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 Women should not have to battle outdated Victorian legislation for control over their reproductive rights.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

Thurlow believes in raising the legal limit for abortion to birth. How does one terminate a fully viable baby.How would a doctor kill it in the womb and does this mean that an unwanted baby of 39 weeks could be killed by its mother with the support of the law and a mother who tries to kill a 39 week baby afrer delivery could be guilty of murder.I fully believe in a wiman's right to be in control of her own body, but on what grounds could anyone kill a baby just before it is born?

I have never claimed to be comfortable with the concept, and I will always continue to argue that this is the last resort, and that more money and support needs to be pumped into counselling and adoption so that women feel they have other options available to them.

And, like PP have said, I cannot imagine that many women would consider terminating a 7, 8 month pregnancy unless there were some quite considerable mental or emotional pressures on them. Which should be treated and supported as a far higher priority.

However, the 24 week limit remains arbitrary and some women get caught out by it because of absolutely heart-breaking reasons.

If we, as a society, agree that abortion is legal, than I don't see how apply an arbitrary time limit is logical. So I would argue removing any time limit at all.

Or do people really believe that there are women out there, heavily pregnancy, with swollen ankles and heartburn and an elbow in the ribs and all the joys of being 32 weeks pregnant, who just wake up one morning and think, Fuck it, I can't be arsed any more? Do you have that low an opinion of other women?

(Though I'm not sure why I'm asking that as it is clear that many women do have such a low opinion of other women, what with all the feckless, irresponsible women who allow themselves to get inconveniently knocked up in the first place...)

Re late abortion,yes ther's absolutely a right for women to have bodily autonomy, but the foetus has a body with separate limbs and a beating heart.Just over half of foetuses are female.Don't they deserve autonomy?

Also I'm amazed at the cool way people describe injecting potassium into the heart.There appears to be no pity for the unborn.I am pro choice up to the present limit, but I am amazed and saddened by the lack of pity shown by people who advocate abortion up to term.What would be the difference if someone injected an unwanted premature baby in the heart with the intention of killing it?Can anyone answer this?

No one wants to answer that question, gorm, I've asked a few times.

*IRL I mean.

Also I'm amazed at the cool way people describe injecting potassium into the heart.There appears to be no pity for the unborn

I think you are referring to posts by me, and also kitty
Both of us have had to endure late-term TfMR and while I don't want to speak for Kitty, it is the single hardest thing I've ever been through, so it is pretty fucking insulting that you think we are cruel and unfeeling just because we are able to recount a medical procedure in a factual manner.

And you can also fuck off suggesting we had 'no pity' for the plight of our babies

To answer both questions (female foetuses and injecting a premature baby), I think plenty of posters have answered that.

My answer would be that until the foetus/baby is outside of his mother, then the mother continues to have precedence and the decision should be hers.

Hence the difference between injecting a premature baby and a late term abortion.

spare and kitty

slug - that sounds horrendous. Very sad that you came up against some idiot doctor like that, who not only refused to help you but actively tried to prevent you seeking help elsewhere. I did say that I'm sure there were women who had been refused help, so you have just proven to me that this is the case; but I'm sorry that you went through that experience and were unlucky enough to have such a doctor.

I don't think that GPs should be allowed to do this - if they have moral issues with TOPs then they should just refer you on to another GP, it's not as though they are the ones performing the procedure themselves! (Unless they're prescribing the medical TOP pills, that is). But they shouldn't be able to actively prevent you from seeking the treatment you require, that's outrageous. for you and anyone else who had the same problem.

Spare thank you, you are more than welcome to speak for me on this one.

Yes that's what they do, yes you have to have these grim conversations with doctors before you make the decision to have a termination after 20 weeks.

If you had read all of my post you would have read that it is the most single traumatic thing I have ever, ever had to do.

My dd2 was planned and very much loved and wanted. She had Trisromy 18. I will not describe the horrificness of the anomoly on here out of respect for others who have had babies with a similar diagnosis but if you want to judge me and think I have no pity go and read about trisomy 18 and what it does then come back and tell me I have no pity (btw my dd2 had a fairly server version, we know from the soft markers on the scans)

Spare 💐

There will never be a consensus on abortion. I'd imagine a large percentage of anti abortionists believe that from the moment of conception it is a baby. No amount of debate will ever change their point of view. As such any termination equals murder (rightly or wrongly) in their eyes. Its nothing to do with female autonomy over her own body, that issue doesn't come into it afatac.

Some pro abortionists believe that it is a foetus until it takes its first breath/various time limit. Up until this point it is perfectly viable to destroy it for any given reason. Female autonomy takes primary place.

These two viewpoints will never be reconciled. I dont think either side will be able to convince the other side scientifically or legally. It comes down to personal belief.

I agree with this guest post.

As early as possible and as late as necessary should be the way it is, unless we don't trust women to make choices about their bodies. If we don't trust women, then we must all stand by and lose the right to abortion altogether. Any other way is illogical and hypocritical.

