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

I was reading today that Cameron is not going to turn up for the vote. The ninty minutes in the house of commons would be better spent debating where his spine went. never been a huge fan of Clegg, but so glad he has stuck to his guns on this and stood up to the anti-abortionists. My opinion of him has hugely improved.

So what do your beliefs equate to MyGoldfish? Th right of a woman to choose what to do with anything inside her body? In that case, my point stands.

Bumbley, you shouldn't try to put words in other people's mouths.

Ok then, what are your beliefs about bring pro-choice then?

Do I have to tell you? Do my arguments on Dorries' amendment stand or fall depending on whether you can pull apart my views on abortion or not?

For the record, I would be happy to state my own personal beliefs on abortion, on a thread about whether abortion is right or wrong (and have done). But here, I really get the feeling you are just up for a bunfight. My beliefs are my beliefs, and they are actually not set in stone, I am always willing to change my personal viewpoint if I hear an argument I agree with.

Lets just say nothing you have written has altered my viewpoint on abortion or Dorries amendment.

Incidentally, pretty poor show Cameron not being there for the vote.

It was a question Goldfish - you didn't want me to speculate so I asked you outright. I don't see why you are so defensive. You should try being on the pro-life side of the debate if you want to know what it feels like to have your views pulled apart and be pelted with buns!

Good night ladies.

moonferret my problem is with honesty which is the fundamental basis of this argument as Nadine Dorris has defined it.

She says that abortion providers are dishonest and misleading. I don't believe they are and ask for evidence.

She has narrowed this debate down to honesty and transparency yet has told clearly challengable lies about the providers of abortion, principally BPAS and Marie Stopes.

When asked to establish her facts she has shied away.

You appear to support her view so I'm asking you for that evidence.

I don't believe that is an unreasonable request.

You believe abortion is wrong at every point and I have no problem accepting and respecting your views. I might not agree with them and will debate with you if you would like.

What I would ask is that if you believe that abortion is wrong at any stage, which we have now established, can you please explain to me why you would accept abortion at any stage if your morals demand that you outlaw it?

I believe it is because you find a drip-feed easier. But correct me if I am wrong.

I don't believe that the end justifies the means. Nor do I believe that lying to people can ever be good.

While I was otherwise engaged other people have responded to you eloquently moonferret and bumbleymummy.

But I'd still like to know how holding a deep conviction plus an argument based on truth and transparency can justify moral relativism, lies and whittling.

Do come back. I might even respect you. But don't count on it.

No bumbley, I'm not being the defensive one. I'm quite comfortable with my views on the subject. I don't think anyone on this thread has thrown any buns, rather, all your arguments "for" Dorries bill have been eloquently argued against. Everything else you've posted on the thread has been a red herring.

Nadine Dorries is telling lies - about BPAS, Marie Stopes and about who is backing her campaign. Personally I'm glad the backlash against her has been so strong.

An example of a private clinic offering abortion:

SPIRES prices quoted are from £1675 -£1875.

The not-for-profitBPAS prices quoted are from £470 -£1595.

This particular private clinic says it is licensed to offer terminations up to 12 weeks so £1675-£1875 for an abortion up to 12 weeks. An abortion up to 14 weeks costs £540/£615 with BPAS depending on whether or not you choose General or local anaesthetic. With BPAS, the later stage terminations (up to 24 weeks) are carried under general anaesthetic and using the dilation and evacuation (with suction) method so clearly a much bigger operation for still less than the price that the private clinic charges for the 12 week abortion. I'm pretty sure that suggests that the private clinic is making a profit on them.

Kelly, do you have anything to show that these private clinics aren't allowed to make profits on abortions? Or were you just assuming that was the case?

I'm comfortable with mine too, goldfish and I haven't accused anyone of throwing buns on this thread - just pointing out that you would be more likely to be pelted if you were on the pro-life side which is clear from most of the abortion threads on MN. I think it's a bit defensive to jump to the conclusion that someone only wants a bunfight because they have asked you directly what your views are to avoid the speculation that you objected to.

That's a matter of opinion Bumbley, isn't it? I distinctly remember a rather unpleasant thread where you, erm, lets say, repeatedly questioned a poster who was the victim of dv and had an abortion. Has already been referenced on the last thread - so I don't think you're quite the innocent victim you make out.

The reason I accused you of looking for a bunfight is that you have repeatedly argued red herrings on this thread whilst ignoring very good points arguing the case in point - ie. Dorries amendment.

Why so shocked? You already know how I feel about abortion.

Oh my goodness, I have just realised how that could be taken in relation to that particular case due to the DV issue so before you all jump on me I will apologise and say that I did not mean that AT ALL!

I do consider aborted babies to be innocent victims in all cases which was the point I was trying to make but due to the DV issue it does sound tactless so, once again, sincere apologies.

Bum,
The law says that and if you cannot be bothered to find out the law yourself then I am not going to teach you.
And there is only one way you can take your lovely claim that the foetus is the only innocent victim when it comes to abortion. Trying to then claim you meant it in a nice tactful way does not hide that. It is a disgusting for you to have said that.

Kelly, I can't find a law about it. That's why I was asking you because you seem so insistent that abortion providers can't make a profit. How do you explain the price difference between the abortion clinics I linked to above? Do you think Spires are acting illegally?

Although interestingly bumble the prices you quote above suggest that perhaps - just perhaps - BPAS isn't making a profit, which is the main thrust of ND's argument and something that has clearly been bothering you all along. So why don't you turn your ire to the Harley Street practitioners instead? Incidentally, there's no legal requirement for independent or impartial counselling before plastic surgery either - which is an industry that is clearly built on profit - so plenty of scope for reform there...

It does, however, suggest that there may be a case for ensuring that women are given access to impartial counselling if there are organisations that do offer abortions that they may profit from.

Also, Wilson, unless we know how much the abortion actually costs, we can't determine whether BPAS makes a profit from those figures above. I'm not saying that they definitely do - I don't have access to those figures either but people just keeps saying that they don't without being able to show how much the abortion costs or whether the doctors performing them are on contract or paid per abortion and I can recognise that such a system could lead to a potential conflict of interest.

Bumbley , 'we can't determine whether BPAS makes a profit'.

We can determine that BPAS doesn't make a profit as they they are a not for profit charity. To suggest otherwise would be a very serious allegation which should be backed up by evidence.

Again. Because they are a charity and are not run for profit. BPAS does not make a profit. Legally, it is not allowed to.

Again. The doctors and nurses who perform the procedures aren't involved in the inital counselling at BPAS and similar - this is GP-led (where charities perform the actual procedures instead of NHS) or provided by nurse/counsellors at the point of contact (where women self-refer to the charities). So there is no link between the number of abortions a doctor performs vs the number of women who contact the service and then change your mind. Unless you are suggesting the nurse/counsellors/GPs are on some sort of commission? Which I really hope you are not.

Again. If there is any evidence of a conflict of interest then it needs to be shown and investigated. Until there is this slandering of charities should stop.

Again. I agree that fast, impartial and free counselling should be available to any woman who wants it. This amendment will not provide that, so I do not support it.

I would imagine that organisations like Spires charge higher fees based on speed, type of facility, amount of nursing care - the usual private health 'sheen' that does cost money. However I would welcome more information on how they operate as I don't really know much about the regulations that they operate under. But they will be heavily regulated, of course.