To ask pro-choice MNers to email your MPs? <this is not a request to vote on anything>

[EricNorthmansMistressOfPotions]

There is an article here about the proposed amendments to the health and social care bill which will force women to undergo 'independent' counselling before being allowed to choose to terminate a pregnancy. The assumption is that BPAS and the like have a financial investment in encouraging women to terminate and as such their counselling is biased. The stated goal is to reduce the number of terminations per year by forcing women to delay between seeking and receiving termination, and having to undergo additional counselling (political bias unknown, though easily guessed at) prior to the termination. ND hopes that woman will change their minds during this enforced extended waiting period.

If you think this is a shit idea you can email your MP by clicking this link

This is not a request to vote on anything at all

bubbleymummy I can't believe that you would think that a woman who wants an abortion therefore isn't going to be distressed at being shown the foetus on a screen. It shows up very well what you think about women who want abortions - that they are emotionally dead, and have no feelings.

chandellina I think in a lot of cases adoption would be a lot more damaging for the mother than an abortion. I for one cannot imagine carrying a pregnancy to term that I don't want, with all the associated physical and mental effects that would cause. Very few women could handle that, which is probably why so few babies are put up for adoption. What if you already have children who will question where the baby went, and worry they too will be given away? What about time to recover after birth? What about affording to give up work for the legally required time of maternity leave (only 2 weeks iirc, but still 2 weeks), or any medical leave, unpaid. For many many women adoption just isn't an option, for practical as well as emotional reasons.

Booboo quite.

If they want to increase the number of women and girls who keep babies and give them up for adoption, then a lot of attitudes in society need to change first.

SQ jumping to conclusions again I see. I don't think they are emotionally dead but I think they should address those emotions when they are making their decision based on the reality of what they are doing. If you think they are so aware of what they are doing then what exactly are you protecting them from?

The only way to reduce abortions is to reduce unwanted pregnancies. There is nothing in ND's proposal which addresses this.

As many, many posters have commented, it is almost impossible to access counselling on the NHS for mental health issues at the moment. Where is the funding for this new counselling to come from?

Again, charities involved in abortion provision are non-profit making. As many posters have commentated, if ND or a poster has evidence that a charity is using its position to pressurise women in persuit of financial gain then let them come forward with the evidence because it is clearly an extremely serious allegation that needs full investigation.

As an aside, where are all these extra sonographers to come from, to provide all these scans, to all these women who need a picture of their baby to help them make an informed choice? Same pot as all the counsellers?

Finally, on the scan issue. Who would you show it to? Would you show it to women who had been raped? Probably not, I mean it wasn't their fault they got pregnant, was it? What about someone on benefits pg with their sixth baby? Well, clearly they know what an embryo looks like, and lets face it they are probably half-feral pumping out kids to drain the state of money, no, actually they don't need a scan, let's just whip out the brat before we have to up the child benefit. Someone in their 30's who had a contraceptive accident? Oh definitely, they need their minds changing, we should definitely make sure she gets a scan. She's got good genes an' all, maybe we can persuade her to put the baby up for adoption?

If a woman doesn't want a baby, she doesn't want a baby. She should be offered supportive counselling to help her explore her options, not guilted into changing her mind by showing her a pic of her ickle baby. And what would you do with the poster who was forced to wait for 23 weeks for her termination by the way? Take her round the neo-natal ward?

I am extremely pleased to have got so involved on this thread because it's woken me up. ND and her supporters want to chip away at a woman's right to autonomy over her own body, and for that she can pull up her bobbysocks and fuck off hand-jive back to the 50's, because that's where her opinions belong.

Bumbleymummy It is clear to me from reading your posts that all your concern is reserved for the embryo/foetus. Beyond that, you clearly have not a shred of humanity - at least so far as the women undergoing terminations are concerned. I do find it objectionable that pro-lifers care more about the welfare and wellbeing of a foetus than they do about another living, breathing human being.

I had an abortion once. My contraception failed (pill) and by the time I realised I was pregnant the MAP was not an option. Although I felt sad, I don't regret the abortion for a minute. Sorry, but there it is. This does not mean, however, that I was blase about it, that I did not give the matter considerable thought, or that I was unaware of the potential for life that the foetus had. Being forced to look at a scan would not have changed my mind, but it would have been distressing. I think most people would understand why that might be and am amazed that you can't.

