Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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 Women should not have to battle outdated Victorian legislation for control over their reproductive rights.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:
YouSaffBridge · 19/02/2016 12:51

I suppose that is where the two different opinions will always part company.

When it comes to situations like that, I will always feel that the life of the individual who has experiences, family, friends, dependents, matters more.

NameChange30 · 19/02/2016 12:52

Totally agree with you.

christinarossetti · 19/02/2016 13:48

So that's a 'no' then lass?

I went to bed last night thinking about this thread and woke up the same.

Over the course of 25 pages or so, those of us advocating the decriminalisation of abortion have been called ' too logical', 'illogical', the possibility that we might be/ are parents has been doubted etc.

And it now appears (I may be wrong, so correct me if so) that one of the strongest and vocal advocates of retaining abortion within the criminal justice system hasn't actually read/engaged with the realities which have led us ' pro- abortionists' to our views.

Plenty of hypothetical scenarios have been posited (woman decides during Labour that she has changed her mind and wants an abortion, women goes to GP the day before a planned CS to request abortion) but, it seems scant if any regard for the actual, real reasons that women need access to late abortion.

I'm very glad that MN ran this guest post and that it has gone on for so long without any deletions/being pulled etc. No- one is saying that late abortion is an easy or comfortable thing to think about. The situations that girls/women are in when they even consider it are truly awful. The idea of terminating a pregnancy which might, should the mother be in a different situation, result in a live baby is a heart-rending one, especially for the woman who will have to live withit for the rest of her life.

But it must be thought about because unwanted pregnancy in difficult circumstances is a part of women's experience which has been brushed under the carpet - often with devastating consequences - for far too long.

NameChange30 · 19/02/2016 13:51

Well said christina.

larrygrylls · 19/02/2016 14:46

We can all post heart wrenching hypotheticals to illustrate our case. i am sure lass has read it, feels she has already said her piece and is leaving it alone. The last word is not necessarily the right word.

In my opinion progressive societies protect their weakest members. The easy solution to a tough dilemma is just to say a foetus is not a person. Most don't believe that, though, especially very late in pregnancy. And if the foetus is a person, then you have a conflict of rights with, as lass has said, a messy pragmatic compromise, which is the best we can do.

I don't think the 96% of us who believe a nearly born foetus is a baby will convince the 4% of you who don't. So be it. However please remember women feel this more strongly than men. They are not stupid. Nor have they been brainwashed by the 'patriarchy'.

YouSaffBridge · 19/02/2016 14:50

Women feel what more strongly then men?

larrygrylls · 19/02/2016 14:58

That an unborn foetus is a living human being. I posted a link to a large recent survey on this up thread.

YouSaffBridge · 19/02/2016 15:11

Eh? What's that got to do with anything? Why suddenly talk about women feeling things stronger than men?

Unless I've misread the names, most of the most vocal to-term posters on here are women Confused

While I hesitate to say that men can't have a strong and valid opinion on abortion, because they clearly can - it's also skewed by the fact that you, larry, will never in your life have to face the situation of having a foetus inside you that you may have to carry to term and give birth to. The idea is essentially abstract to a man. The same way that I, as a woman, couldn't hold the same detailed opinion as a man on vasectomies. Because I don't have testicles, and so would be essentially imagining how I might feel in that situation.

But thanks for the patronising "women aren't stupid" comment though.

NameChange30 · 19/02/2016 15:11

"I don't think the 96% of us who believe a nearly born foetus is a baby will convince the 4% of you who don't. So be it. However please remember women feel this more strongly than men. They are not stupid. Nor have they been brainwashed by the 'patriarchy'."

Unless you have stats and links to back up these claims, I'm calling bullshit on the whole paragraph.

NameChange30 · 19/02/2016 15:13

Are you a man, larry? Your username would suggest you are. So why the fuck are you telling us women that we're not stupid?! Mansplaining alert! Grin

larrygrylls · 19/02/2016 15:14

Anotheremma,

Irrelevant.

larrygrylls · 19/02/2016 15:14

Or, if relevant, are you a parent?

YouSaffBridge · 19/02/2016 15:19

It's not irrelevant, Larry, not in the least. For the reasons I have just explained - just as in other debates about male only issues, a woman's opinion will perhaps carry less weight.

I am a woman, a parent, and have had an abortion. Am I now qualified to discuss this?

