The Dorries amendment will be a free vote - keep the pressure on

[WilsonFrickett]

Lots of press today saying that the govt has decided to vote against ND's ridiculous amendment. While this is good news, it will still be a free vote, with individual MPs able to vote as they please. If you were thinking about emailing your MP on this issue please still do so - the result isn't a foregone conclusion.

From the Guardian article:

...a combination of the unpredictable intake of new Tory MPs, split between social conservatives and modernisers, the number of Roman Catholic Labour MPs, and the high degree of nuance of the amendment make it extremely unclear which way the vote will go.

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/31/downing-street-uturn-abortion-proposals

Empusa, it could. Would you object to them having better counselling that would have allowed them to make the right decision for them too?

Josephine, presumably the figure is based on women who have said that they regretted their abortion and would not have gone through with it if they had better counselling.

Abortion can cause mental illness kelly. It doesn't mean it always does but it can.

Is it just hatred of Dorries that means you can't support this idea at all? Even if it could be modified slightly? I wonder what the reaction would be if someone else put it forward....

'presumably the figure is based on women who have said that they regretted their abortion and would not have gone through with it if they had better counselling.'

As far as I understand it, it's a figure that ND pulled out of thin air unless you know otherwise?

Abortion ha sbeen shown not to cause any significant increase in mental illness. pregnancy and childbirth has been shown to cause a significant increase in mental illness. If a woman does not have an abortion, then she must stay pregnant, therefore not having an abortion statistically increases the chnce the woman will suffer mental illness, as well as physicaillness and even death. So trying to prevent abortions does more harm to a woman.

And I do not hate Dorries and to be honest I almost pity her, but I think she is unhinged, and gives out false information to boost her wild claims. I also find her the fact that she seems to make claims about having been involved in what appears upon reading to be the killing of a living baby after a botched abortion highly worrying and cannot understand why the tory party are not investigating her claims more. Either she is lying which is disgusting, or she is telling the truth and was involved in something very sinister and illegal.
I also think that anyone who is an MP in a country where 1 in 4 to 1 in 6 children are sexually abused, and which has one of the highest rates of maternal death in the western world yet spends their time campaigning against abortion , and claiming girls saying no would prevent these sex crimes needs to get their priorities together.

Kelly, are you trying to promote abortions because they are the 'safer' option? That is what it is coming across like.

No, Josephone, why would I have information that you do not? That's why I said 'presumably'.

It doesn't make any difference to my argument anyway. I don't care about particular figures but if better counselling ensures that women do not regret decisions then that is a good thing.

No, I am saying claiming you want to cut abortions to help women, even though abortion is actually the safer option is pathetic. Trying to mislead people into think pregnancy is the safer option is wrong. It might be the right option for you, but it is not statistically the more safe yet that is what anti-abortionists try to claim so they disguise their agenda as trying to help women rather thn trying to just stop abortion.
If Dories disagrees with abortion she should be honest about it, and just say I want to stop abortion as I disagree with it. Se should not use mis-information to ty to dress it up as something it is not.

I don't presume to know you or what access you may have to information that I don't - hence the question.

So are you happy with the idea that better counselling may lead to an increase in abortions?

Bumbley, The ammendement is not about providing better counselling, it is about providing different counselling from that which is available now and in fact trying to cut counselling services provided by impartial bodies such as Marie Stopes.

And again, if counselling is only provided to women seeking abortions, then it is not helping all pregnant women make decisions they do not regret.

Absolutely, kelly - if the concern was 'better' counselling, presumably the amendment would be to establish a regulatory body, or to introduce a new counselling qualification for this area, or something.

I don't like the word harridan. There are plenty of other words to describe Nadine Dorries.

Oh, but 'better' counselling in the eyes of Dorries means more 'pro-life' counselling. How else would you reduce abortions by 60,000 per year?

Joesphine asks a good question - I wonder if any pro-lifer will answer it?

Didn't want to be deleted Narky

Got told off for 'nonsensical' lowering the tone earlier.

