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

SQ - still waiting for your response about making women watch the abortion videos and talk to people who have had negative experiences etc. I'm pretty sure you don't agree with it but it's a fair comparison to what you're suggesting wrt to women having difficult births.

P.S if you want to send me some more info about global issues then please feel free. You know very little about me in RL so you may be surprised at how much I've actually seen but you just continue on with your silly little posts if you think you're actually making a point.

bubbley don't you want to stop women having abortions? That's not what you've said on other threads I'm sure

I don't think a phone-in is any more reliable than MN. Probably far less as I know many more people who post on MN than ring into radio shows.

Why don't you want to give pregnant women the full information about the risks associated with pregnancy and birth? Given that they are higher than the risks associated with abortion?

Bumbley,
that is very rude of you.
i asked if you agreed with chandelilina,
Chandlelina seems to think we should not give women the full information when dealing with prgnancy and abortion because some of the risks of death and ill health will be due to natural causes. so it seems you think we should tell women all about abortion, but not mention they are more likely to die if they continue with the pregnancy since that death will be due to natural causes and is somehow less of a concern to a woman.
that attitude just demonstrates that when anti-abortionists refer to giving information and helping women make an informed choice, the really mean picking and choosing the information in order to try to persuade women to not have an abortion. You cannot claim that you want women to be forced to watch a screen or undergo counsellign to help them makie an informed decision in one breath and in the next say you do not think women should be given all the facts if some of those facts relate to a natural risk of ill health or death.
And SQ is saying the same thing, if you want women to make an informed choice, give them all the information including that pregnancy is riskier than abortion.

And what about the question of the invasive nature of transvaginal scans, bumbleymummy?

Dunno, but michelle is I think maybe hurting so much she's reacting like we are all touching a wound. Wish I could help.

Silly little posts? Hmm you seem a bit rattled.

What I am suggesting is a perfect parallel to what you suggest.

You say that you know better than women, you know that they are not fully informed. Despite the doctors and the leaflets and the other HCPs informing them. And the fact that they know damn well what being pregnant means and what having an abortion means. But you think they don't know. You think they are not informed. You think they need more information. This information should take the for of whatever will induce as much guilt as possible. What a compassionate approach

Twisting again SQ - I said I see the purpose of the scan being used as ensuring informed consent not as an attempt at emotional blackmail (have written that a few times now)

SQ - do you mean all women or just women who are considering abortion? As a few people have pointed out, birth is not like abortion because it is a medical procedure. Risks of c-sections are explained before them same as with abortions.

Kelly - see above. Apologies for the 'banging on' comment btw. Silly to stoop to the level of some others on here.

bumbleymummy, until you and the rest of the anti-abortion lobby demonstrate the same level of care and concern for unwanted and ill-supported mothers and babies post birth as you do for fetuses and (supposedly) for poor post-abortion mums driven to suicide etc, I have no time for your arguments.

Fancy fostering/adopting some of the 60,000 additional population Dorries wants the women of the nation to have to deal with? Unless you're taking the lot of them, or are at very least prepared to pay a lot more tax for their upkeep, no one will take you at all seriously.Fancy even helping out the women who will be forced to live on benefits with said children? Even better, fancy helping to prevernt pregnancy rather than abortion by paying for or providing free contraceptive advice and sex education to teenagers?

I frankly doubt it. It's easy to be sanctimonious about an abstract concept- the poor ickle neglected fetus and its poor non-mother, fated to a lifetime of misery and regret (

btw bumbley, if I'd been forced to have a scan pre-abortion no doubt it would have upset, scared and horrified me. But I would have had the abortion anyway, following an expensive and pointless procedure designed to intimidate me and induce me through guilt to bear a child I didn't want and knew I didn't want.

nice idea though. I see they've already adopted it in that bastion of compassion and women's rights, Texas.

Threads like this actually reassure me that the majority of the people in the world are sensible, compassionate and fair.

bubbley would you have an exemption to the scan for women who have been raped?

