Abortion law challenge - 24 weeks limit for Down's syndrome

[SecretThermalsAreTheBest]

Just read that there's a high court challenge to try and change the clause that currently allows abortion to be carried out after 24 weeks, up until birth when the foetus/baby has Down's Syndrome or another severe disability.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-56982646

The campaign would bring the abortion limit for all babies with non-fatal severe disabilities to the same 24 week time limit.

Just interested to know what people think about this?

I used to help at a weekly social club for adults with severe learning difficulties most if whom had Downs Syndrome. Some were indeed lovely. But I had to lève because 1 man in his 20s developed a crush on me (I was in my 40s). After he pinned me against a wall trying to force himself on me and it took 3 burly men to pull h

Pressed send too soon.
It took burly men to pull him off one of had to go. I knew how tough his parents had it as he could be very aggressive with them soI wasn't going to deprive them of the only 3 hoursa week they had to themselves. So, although your sister may be lovely don't think that's the only story in town.

I’m saying you identify as a compassionate person.

There are people on this board who think women should be able to abort up to birth just because they want to. Because it’s not a real baby yet/ it is ‘nothing’. That’s the attitude I have a problem with.

And these same people would cry out at a news story of a woman neglecting and abandoning a 1 day old baby girl just because she ‘didn’t want to’ look after a baby and be a mother.

An unwanted pregnancy at 30 weeks is really, really shit. If there are medical complications then yes I 100% agree abortion should be allowed and at least discussed and should be a case by case basis. Yes I’ve given birth and yes it was bad. I’m not pretending it isn’t. But there has to be a point where yes an adult woman might suffer to save a newborn girl who could be adopted into another family. An absolutely travesty and the woman might never get over it. But she might never get over aborting a 30 week old healthy unborn baby either. There is clearly something seriously wrong in this situation. And neither will the doctors having to perform it.

pro choice is not black and white and if it is, it’s messed up.

And these same people would cry out at a news story of a woman neglecting and abandoning a 1 day old baby girl just because she ‘didn’t want to’ look after a baby and be a mother.
This claim of yours really needs [citation needed] after it.

Someone who thinks it should be legal for a woman to get pregnant multiple times and abort at nearly full term each time (and yes there are women who are seriously in this situation) is a little messed up imo. Yes these women need help and should be knocked out for a full GA C-section if that’s what it takes. Just like you can’t abuse and neglect a baby that’s been born. You have to do what’s right and find someone to take it if needs be.

And yes it’s shit but as so many people on this board claim to care about we are WOMEN and this is a real issue women have to face and need support with.

What would you rather call someone who is anti abortion, and wants a pregnant woman to continue with a pregnancy against her wishes?

Are you telling me you would be happy with this?
Nuts.

Yes it is forced birth.

It is black and white.
Either a woman has bodily autonomy or she does not.

If she does, then it is entirely her choice whether to end a pregnancy

If she does not then the state can step in and force her to bring a child into the world.

It really doesn't get more black and white than that.

I’m telling you that most people with an ounce of compassion or sense would be deeply concerned for the woman and wonder where her support was during pregnancy, why mental health and perinatal mental health is so neglected in this country, how she was in a position to abandon or neglect a one-day-old baby, how did she slip through the safety net, why was she not able to access safe and legal abortion, etc.

I don’t believe for a second that women merrily go through pregnancy, labour and birth with the intent of neglecting their baby unless something has gone seriously wrong in the social care and support system that is supposed to be in place. You’re just inventing things to distract from the key thing, which is women have rights over their body and can abort foetuses with Downs Syndrome.

But no one should have completely autonomy to do anything.

Do you not think?

Can she also not have completely autonomy to do what she wants with her born children? That’s why there are things called laws to govern what society thinks is ‘fair’.

Anyway you don’t have to agree with me. I personally find it a bit messed up to think it is that black has white.

Of course they would be concerned. I’m not doubting that at all. Does it make it ok though? You could argue someone going to full term with a healthy baby is in the same situation?

