Guest post: "Abortion must be decriminalised"

[MumsnetGuestPosts]

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 Women should not have to battle outdated Victorian legislation for control over their reproductive rights.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.

Ispy
Most of those reasons are heartbreaking. Do you have no empathy?

I'm guessing that most women who are members of mumsnet are actually mums? And therefore have gone along to all of their scans and routine check ups? Have been aware of the development of their baby throughout pregnancy and of the physical changes that happens to the baby from week to week? As a result of this is find it genuinely horrifying that anyone could think abortion up to full term should be even considered. I could technically give birth now and still have a very healthy baby and I'm 32 weeks. I could have given birth at 27 weeks to a little baby who probably would have survived quite nicely.
In these cases it's important to remember that other options may also include giving the mother support. What reasons would drive a mother so far through her pregnancy to all of a sudden decide to get rid of her baby? What has driven such drastic action? Whilst I'm not supporting the jail term here as I think that this case had other factors. I don't think someone just reached 32 weeks and decides nah I've changed my mind. I think there are clearly physiological issues that need to be addressed and addressed fully. And I think this should be the case for all mothers. A clear line of support both mentally and physically should be offered fully to any pregnant woman. I think that the legal limit should be lowered and lowered drastically.
Education and awareness are the key. Obviously there are always special cases but abortion should not be something to take lightly and treated as a lifestyle choice.

We should play anti-choice bingo...
...abortion as a "lifestyle choice" being one of the bingo items.

Abortion isn't a fucking "lifestyle choice"

A simple point that you're missing 22neve is that most women who have late term abortions don't go to scans/check ups, either because they don't realise that they're pregnant, are too frightened to face it, because they have other major trauma and stressers dominating their life etc. Look at the list that Maud posted above to give you an idea of the circumstances some women and girls are in.

If you don't want an abortion. Fine. Don't have one. But your strongly held views about your pregnancy don't automatically translate into you having the right to dictate the decisions that other women make.

Of course all pregnant women need support, whatever choices they make about their pregnancy.

AnotherEmma I'm not being aggressive here. Simply posting my thoughts like everyone else. Please don't curse at me. Abortion is treated almost like another form of contraception. It suits the lifestyle choices of some people. I did make the point that this isn't the case in all abortions and there are special exceptions to this. However as someone who had to help a friend through one such exception without at any point giving my own opinion on abortion it was the option which was very forcibly put upon her by her healthcare profession and the Marie stokes clinic. She felt like she almost had to go through with it and all she wanted was some help. A bit of support. She ended up keeping the baby though and has since put in some very serious complainants against her treatment. This is my point. Support has to be there in these cases. A woman can have all the choice in the world but still need support. And abortion is a serious choice to make in my eyes. Should i get rid of my baby? Is this the only option I have? Who is here to help me?

I know of many women who've had abortions because they want one, not one has been refused. That doesn't mean that there might not be some women out there in the UK who have been refused an abortion, of course - but why would they be?

Yes, they see 2 doctors, who sign off on it - but there's been no need to give a compelling medical or mental health reason for it, just that they don't want a baby.

So I don't recognise the situation the OP is talking about, even if it is the strict legal situation - if it were the case that most women were refused abortions, then of course I could see the need for a law change there - but IME it isn't generally the case.

Even if one doctor is opposed to abortion for whatever reason, there are others to see who won't be.

Getting to the case of the woman currently in jail for ending her 32w pg, well I don't know quite what I think there. I was pleased when they reduced the time limit from 28w to 24w because the chance of viability is still reasonable at 28w under the current medical climate; whereas it's very low indeed at 24w.
At 32w - well I tend to agree, that's a viable baby and therefore it seems very wrong to have killed it. If the woman in question had given birth to a live baby at that age and then killed it, she'd be done for murder - I can't quite see the difference, although I know that a lot of people won't agree with me.

I absolutely don't support the concept of allowing babies in the last few weeks of gestation to be killed.

