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

Anne Milton's letter is here, did the wrong link:

www.scribd.com/doc/63778462/LC-exclusive-Anne-Milton-Letter

To repeat my earlier post, she says that provision for independent counselling for all women is already being worked on and can be brought in under existing healthcare legislation. She says she doesn't see a need for it to be laid down in primary legislation under Dorries' Amendment.

www.scribd.com/doc/63778462/LC-exclusive-Anne-Milton-Letter

Third time lucky.

Good letter Goldfish, thanks for posting.

smallwhitecat, I do agree with you there. Reading her letter again, she emphasises that BPAS is a reputable organisation - so does that mean they will be deemed 'independent' enough to do the 'independent counselling'? Let's hope so.

I think its interesting that Anne Milton's letter is so much clearer and less ambigious than NDs amendment - and the amendment is a legal document!

I think there is a (Conservative?) agenda here to just gently chip, chip, chip away at the status quo. Nothing too scary, nothing too Texas, just a wee tweak here and there. We all need to stay on our toes and make sure our voices are heard swc but agree the voices of those who have actually been through the existing system are very powerful. I've been inspired and moved by the honesty of some of the MNers on these threads, to be honest.

I don't see it as a Tory conspiracy, but both DC and Anne Milton seem to be keen to change the status quo. I completely agree that it is very odd that Frank Fields seems to be coming out of this unscathed...

To be fair - the Conservative Women's Organisation have come out against NDs proposals. There are different types of Conservatives, jusrt as there are different types of lefties and (thank goodness!) the UK seems not to breed significant numbers of the type of Conservatives found in the Southern United States.

cwoblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/health-social-care-bill-termination.html

I have signed the e-petition, and emailed my local MP (Huw Irranca-Davies)

Recieved a letter from MP today, and he will not be supporting ND. To quote

"I will not be supporting this amendment if is bought before Parliament at Report Stage of the Health and Social Care Bill as I see no evidence to suggest that a change is currently needed"

This is good, isn't it?

Very good runny

To be fair swc FF is coming out of it relatively unscathed all over the place, not just on MN.

'FF comes out of it unscathed on MN because it is infested with people more concerned with flogging their left wing horses than dealing with the real issue'

I would never flog my left-wing horse. I clean it's hooves and brush it's mane and sing the Internationale to it whilst feeding it oats.

FF is anti-abortion. ND is anti-abortion and full of shit, pretending she's acting for the benefit of women rather than trying to stop abortions. I suspect that her gender does make her more of a target though.

"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."

Where did I say it was victor? Yes, it could mean women having less regret - isn't that a good thing?

Josephine, I'm well aware that many women don't regret their abortion. I believe there was even a thread on MN quite recently about it.

I don't think I misread, bumbleymummy: in the context of counselling, you said that the numbers of women who regret having an abortion outnumber those who regret having one. So in this context, counselling that results in birth is better than that which doesn't.

You also appear to believe Dorries's disingenous claims that she doesn't intend for this amendment to open the door to pro-life groups to provide 'counselling'. It has been proven that for a majority of these groups, their version of counselling is whipping out baby clothes and telling women lies about the abortion procedure and aftermath.

Sorry: those women who regret NOT having one, and continuing with the pregnancy.

"Where did I say it was victor?"

In the last thread.

MyGoldfishIsEvil said - "For your info, BPAS stats show that 20% of people counselled by them go on to keep the baby"

You replied with - "But if there are instances where the counselling isn't up to scratch - such as that shown in the article, then perhaps that figure would actually be higher."

Or did you mean something totally different to "if the counselling was better then the percentage of babies kept would probably be higher"

Actually, I asked another poster if that is what she was suggesting because that would need to be the case if counselling was to result in the increase in the number of abortions - she was asking if I would be happy about that. I still don't see how that equates to ' 'Better' counselling is not a synonym for 'more women keeping babies'. ' either.

bumbley Having just read the last thread, specifically that bit of it, it didn't come across that way at all. Maybe you should word things a little more carefully.

"I still don't see how that equates to ' 'Better' counselling is not a synonym for 'more women keeping babies'."

For example, does the above quote mean that you think "better" counselling should change the number of abortions performed?

'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.'

That's what you said. It's not a question, and you clearly equate women being '"happier" with the outcome' with proceeding with pregnancy.

You're totally entitled to be anti-choice. For yourself.

That's clearly not what victor was talking about empusa but no, saying that an improvement in counselling could perhaps result in fewer abortions is not the same as saying 'better counselling means more women keeping babies.' one suggests a possibility the other says it would be a definite.

Empusa - I'm talking (and so is victor) about this thread. I don't think victor was even on the other one. (apologies if you actually were victor)