Sorry Narky looks wrong, should say MinimallyNarkyPuffin.

Looks as if ND is losing support all over the place....

liberalconspiracy.org/2011/09/02/exclusive-health-minister-admits-bpas-a-reputable-organisation-abortion/

:)

Good article Josephine.

This one too, on the same site:

liberalconspiracy.org/2011/08/29/why-nadine-dorries-frank-field-are-being-dishonest-on-their-abortion-proposals/

What I want to know is the location of the counsellor that can make a woman feel better about the abortion she doesn't want but has to have. No counsellor can magic money out of thin air, wish away terminal foetal abnormalities, or make a relationship stay stable and non-violent. Is a counsellor going to come and look after my child when I go back to work?

And I also want to know the location of the counsellor that can make the decision for the woman concerned, without being (deservedly) sued to within an inch of their lives and struck off. A counsellor is not there to tell you what to do - understandably but sadly, I think this is where a lot of the 'objections (I mean from women on MN, not the imaginary ones cited by Dorries) come from.

I want to meet the psychic counsellor who can predict the future and how a woman might feel ten years into her future. I also want to meet the counsellor who thinks that the risk of 'regret' can be eliminated from all our decisions via the medium of counselling.

I also want to see the evidence for BPAS and Marie Stopes systematically 'railroading' (Dorries's actual term) women into abortion for no other benefit other than the cost of their procedure. That is a scandal the like of which we've never seen - it could bring down the NHS? Why, I wonder, have no journalists dug anything up?

Josephine, I wouldn't say I would be 'happy' about it but if it means more women are making more informed decisions and are happier with the outcome then I am willing to accept that. TBH I don't actually see that as happening unless you think that the number of people who regret deciding against abortion and keep the baby outnumbers the number of women who regret their decision to have an abortion.

"And again, if counselling is only provided to women seeking abortions, then it is not helping all pregnant women make decisions they do not regret."

It's not targetted at all pregnant women. Maybe there will be another campaign to help all pregnant women have access to counselling. Why don't you start one? I'm sure your idea about telling ALL pregnant women that abortion is a safer option would go down really well.

"Oh, but 'better' counselling in the eyes of Dorries means more 'pro-life' counselling."

I thought you said you read her blog? She's said a few times that that isn't what she means at all.

BTW you lowered the tone by throwing in an insult that had no relevance to the discussion. It's just a bit childish really.

Narky is fine, as is Puffin, MNP or full name

Your parameters are all skewed, bumblemummy. 'Better' counselling is not a synonym for 'more women keeping babies'. 'Better' counselling might mean that women feel less regret for the abortions that they do have.

Somehow I don't think this is Dorries's aim, no matter what poorly thought-out shite she trots out on her blog.

:) Narky.

Dorries stated under oath (during the MP's expenses hearings) that her blog was 70% fiction. Lets hope that saying it won't be pro-life counselling is part of the 30% truth then.

Actually, here is a letter from Anne Milton MP, under secretary for the Department of Health. (Click on the link under the article.)

liberalconspiracy.org/2011/08/29/why-nadine-dorries-frank-field-are-being-dishonest-on-their-abortion-proposals/

Bumbley will be very pleased to note that provision for indenpendent counselling for every woman is already being worked on - and she sees no need for it to be set down in primary legislation as set out in Dorries amendment.

'TBH I don't actually see that as happening unless you think that the number of people who regret deciding against abortion and keep the baby outnumbers the number of women who regret their decision to have an abortion.'

On balance, you may be right but I think you'd be surprised at the numbers of women who decided they couldn't face an abortion but who very much regretted having a child. The taboo against saying this is so huge that few will ever say it outside of a therapists room but I assure you it is not at all uncommon. Equally I think you'd be surprised at the number of women who don't regret having an abortion at all - after all, one in three of us (UK women) have done so by the age of 45.

For the record, Bumbley, I have never once thrown an insult on MN. I did, however, call your posts nonsensical because, to me, they are.

We're even-stevens now anyway as you called me/my posts childish.