SQ I just don't understand how people can treat pregnancy and having a child like it's nothing. Pregnancy wrecked my body, not in superficial ways, though my tummy is certainly not seeing a bikini ever again. My pelvis is wrecked from SPD, I can't walk especially far without it hurting like mad. No cure, only physio to help strengthen things. Then there's the mental thing. Pregnancy, even with a much wanted child, makes me depressed. Which is why it's the mothers right to choose. It's my body and mind that suffer either way. So just let me be to make my damn choice. For me, there's no more children becasue of the damage to my pelvis. But I have 2 dc to show for that. Imagine of you'd been guilt tripped into havign a child to give away, only to realise that you then won't be able to have any of your own at a time you choose to have them. Terrible.

Well changing those attitudes wouldn't be a bad thing either. If a woman feels forced to have an abortion because she feels she has no other option it's hardly a 'choice' for her really? Sometimes it seems like pro-choicers for get that there are other choices besides abortion.

Forget*

I think you're being deliberately obtuse. Of course it's a choice. And thank god it is.

bumbley do you similarly think that people who are omniverous would have no emotional response seeing an animal being killed? People who haven't already seen it, and are removed from it?

What about people who buy cheap clothes, do you think they will not be moved by seeing pictures of young children working terribly long hours in cramped conditions around the globe?

Of course most people who have no exposure to farming will have an emotional response to seeing an animal killed. But most would still buy meat. Many people still buy battery chickens despite knowing where they come from. But most will still feel unwell if taken around a battery farm. People need cheap clothes so they buy them, and try not to think of how they are made.

People do things which have a detriment to others all the time. If you live in the UK and aren't in a cave wearing grass clothes then you do too. Can you live with yourself? Would you feel great if you had the consequences off all your choices fired at you? No you'd feel terrible. But you'd almost certainly still do them.

Your ideas on this matter are driven by emotion rather than logic and your dismissal of real actual living women and girls in the here and now in favour of something with potential makes me feel quite uncomfortable.

booboo I totally agree and said that upthread as well. It is an excellent point. pregnancy and childbirth are huge things. They are more dangerous to the woman than abortion. Both in terms of death and physical/mental problems. Yet this is overlooked - the women who would be forced to have the babies just aren't of any relevance at all, they are nothing more than a receptacle. Also once the babies are out many anti-abortion types lose interest, which is outrageous frankly.

If these people want to improve things for babies they should be helping the ones that have already been born, frankly.

Not at all booboo. I'm just pointing out that a woman who feels she couldn't even consider adoption because of financial reasons/work/attitude from society etc and feels she has no other option except abortion hardly has much of a choice. You may not like it but it's true.

Chandellina gave some good examples of women who may actually not want to have abortions but find themselves there for all sorts of reasons. Not sure why all of you want to bundle all women into neat little boxes who all want abortions, know what's involced, know exactly what they are doing and how it is done, are content with it and feel no guilt etc etc. True for some but not for all.

Im going to ignore the snide comments about my humanity etc - pro-choicers always stoop to personal insults on these threads and then try to accuse pro-lifers of being rude and abusive.

Bumbleymummy, Because a doctor is there for medical reasons, not to guilt a patient. Why show it to her. An abortion is a difficult decision so why make it more difficult simply to make it more difficult. Do you want women to have children they regret, do you think teen mothers who have decided to keep their children should be given tours or morgues, and ob wards where women who are ill through childbirth and pregnancy are. If a woman is deemed incapable of deciding to have an abortion, then she must also be incapable of making the decision of keeping the baby. Would you have liked it if the state got to decide whether or not that you kept your child?

Yes that's true kelly.

I don't think anything Bumbley or anyone else can say on this thread that would make me think that Nadine Dorries amendment would be a 'good thing' for women. If the GP will only 'offer' the counselling - how is that any different from now? And if, as they claim, the counselling will take place in a few days, and not delay an abortion - how come abortions are already being delayed by the current procedures as in Michelle's case.

Nadine's amendment quite clearly states that she wants to / will reduce abortions by 60,000 a year - quite clearly by introducing the sort of counselling I alluded to on my previous post - and causing a pregnant woman to keep a baby through guilt and shame.

This is not a good thing for women's rights - women's rights to a choice about what to do with her own body and her own future. I think the obvious pro-lifers on this thread should take their arguments to a thread about whether abortion is right or wrong and allow the rest of us to e-mail our objections to this change in the law in peace.