I'm speaking of abortion generally. And have said there are always exceptions. Late term abortions perhaps being one of them given the circumstances. But i don't think it should be something that's freely available. Thus my belief that a good support network for both mental and physical health needs to be in place from the beginning for each woman. Especially in cases like you mentioned where the mother wasn't aware she was pregnant. But again it is my own opinion that the development of the baby needs to be taken fully into consideration here as well.

Thumb, it doesn't matter if you can't see the difference between terminating an pregnancy and killing a live baby as the law is very clear on the difference in legal status between a foetus and a live baby.

'Another form of contraception' to add to the anti-choice bingo.

So what sort of 'special cases' 'circumstances' and 'exceptions' would be acceptable to you 22neve?

If there was a substantial risk of serious handicap (as Ground E of the Act states now)?

I can see you want to be pro choice but I can't have an opinion. Mature conversation seems to be outside the reach of some people.

You can have an opinion 22neve. Absolutely you can, about your own body and your pregnancy.

Was my question a little tricky for you I wonder?

22neve
"Abortion is treated almost like another form of contraception. It suits the lifestyle choices of some people."
Do you know of any evidence for these statements? If so please can you share it? I think your statements are, at best, true in only a tiny minority of cases, and at worst, absolute bullshit rubbish.

Can a pro abortion person tell me what the difference is between a 32w baby outside the womb & inside please?

Also I would like clarification on how a 24w limit means the foetus's rights "trump" the mother's? Surely it means they have the same rights - to life?

As someone with a severely handicapped relation I don't view that personally as a reason to abort a child and the parents of her would agree. However again it wouldn't be something that I could judge a person for doing. I don't believe anyone who has had an abortion should be judged. That's not my place to do so. I'll just make that clear now. However I'm talking about in cases of rape. Cases of risk to the mothers life. Cases where you can look at the mother and say this woman is clearly not in a fit state to raise this child due to reasons X y and z. Reasons such as severe illness. Being mentally unwell. Or perhaps having special needs and needing care themselves. There are exceptions. I'm not suggesting we crucify all women who make this choice so far into their pregnancy but like I said the circumstances must be exceptional and they must be clear. It can't just be that mother decided she didn't want it anymore so she got an abortion at 32 weeks.

What
"Can a pro abortion person tell me what the difference is between a 32w baby outside the womb & inside please?"
That's the difference: inside v outside. When inside the womb, it's a foetus (that's the medical a legal term) and when it's outside the womb, it's a baby. A foetus doesn't have the same legal rights as a baby precisely because it's inside a woman's body.
I'm pro-choice, btw, not pro-abortion. There is a subtle difference. I believe in a woman's right to choose and be supported but not pressured either way.

I respectfully disagree with your post and your opinion.
Abortion should most certainly be criminalized. It's not just a "woman's body" when you have a near full term HUMAN growing inside you. There are thousands of infertile couples waiting to adopt. Why selfishly KILL an unborn BABY because it's "your body"?

I'll add that I think the legal abortion gestation should be 12 weeks.

I'm very ashamed of Mumset for hilighting your post. Very ashamed.

Firstly, I would define myself as pro-choice or pro-abortion rights rather than pro-abortion. I don't think all pregnancies should be terminated, so it's a bit silly to use that term.

Very simply, the law says that when inside the mother, the foetus doesn't have the legal rights of a live baby because it isn't a live baby.

If that foetus is born alive it automatically has the same legal rights (to medical assistance etc) as every living person does.

A time limit based around 'viability' is inherently based on a view that once the foetus becomes 'viable' its 'rights to life' are more important than the mother's rights to make decisions about her pregnancy. Suddenly, at 24w for example, the foetus has more or different rights to those it had the day before.

22neve, I can't quite marry your statement that "I don't believe anyone who has had an abortion should be judged" with your comments about abortion being 'another form of contraception', a 'lifestyle choice' and your being 'genuinely horrified that anyone could think abortion up to full term should be even considered'.

What
"Also I would like clarification on how a 24w limit means the foetus's rights "trump" the mother's? Surely it means they have the same rights - to life?"