Agreed that it's a controversial and emotional issue harrassed

However also worth noting that many people take a position between those two extreme ones, and sometimes women in particular can be quite pragmatic? Possibly men slightly more likely to take the more extreme philosophically based only views (since generally they are not so close to the relevant experiences)?

But Through uni I watched girls have abortions because it suited them

I had a baby in the middle of uni. No time out, no part time, because the pressure on me to keep up with my peers was huge - not from family or friends, but from society and acquaintances who told me if I dropped out I was "just like any other teenage slut", "worthless", "scrounging" etc.

I had severe antenatal anxiety. Horrendous postnatal depression. I made myself very physically poorly during my last year of uni, through the constant pressure to graduate well.

I did it. I graduated last October with a first, the highest grade in my class. But if someone came up to me now and said "I'm 19 and at uni and I'm pregnant and I don't know what to do", I wouldn't say "Go ahead and carry on with uni, it's easy and excellent". I can totally understand why girls in my situation have abortions, and would never ever judge them for it.

Yh i do think that most people lie in the middle. I think if a referendum was held tomorrow re abortion it would probably remain the same, or possible the time limit would be reduced. I definitely don't think there is any widespread appetite for full term abortion in the UK.

What i was meaning to get at tho was the two sides are fighting each other on completely different points, one being bodily autonomy and the other rights of the unborn.

Ovaries, that is quite a sad tale. Not your struggle (which i totally sympathise with, im at uni at the mo having returned as a mature student but considering having one last bash at having a baby between graduating and postgraduate. Neither time nor age is on my side) but the fact the women should even have to consider abortions because society would deem them as teenage sluts, worthless, scrounging etc. Therein lies the real problem imo.

I guess I think it's a question of balancing those two rights in whatever way we and society decides is the right way harrassed

I think I'd say that neither extreme, philosophically held, position is that helpful - but would want to make the case for compassionate pragmatism.

gormen and ducky If you RTFT you'll see that your question has been answered by several PPs, including me.

harrassed medically and legally it IS a foetus until it's born, and a baby after it's born. And as we've already said on the thread, we say "pro choice" not "pro abortion".

"It all comes down to personal belief" - I agree. And that's why I think everyone should be able to make what is a personal choice, and not impose their personal beliefs on others.

And that's why I think everyone should be able to make what is a personal choice, and not impose their personal beliefs on others

Here here.

No woman opts tk terminate lightly.

I did. There was no wrestling with my head. I didn't need a single minute of counseling and have never felt any guilt or regret. I just wanted it done as soon as possible. It was done very early though, I couldn't have done it have it been late.

To those who support the right to abortion to term do you really not see any shades for grey as to when life begins? So 32 week baby inside the womb, not alive, outside the womb, alive. We give loads of medical care to babies inside the womb, sometimes to the detriment of the mother (their choice). According to your definition these babies are not alive?

Can I ask if you don't see late term babies as being alive, what is your definition of alive?

Mine would be the ability to survive outside the womb.

AnotherEmma, your misunderstanding what im saying. Medically and legally atm they are considered foetus. But to anti abortionists they will always be babies. If the law changed tomorrow and declared that from conception they are medically and legally considered babies, would you think they were babies. Probably not, you would still consider them foetus. Medical and legal definitions are not carved out in stone and can change (not suggesting it will but its not impossible) It wouldnt matter what the law or medicine said, you would still believe what you think is right. Pro choice/Pro abortion/ anti abortion/pro life. Its all the same to me.

I think it's possible to see shades of grey about where life begins and still feel it's the woman herself who is best placed to make those judgements and decisions fakename

But maybe I should leave it to those with that view to talk it through. As I said I'm more of a, hopefully compassionate, pragmatist.

not impose their personal beliefs on others Anti abortionists will consider you imposing your personal beliefs upon another, the unborn child.

And we do impose our personal beliefs on others all the time, at government level in a democratic majority wins kinda way.

Also the pro choice lobby you are not demanding that women have a right to choose to do as they wish with their own body (maybe you would have a point with the op case) you are demanding that other people do what you want them to do to your body.

If anything I would prefer the fetus had more rights so that an abusive violent partner who deliberately caused a women to miscarry (after the 24 week) could be charged with murder.

Also the pro choice lobby you are not demanding that women have a right to choose to do as they wish with their own body (maybe you would have a point with the op case) you are demanding that other people do what you want them to do to your body.

Eh? This makes absolutely no sense, unless you are saying they need to campaign for the right to carry out their own abortions.

Which actually an awful lot of women do when they take pills in the first trimester, and what the women in the OP did when she took them at 32 weeks.

You've picked a very bizarre semantic point, especially given the ability for doctors to opt out of performing terminations if they want to, so you can't even use that as an angle.

Body autonomy doesn't mean you have to do everything yourself.