imagine how this little girl is going to feel when sheis old enough to understand

[stitch]

\link{http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4826148.stm\abortion bid mom}
can this not be classed as child abuse?

what is wrong with you all? are you so bitter and twisted about your own lives that you feel the need to spit bile at a fellow woman for the choice she is making in terms of how she deals with a hospital cock up (i've had an abortion, if i had subsequently found out i was pregnant i would have been devastated, furious and convinced that the hospital had acted negligently in not being able to carry out a surgically simple, but emotionally hugely complex procedure).

lots of children grow up knowing that they were an 'accident', but loved despite that.

totally agree with caligula regarding the facile and frustrating assertion that she could 'just adopt'.

seems to me that someone that would direct so much hate outward about this has some seriously ambivalent feelings about their own life choices that they haven't begun to come to grips with.

Totally agree with Nutcracker.
I am pro choice, this to me is not about the abortion.
It's about the here and now. The little girl was born and is here. I'm sure there are coulples all over the country who would give their right arm to have and cherish that little girl.
As it is, she will be traumatised by knowing the ins and outs of her conception and her twins death.
As for the Mother saying 'i'll tell her when she's 10 or 11' well i have a 5 year old girl and beleive me there's no hiding things from her.
I bet she knows right now.

It is pretty awful and traumatic all round and obviously not helped by being spotlit by the media. I think that this mum is foolish but probably very naive too. I don't think she realised how it all might effect her daughter and I don't think she deserves some of the really very spiteful comments on here. As for giving her child up for adoption that is an easy thing to say isn't it? Would any of you give your child up for adoption in similar circumstances?

I'm a bit surprised that people appear to think this young woman could control the media circus around this.

If Prince Charles, Tony Blair and all the other powerful men in the country couldn't control the media, why on earth would we think this young woman would be able to?

not hate, twisted or vile, but how the mother allowed her child be photgraphed and exploited to the world, the little girl is going to grow up with newspaper clips of how mummy didn't want her or a twin preg, which is fair enough that was her choice at that age to correct her situation at the time, but to then sue for a large sum of money is wrong to be able to look after her daughter(her daughter that her parents have looked after). I agree the hospital need to review how it happend, but in this world MISTAKES happen that cannot be corrected, how much more could have been done? she was scanned, abortion took place, scanned again then given contraceptive injection! Amazing the little girl is here, When she realised she was still pregnant and too far gone she decided to have and care the baby, but since has decided to sue for the upbringing of the child(fair enough) but a huge sum and allowing the photograph to be published is wrong in my eyes, but thats only my opinion, a child has rights and at this age is far too young to understand what it will mean as she grows up, the mother could of sued behind closed doors and still have protected the child, instead that little girl whereever she grows up will be known as the little girl whos mother sued for her up-keep wether it be at school or out in the street, feel very also i would like to appologise for saying about adoption, i know it can't be easy to give up a child for adoption, but in some circumstances like this one, it might have been a choice for the young woman

she could have controlled the media circus surronding it, by not letting her child be photographed, as i said the child has rights and so does the parent when in comes to publishing photographs, fair enough the story will still have run, but it could have run in a court (privately without the media being allowed in to protect the child) but the mother allowed it, again i don't know much about this so i could be wrong but maybe the woman felt pressured by the media to allow a photograph

Why does her child's picture need to be in the paper? Why didn't she quietly fight this fight after the baby was born?

I smell an ambulance chasing lawyer / reporter behind this. But, nonetheless, SHE must have agreed to ti. And that it what annoys me. Surely this kids' frineds parents have seen the picture. And surely they are talking about it. And some snotty kid at aschool is going to say "Your mum does love you. She didn't even want you." And so on...

Think the mum is terrible for putting her kid in this position. This thread is definitely not about abortion, but the cours of action mum has either initiated or agreed to FOUR YEARS LATER.

Er, why does she deserve compensation? She was the one who decided to spead her legs and think of England? If you are grown up enough to do that, you should be grown up enough to accept responsibility for your actions! Why on earth did she not put the child up for adoption?

I wonder if her daughter will grow up and sue her for the mental anguish she will suffer for knowing that
1)her mother did not want her
2) her mother disposed of her twin
3) her mother abused her right to privacy with respect to this matter.

I really hope the judges tell this grasping gold-digger to grow up, accept her responsibilities,find the father (if she knows who he is), get him to shoulder some of the financial burden and tell her to get a job herself if she has not got one already.

And there endeth the sermon according to speedymama - glad I got that out of my system. People like this woman leave me exasperated!

You go Speedymama!

whoosh did you see the for an ending

Go girlfriend! Totally agree speedymama.

Oh God. "get herself a job if she hasn't got one already". And then we can all criticise her for working outside the home when she should be looking after her child. Why didn't she have the child adopted, when everyone knows that if children are adopted that's an end to a problem, not the start of a new one, and no adopted children ever suffered mental anguish?

I feel weary.

right have found this \link{http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1584236,00.html\here} it says the baby's father died 2 years ago. It also has a small piece about another lady who was adviced to give have a termation for health reasons, she had it and then gave birth to the twin. She was awarded £10,000.

no one saying that though are they?

I still think something is fishy here. She had the abortion at 6 weeks, 33 weeks later she returned to be told that she was pregnant still, and 7 weeks from term. Do your maths it doesn't tally.

ah ha so there was no scan after the procedure, media lies as usual, i stand corrected from an earlier post, doc only felt the stomach to see there was no product left as he put it! Surely with a twin preg they should have scanned to make sure both had been removed, doc guitly as charged, stump up some cash now! Sorry jokes aside she is clearly entitled to sue but without the explotation of the child and the amount of money is a vast amount, and why would the grandfather need to take on a second job to pay for his grandaughter? i hate crap like that, he didn't need to do anything except be there for his daughter/grandaughter

I honestly don't believe that most reasonable people would criticise her for working to support her child Caligula. In my opinion, she is not a victim.

that would mean she went to doc at 39 weeks? and was told she still had 7 weeks to go? is that right or me no good at maths

Speedymama - your turn of phrase does you proud.

Pleased your views are so full of care, compassion and understanding and still so eloquently put.

I am amazed that she has brought this claim. It used to be the case that if you had an undiagnosed pregnancy (ie your doctor didn't work out you were pg until too late to have a termination despite presenting at the doc with obvious symptoms) that you could then make a claim for the upbringing of the child. This has now been changed - if the child is NT then they are now viewed as a "happy accident" and no claim can be brought. If they are not NT then I think you can still claim

I would have thought that this sort of thing would have come under the same category.

But then it is scotland and the law is prob differe nt.

Er Gomez, people who know me know that I care and show compassion. They also know that I do not suffer fools and that I don't abide free loaders. I believe this woman should accept that she is responsible for this child and she should not expect others to pay for her actions and her mistake (she chose to spread her legs remember!)

If that means that I am without compassion and care, well tough!

flutterbee, just read your post.
the abortion issue is not what this thread is supposed to be about. its about a little girl being exposed to the media by her mother.

murder is a strong word. unfortunatley it is what an abortion is. and anyone who kids themselves into thinking it isnt, isnt taking full responsibiluty for their actions. i am very pro choice. and if my dd had to have an aboriton, then i would support her decision fully. but, it is not something to be taken lightly. personal responsibilty!
but this thread isnt baout the choices of the mom