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 Women should not have to battle outdated Victorian legislation for control over their reproductive rights.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:
TJEckleburg · 09/02/2016 19:33

Utilising this example to campaign for women to get the right to have an abortion is ridiculous, both morally and politically. There are many many feminists who believe wholeheartedly that women should be allowed to end a pregnancy on request rather than have to persuade 2 doctors that it would cause her harm who would also see the abortion of a pregnancy at 32 weeks as no better than murder. There is no way that a campaign to allow women to end a pregnancy on demand at any point up to birth will ever gain traction - far better to focus on allowing woman the right to abortion on demand up to a point that all scientists agree there is no chance of viability or even consciousness (perhaps 18 weeks) and then maintain the ability for women to have abortions past this point if there are legitimate medical reasons.

Seriouslyffs · 09/02/2016 19:40

'Eat these tablets bitch, and if the Drs suspect anything say you got them yourself.'

itsbetterthanabox · 09/02/2016 20:05

Whattheactualfugg
Yes it is her body.
Do you propose it's better to induce at any stage? So 24 weeks woman wants abortion force her to induce labour instead? Then try to make that premature baby live?

WhatTheActualFugg · 09/02/2016 20:07

What on earth did I say to make you think I'm proposing premature inducing?! Confused

WhatTheActualFugg · 09/02/2016 20:09

seriously that scenario hadn't occurred to me. What a horrendous, and such a very likely, repercussion of time-limitless 'abortions'.

itsbetterthanabox · 09/02/2016 20:12

Whattheactual
What other option is there then?
If someone no longer wants to be pregnant and it's past the legal time limit for abortion?

itsbetterthanabox · 09/02/2016 20:13

Seriously
Are you saying that if we didn't prosecute women they would be forced into abortions by someone else? It isn't lack if prosecutions of women that stops that.

itsbetterthanabox · 09/02/2016 20:14

Seriously
Are you saying that if we didn't prosecute women they would be forced into abortions by someone else? It isn't lack if prosecutions of women that stops that.

WhatTheActualFugg · 09/02/2016 20:16

Is this a trick question?

What's wrong with seeing through with the pregnancy?

stitch10yearson · 09/02/2016 20:16

This nonsense cropped up on my fb newsfeed.
Terminations are not criminal in the UK. This isnt even an issue. Anyone with half a brain will go to a doctor to get their pregnancy legally terminated.

Backstreet abortions are dangerous because they carry a risk of death.

Their is a reason the 1861 legislation hasnt been changed. Its because it doesnt need to be changed. We have perfectly adequate access to terminations in the UK

CockwombleJeff · 09/02/2016 20:31

What a horrendous post.

Another mum of a 30 weeker here who only need 2 nights help in scubu.

What pain that poor baby must have felt.

Seriouslyffs · 09/02/2016 20:31

It is a horrible scenario. Sad
The current situation- 2 Drs and all procedures supervised by HCP protects women against it.

CockwombleJeff · 09/02/2016 20:33

I have worked as a frontline nurse with women for 17 years. I have NEVER known of any woman struggle to access an abortion.

TJEckleburg · 09/02/2016 20:36

No we don't stitch. We have the right to ask for them. The right to persuade two doctors that our mental or physical health would be gravely damaged by a pregnancy. But if I got pregnant now my mental health wouldn't be gravely damaged - I am more than capable of carrying a baby to term, and more than capable of looking after it. But at 40, with my kids at secondary school and my husband about to take a break from work, I don't want a baby. I want to go on adventurous holidays and nip out for a drink without worrying about getting a babysitter and have fun. And as long as I terminate a pregnancy well before any scientist would try to claim that the foetus inside me was conscious or viable why shouldn't it being what I want be enough?

Thurlow · 09/02/2016 20:47

The reality for most women is that it is easy to get an abortion at an early stage. I certainly don't remember having to explain anything other than "I don't want to continue with this pregnancy" and that being taken as acceptable - I assume the abortion was granted on mental health grounds.

It is a fairly simple issue at heart here. Does a woman, once she becomes pregnant, become less important than the fetus/baby she carries? Do her wishes count for less? Essentially, once she is pregnant, at what stage should she be forced to continue with the pregnancy against her wishes.

The number of women and girls we are debating that may want a late stage abortion are vanishingly tiny.Most of us cannot even begin to consider terminating a pregnancy when we can feel the baby move. But equally, from that, I cannot begin to imagine that many, or even any, women would make the decision to terminate a pregnancy at such a late stage unless something extreme was happening in their life, either emotionally or mentally.