Others may see it differently but I think a criminalising abortion means that a foetus' right to life "trumps" a woman's right to bodily autonomy. They are competing rights but not quite the same. (In some countries abortion is illegal even when the mother's life is at risk; in those cases the competing rights are the same and somehow the foetus is seen as more important than the woman.)

The way I see it, when a foetus is still in utero it's not an independent life; it "lives" through the mother's body and only becomes independent once it is outside her body. The more restrictive the laws, the more I worry that women are seen as incubators rather than people with the right to make decisions about their own bodies.

Well if you don't mind me saying there's one for the pro choice bingo:"inside v outside". The difference is literally a couple inches skin and muscle. its not miles under the surface. You can literally see it kick and feel it move. this is when we need to be clear on what is alive and what is not legal terms aside. All that action happening inside of me I'm taking it as alive. If it's growing it's alive. If it's making me hungry all the time and using up all my organ space to stretch out its alive. I'm not saying pregnancy is awesome cause personally I'm not enjoying it but i know that at the end I'm having a little girl or a boy. Not a rock. Not a pair of socks. I've grown and nurtured a human being inside of me. Fact.

whatapalaverama

I very strongly think the law does need to be changed to give abortion on demand, but I do disagree wth those who think that this should be up to the moment of birth. I think everybody should have an absolute right to do what they wish to with their own body as long as it causes no harm to others. I would genuinely like to hear from anybody who can oppose that concept.

The debate then comes down to at what point a foetus becomes an other that has the right to protection from society in the form of laws. Legally atm that is at birth, when a foetus becomes a human being, though our current abortion law contradicts that definition by making abortion illegal after 24 weeks. Personally i think that's about right and ties into viability, though would be prepared to listen to arguments from professionals about slightly lowering that due to advances in science.

Some right to lifers believe that the foetus deserves protection for the moment of conception, I do believe that there are many in the pro life camp who don't actually want to control women, but do genuinely believe that life begins at birth and see a day old foetus as having the same rights as a mother. And then there are the pro choices, who think life doesn't begin until the first breath and that whilst the baby is inside the mother her right to agency over her own body has to trump the foetus' right to life. Personally I think both of those arguments are as ridiculous as each other, and that as a society we have to come to a compromise somewhere in the middle, and give pro-lifers the right to not have an abortion if they don't want one, and maybe give pro choicers the right to request an early induction, and definitely support to give up a baby for adoption if the mother decides she no longer wants the baby after the limit has passed.

You're not seriously trying to tell us there's no big difference between being in utero and being born?! Try telling that to the millions of women who have given birth!

Sure, if you could wave a wand and magic a foetus out of its mother's body, it would be no big deal. But giving birth is a pretty big thing that the mother is PRETTY INVOLVED IN. So I think she should get a say. Apparently you don't

Cross post. Mine was to 22neve.

The law as it stands does not allow the self ending of a pregnancy at 32 weeks. I looked up this distressing case. The woman in question administered a poison to kill the baby (or foetus if you prefer). Paramedics made attemtps to save the child but couldn't. This woman was distressed and some people might think she should have been treated more leniently and not given a custodial sentence. But that isn't the point. The point is this OP seems to be advocating that this becomes a lawful option. Heaven help us.

You are correct. I should have said I would never judge people who have had abortions where I don't know the situation surrounding it. I wouldn't ever sit beside someone who has had one and stare at them or make comments. im not going to have a go at someone who has told me they've had an abortion or shove my opinion down ther throat. In these cases I don't know why. But Through uni I watched girls have abortions because it suited them. Freaking out after one night stands and being too late for the morning after pill. Or only realising when their periods never arrived. One if my best mates has had 3. Ive never said a word to her about it. Through my work I've met girls who didn't want a baby just right now but we're happy to have unprotected sex on a night out and had abortions. They don't know my opinions because it's not my business. But knowing the situations surrounding it Abortions suited their lifestyles. But where a debate is happening like on this thread then yes I will express my opinions.