If so, please can you explain how this ties in with your logic about what (you claim) the scan is for.

Too true, michelle.

Dorries is now ranting in the dailymail. from the way I read it it seems she claims to have taken part in the killing of a living baby after a botched abortion, I do not believe her, but surely if this is true she should be prosecuted for this. She also claims that women are more likely to suffer mental problems which is not true, and it is worrying she is claiming this. yes it is true women who have abortions are more likely to have mental health issues, but this is because in the UK one of the reasons for allowing abortions is mental health issues. However abortion does not cause people to develop mental health issues, whereas pregnancy does. She also make a very serious accusation against Marie Stopes and claims they profit from abortions and have a vested interst in maintaining the abortion rate. This is not true and they are a not-for-profit organisation, and she offers no evidence other than her own opinions. I wish Marie Stopes would sue her for libel.

Thing is, I'd claim I was raped. And what with rape convictions being what they are, I could be pretty sure there'd be no comeback for anyone. Everyone's a winner.

SQ I hate the expression but 'LOL' at being 'rattled' :)

" And the fact that they know damn well what being pregnant means and what having an abortion means. "

You're assuming that. How can you guarantee it for everyone? Or do you honestly think that EVERYONE knows what is involved and what they are actually aborting is more than a 'bundle of cells'?

Still waiting for your response about the abortion video/talking to people who were traumatised/depressed afterwards. That's actually on par with what you were suggesting wrt making people visit morgues/women with tears/complicated births etc. I notice you're trying to avoid it though.

Once again, I think the scans ensure informed consent and are not there to merely guilt trip but if someone feels guilty about it when they face the reality well at least it is a good time to find out before they do something they may regret.

Bumbley,
i cannot see anywhere where you say that women should or should not be given all the information regarding the risks of pregnancy. Chandellina says they should not be given this information as the risks are a natural part of pregnancy which is natural. Do you agree with this, that information should not be given to women?
Also it was not just me you were rude to refering to sillylittle posts was very rude, no-oneis being rude to you on here. It reminds me of Dorries who makes wild and very, very serious accusations against marie stopes (libel is not just a civil issue in the most serious cases it can also be criminal - and Dorries has not demonstrated any evidence other than her own opinion that her claims are true), yet claims she is the one beng victimized.

breaktime, if you read back you'll see that we have actually considered adoption and fostering. :)

Of course I imagine that you must provide direct support for any of the women who have abortions without adequate counselling and are now trying to live with their decision although they deeply regret it.

It's actually quite appalling how some of you who don't regret your abortions are so willing to overlook those who do. Even when they have posted on this thread. Yet you still call pro-lifers 'callous' - oh the irony!

breaktime - see - you would have gone through with it anyway. So why object? Whats the problem with facing the reality? Or is it easier to pretend it is just a 'bundle of cells'?

Bumbley, Again the arguement also works for people being told about pregnancy? And as for the videos SQ did not say she wanted women to see them, she pointed out that if you are going to do this you have to do the equivilent for pregnant women. Dorries in her writings never once mentions giving pregnant women informed consent, she focuses only on stopping abortion. Informed consent has to go everywhere, a woman cannot make informed consent about abortion if she does not know the risks of the alternatives. And in America this is being done to guilt women as they admit they will exempt rape victims.
being pregnant is a uniquely female experience and any attempt to involve the state in it whether it be the decision to keep the pregnancy or have a termination is purely sexual discrimination. men do not have a problem buying condoms, or getting sterilisations, yet women can be made to jump through hoops to get contreception, and abortions. And although Dorries is female, the parliament that is making this decision is made up of nearly all men who will never ever be pregnant.

SQ - I didn't say I would. I was asking if that was why Texas ask. Does anyone know?

Still waiting on your response to that abortion video question SQ - it's not going away. Going to keep avoiding it?

Kelly - I asked you a question in relation to that in my last post. Do you mean all pregnant women or just those considering abortion?

What has saying you might consider fostering in the future got to do with saying whether or not women should be given full information about the risks of pregnancy.