I agree. The original point was I don’t actually think the law should be changed. It should continue you as a case by case basis.

And if people want to argue that a woman or girl has more rights than a full term unborn child then that’s fine. Just don’t pretend it’s not a real baby because that is distracting from the point and pretending things are different to what they are. At least admit that it is a horrible situation and thing to do. Even if it must be done.

And in some countries (and that includes the UK, with some of the families I have worked with) that means a woman might abort a child up to birth because it is a girl. A lot of abortions are because the baby is a girl. You could argue that maybe it’s better to be aborted than neglected or given up for adoption. Fine, that might be your stance. But it’s something to think about.

Can she also not have completely autonomy to do what she wants with her born children? That’s why there are things called laws to govern what society thinks is ‘fair’.
There are also laws to govern what’s a foetus and what’s a human being. HTH.

I'm with the
'Hard cases make bad laws'

I think (know) that there is usually pressure for women who are carrying a fetus who is known to be disabled to have an abortion.

I know that many women who find out at birth find themselves being offered adoption info.

I hate that abortion is encouraged and supported when disabilty is involved.

In Australia there was a case where the mother sought an abortion very late on discovering dwarfism.

Disabilty is not a tragedy.

Abortion must be a decision for a woman and her team. Legal limits are rarely helpful.

I hate the message this sends to people who either have Down's syndrome or have loved ones who have that extra chromosome.

Society should be stepping up. Not encouraging eugenics.

Also - do people who think that abortion at 30 weeks is abhorrent think the same if the woman/girl only discovered they were pregnant at 29 weeks?

Well no. Because once a child is brought into the world and takes their first breath, they are a separate person and not part of the woman's body.

The facts are that the vast majority of abortions are carried out very early and 'women would merrily skip off to have near term abortions given half a chance so we must stop them' is nothing more than an attempt to manipulate people and does not reflect the reality of abortions.

Women simply do not go round aborting near term babies willy nilly.
Late abortions happen for medical reasons.

This is an ideological stance. I believe that no woman should be forced against her will to bring a child into the world. The moment I start adding ifs and buts I am supporting removing elements of bodily autonomy. I won't support that. Not even to support the theoretical rights of the none existent full term foetus that a non existent woman suddenly decided for no reason that she no longer wanted.

And I did notice you removed the word bodily from bodily autonomy by the way.

Complete autonomy and bodily autonomy are different things.

If you have to remove an important word to make your argument then maybe you don't have an argument. 🤷

I suppose the only thing I would add to @IncompleteSenten post, is that perhaps a ‘best of both world’ policy would be that if a baby was healthy and post, for example, 28 weeks (and therefore had a good prospect of pulling through their prematurity) then they could be induced alive to be adopted. There would be zero difference to the woman’s procedure, the only difference would be no injection to stop the baby’s heart first. I can’t see people clamouring to adopt disabled babies but I can see how healthy newborns would stand a good chance of being adopted.

@Wouldloveanother There would be a huge emotional difference to the woman’s procedure: the difference between terminating a wanted pregnancy and being induced to give up a baby for adoption is enormous. Very very very few abortions are performed post-24 weeks, those that are, are usually for medical reasons due to the baby’s health, or for the mother’s health, so under what circumstances would there be a 28-week abortion of a healthy baby that could then be put up for adoption? Who is caring for the baby in NICU – overworked social services? Underfunded foster parents? The birth mother who wanted a TFMR and not to have a child?

There is also the emotional and mental impact on the adopted child – who as you say may not be adopted due to disability. You’re suggesting forced birth under different terms. It’s not the best of both worlds at all.

Just trust women to make decisions about their bodies. Trust them to make decisions post-24 weeks, which is already difficult enough.

Someone who thinks it should be legal for a woman to get pregnant multiple times and abort at nearly full term each time (and yes there are women who are seriously in this situation) is a little messed up imo.

When you say "there are women who are seriously in this situation", what situation do you mean? Women who have aborted multiple pregnancies at full term? Women who have wanted to abort multiple pregnancies at full term? Women who would want to do this if they could?