Once again can I just state that medical staff are not allowed to put patients through procedures for anything other than medical reasons, so a doctor who makes a woman have a scan to try to change her mind about abortion is acting illegally as there was no medical point to the scan. If a pregnant woman asks about whether pregnancy is dangerous or not they more or less get told not to worry their pretty little heads about it, if people like bumbly and chanelina want women to have the full facts do they not also think that all pregnant women should be made to be informed of the statistics of illness that can occur as a result of pregnancy, be told about all the negatives of pregnancy and childbirth, all the negatives about caring for a baby and the statistics about what is likely to happen. If you want to give out the facts about abortion, then you have to give out the facts about pregnancy, childbirth, and raising a child.

SQ - but they are making informed decisions if they have seen those things and decide to still buy them. They know what they are doing but are prepared to live with it. I don't agree with people going around blindly buying things without any idea of the consequences they are having so I'm not sure examples will have your desired response from me tbh. I apply the same principles to abortion. If you can't live with the reality then don't do it but don't walk around with your eyes closed and your fingers in your ears and pretend it is something it isn't.

I'm not being dismissive of anyone - I am presenting another side to the argument that you disagree with and that's what makes you uncomfortable.

Bumbley,
if a woman wants a scan that is up to her, why force her to do something against her consent, the same with counselling. Why should a woman be made to do things against her consent. Why is there this desperation that the state should get to do things to womens bodies against their consent. Dorries legislation will only lead to more late abortions, women going abroad, and in some cases suicide.

Kelly, I've already said before that I see it as the doctor ensuring that it is an informed decision - not an attempt at emotional blackmail.

Not sure about tours of morgues/maternity wards for complications etc (by this reasoning you should be taking those who are choosing abortion to see women who have suffered complications from abortions)- but I think teenage mothers (why did you restrict it to this group?) should be given access to support/advice to help them raise their child if they need it but I'm pretty sure that is available already.

There's no point trying with bumbleymummy. She makes these hugely inflammatory statements and then when anyone points out any possible negative points you just get sigh... I didn't say that.

Yes, you did say that bumbleymummy. That's exactly what you said.

We had a lovely chat on another thread where she thought it'd be nice to discuss at length why I couldn't have my baby adopted.

She's like a dog with a slipper.

You do not expect a doctor to do this for any other medical procedure. And why not give women the information about the risks of pregnancy so they can make an informed decision. has your doctor sat you down and explained the health risks involved in the pregnancy, and told you to go home and think seriously about whether you want to keep it. If not, then are you going to tell them they should have done as you want to make an informed decision. If an abortion is best for the woman, it is best for her regardless of whether sh eknows what the foetus looks like, all a scan will not is guilt her and delay the abortion, and lead to more late abortions. The woman is the patient, the doctors concern should be 100% for her and if not they should be struck off.
teenage mothers were just an example, statistically they will have the hardest time bring up a child whatever support they have

Bumbley, that legislation is already in place - an abortion has to be signed off by 2 doctors and counselling is already available.

bubbley do you believe that you have been exposed first-hand to the negative sides of everything you do, and that everyone else has as well?

I don't know anyone who has been around an abbatoir. I know lots of people who eat meat. I don't think that they should all be forced to go around abbatoirs. Do you?

kelly that is very true. No-one told me about many of the possible negative consequences of pregnancy / childbirth. Why on earth not?

MyGoldfish - the difference is that it would be offered by an independent provider. The point chandellina was making about it not delaying it any further is because it will take place during the already current 'delay' for the abortion.

Kelly, I am seeing it from another angle. Truly informed consent. If a woman can't face what she is doing then how can you say it is informed consent? If she knows what she is doing (what stage the foetus is at, stopping a beating heart etc etc) then how does showing her a picture of it make her feel guilty or shock her in any way? Surely she would feel guilty already if she was going to and she would have decided whether or not she could live with that.So what difference would seeing it make unless she was actually having second thoughts in which case isn't it better to have them when she can still make the decision not to go through with it?

I know you don't like my impression of this but some women posted yesterday saying that they had an abortion, felt no guilt and know it was the right decision and wouldn't have been swayed by seeing pictures of embryos/foetuses at whatever stage they were having an abortion at so I don't think it will stop abortions that people genuinely want but it may stop the ones that people do live to regret and I don't think that's a bad thing.