32

Is it better that the very few women who want late term abortion have it done safely in a medical setting or is it better that they perform at home abortions

I don't think that is the question though.

If you have a look at the link up thread on the reasons women presented late for abortion, a good proportion were refused because they were past the cut off, they were listed as 'referred for antenatal care'. Are you suggesting they then went on to self abort? I would bet that none of them did, not one. I imagine the number who try to self abort is vanishingly small.

sparechange · 12/02/2016 21:16

fake
Have you actually read the thread?

If you did, you would have seen the highly publicised case of a woman who presented herself to the GP for an abortion, couldn't get one, did it herself and is now in prison.

fakenamefornow · 12/02/2016 21:27

Yes I have read the whole thread.

Are you saying I am wrong in the last post? Are you saying that in fact large numbers of women try to self abort late term pregnancies? How many women/girls refered on to antenatal care in this list linked to above do you think went on to self abort? As I said, I imagine the number who try to self abort late term is vanishingly small.