Perhaps the tiny number of women who would want a termination at such a late stage means for non medical reasons it is not worth considering changing the law. Certainly, while I would advocate having no time limit, I would never advocate doctors agreeing to one without a considerable amount of intervention and every effort being made to support them to convince them to continue the pregnancy and to consider adoption as a solution.

I will always have an issue with the time limit to terminations after reading a document put out by BPAS or Marie Stopes (apologies, I can't locate it now) which outlined the reasons women came to them at post 20 week requesting an abortion. Some of the stories were heartbreaking. Girls who didn't realise and then hid their pregnancy, women in terrible relationships. The cut off is so arbitrary. There were young girls who missed the deadline by as little as a few days.

Waypasttethersend · 09/02/2016 20:48

It's just changing it for changing its sake though, as PPd said up to the legal limit there is no real issue women can access abortion and after then they still can for medical reasons. Women being jailed has happened once and for good cause.

The law works not by blindly following the letter but by arguing set precedents, amendments, logic etc.

For example in the Isle of Man you HAVE to shoot a Scotsman on sight, it's illegal not to. Do you honestly think someone shooting a Scotsman wouldn't go to prison because of a written outdated law? No because they isn't how it works.

This is a non issue supported by a terrible case study. Bad call BPAS.

eatingworms · 09/02/2016 20:48

What's wrong with seeing through with the pregnancy?

Are you serious? To forcibly put a woman through pregnancy against her will is absolutely sick and is an abuse of her body. Why are women seen as so unimportant?


AliceThrewTheFookingGlass · 09/02/2016 21:09

o forcibly put a woman through pregnancy against her will is absolutely sick and is an abuse of her body. Why are women seen as so unimportant?

I don't think she's suggesting that women should be forced to continue with pregnancies, but rather if they do not want to continue with a pregnancy then they should end it before the foetus gets to such a stage that it has a strong chance of survival outside of the mother.

Dragongirl10 · 09/02/2016 21:15

I am truly shocked and sickened by the support of this woman, we live in a country where contraception is so easy to get, the morning after pill is widely available, there is plenty of support for those who want to give a baby up for adoption, and yet so many seem to think it is acceptable to kill a viable healthy baby because it is ...inconvenient. Animals behave so much better than people.

Of course we need the rights to abortions but with limitations.

It is not about the jail time or length/type of punishment, but the inhumane attitude to ones own almost full term baby that l find so deeply upsetting.

Viviennemary · 09/02/2016 21:19

I'd say self abortion at 32 weeks is infanticide or murder.

itsbetterthanabox · 09/02/2016 21:23

Alice
We aren't talking about before the legal limit. We are talking after. And that is forcing someone to continue pregnancy against their will. Pregnancy which is painful, potentially life threatening and interrupts personal and work life.

JugglingFromHereToThere · 09/02/2016 21:23

Well, I think they should have a look at their laws regarding Scotsmen on the Isle of Man too. Outdated laws do no-one any good.
If they aren't fit for purpose and could cause harm they should be changed

itsbetterthanabox · 09/02/2016 21:25

Whatthectual
For someone who doesn't want to continue the pregnancy there is everything wrong with continuing the pregnancy.
Do you and others think they should be forced to?
Do you and others think it is right this woman has been jailed for 2 years?

Thurlow · 09/02/2016 21:25

Yes, women should have an abortion before the foetus gets to the stage that it has a strong chance of survival.

Yes, we have good access to contraception, the morning after pill and NHS funded abortions.

But I'm truly shocked that in the 21st century some people still believe that contraception is infallible, that all women realise they are pregnant within the first month or two, that all women have the ability to see a GP, that all women remain in perfect mental health throughout their pregnancy, and cannot imagine that other women have difference experiences.

I'm also disgusted that on hearing that a woman wants a late stage abortion, another woman's first reaction is to believe that the woman would do it because they see the baby as "inconvenient". Couldn't be for any other reason, could it?

I'm shocked, but not surprised. Because compassion and empathy seem to be in very short supply sometimes.

itsbetterthanabox · 09/02/2016 21:27

It's hypocritical to put arbitrary limits on abortion. It's either wrong or its not.
Saying a weeks difference means it does from abortion which is ok to infanticide watch is not is absurd.
I am pro choice. Pro choice means women make the choice. You don't get to put your limits on that.

Swipe left for the next trending thread