Emma's status as a parent or not has less relevance to this debate if she is a woman and therefore may one day theoretically need a late-term abortion. As valid as your opinion is, it still misses a certain percentage because you will never be in the position of having a foetus in your body.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 19/02/2016 15:19

I did not reply because we are going round in circles, and no-one is going to change their minds but thanks for putting words in my mouth Emma (and not for the first time )

As you insist -
Sounds like you think the girl in this situation should be entitled to decide not to continue her pregnancy.?

That's the reason for removing abortion from the criminal justice system

My personal view is I would support an extension to 25 or 26 weeks but there has to be a cut off. Nothing any of you have said has persuaded me to accept full term.

So far as taking it out of the realm of criminal law - how is it to be monitored?

Finally, should any of you be actively campaigning christina has written eloquently and unaggressively, although I am not persuaded

Emma and itsbetter's contributions have made me think about this- but from the point of considering my previously settled views might be wrong - and not wrong in the way you would want them to be wrong. I have not changed my views (see above)

NameChange30 · 19/02/2016 15:21

Given that you're telling us "what women think", your gender IS relevant. If you don't have a source which proves a difference in male v female responses, you have no right to make such sweeping claims. And as YouSaff points out, being male means you could never be pregnant, so your opinion is based purely on theory. You want to control women's bodies despite not even being a woman yourself.

And fact that you claim this is all "irrelevant" indicates that you are very probably a man Grin

Shall we start having a debate about criminalising vasectomies, then? Start telling you what men think about the subject? Men aren't stupid, you know. They have their own opinions.

How would you feel about that?!

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 19/02/2016 15:21

Emma I think Larry is a man. "Feministplaining" is just as obnoxious and counter-productive as "mansplaining" (which I don't think Larry was doing)

YouSaffBridge · 19/02/2016 15:22

Lass, I do appreciate that none of us still posting are likely to convince each other of anything - we're all strongly vested in our own viewpoints.

I would ask - genuinely - if you would support an extension to 26 weeks, do you not see that there would still be the same arbitrary cut off there, and a woman could still miss that cut off?

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 19/02/2016 15:23

Emma Unless you believe "every sperm is sacred" your comment about vasectomy, even if meant as a joke, is ridiculous.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 19/02/2016 15:25

I would ask - genuinely - if you would support an extension to 26 weeks, do you not see that there would still be the same arbitrary cut off there, and a woman could still miss that cut off?

Yes. I have said over and over the cut off is arbitrary (although it's actually not as it is related to viability) As far as I am concerned there needs to be a cut-off.

larrygrylls · 19/02/2016 15:26

Emma,

I linked to the stats earlier. I am not going to repeat it, read the thread.

YouSaffBridge · 19/02/2016 15:27

No, it's not ridiculous.

A vasectomy is something that only a man can have - in the same way that a pregnancy is something only a woman can experience.

If a law was introduced which said that it would be a criminal offence for a married man to have a vasectomy unless his wife signed an agreement that she too agrees that they want no more children.

This is a far-fetched scenario, yes (but probably no more so than imaging a woman who has a baby placed on her stomach with the umbilical cord still attached and says she has changed her mind).

But a woman's opinion on vasectomies would carry slightly less weight because it's not them that is having the snip. is it?

larrygrylls · 19/02/2016 15:28

Emma,

A lot of women have opinions on male circumcision. I assum they have no right to speak to that?

NameChange30 · 19/02/2016 15:28

Last post (15.21) was to larry, obviously.

lass, a couple of times you've mentioned me by name when referred to a point made by another poster - I did wonder whether you might have accidentally got posts confused or mixed up? I'm not saying that to attack you, as it is a fast moving thread and a heated debate so it would be understandable if you had mixed us up. But please do clarify which comments you're responding to. I am starting to feel a bit personally attacked for comments I didn't actually make. I hope I'm wrong about that.

NameChange30 · 19/02/2016 15:30

Correction: when referring to

fakenamefornow · 19/02/2016 15:34

I wouldn't support an extension and I don't think the cutoff is as arbitrary as some might like to believe.

At 24 weeks 40% of babies survive.

www.nhs.uk/news/2012/12December/Pages/Premature-birth-survival-rates-on-the-rise.aspx

By 29 weeks almost all survive with few long term health consequences.

The point a poster made about women having stronger opinions than men against late term abortion is based on a study linked to up thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread