Abortion Age Limit - Your Views...

[Salamander]

This news story has broken in the past 24hrs.

What are everyone's views?

What's the significance of 12 weeks?

My significance of 12wks is that after 12wks the mc rate lowers significantly and the "foetus" starts to develop into a baby more. Heartbeat stronger etc etc.

I dont think the morning after pill should be an birth control method. People should be preventing pg not getting rid of it when its happened. Thats what condoms, the pill, injection, coil and many more things were invented for.
If theres a mistake then its understandable but a mistake doesnt happen 2 months in a row, then you're being quite stupid.

AFAIAC the foetus is part of my body, and I have the ultimate right to determine what happens to my body. Once the foetus becomes capable of independant life, ie after 24w, then it becomes capable of not being part of my body, and only then do I admit anybody else's right to be involved in determining what happens to my body.

That doesn't mean that I am pro- or anti-abortion. But I don't see why my personal ethic, or religious views should determine what another person does with their life or body. Like I say, once the foetus becomes capable of independant life, then there is more of a 'community' issue involvment than a purely personal one. But until that stage I don't believe I or anyone else has the right to impose my or their views on me or anyone else. Other than to protect the mother.

All sorts of things happen two months in a row, jw! Especially if your cycle and system are dirupted through morning-after-pill, and you usually use the pill.

presumably the m-a-p is restricted because of the high level of hormones, rather than for a moralistic reason?

jw - and people who have an accident then get raped? Women whose drunken partners refuse to use a condom and force them at the last minute? People who are simply careless one month and then have a real accident - spplit condo=m, say, the next? people who have a stomach upset which disrupts the pill one month, and a split condom the next?

In any case, continuing with an unwanted pregnancy should never be seen as a 'punishment' for people you (or others) consider to be 'stupid'.

And it starts - I cringed when I saw this thread, as I thought "How long can this go for without someone getting jumped on?"

In fairness we lasted pretty well but Salamander's thread was always going to evoke a strong response.

Let's just try to all be civil ok?

I think you should rad that essay I posted Jensmum. I think everyone should. It's one of the most authoritative, calm, reasoned and nonpartisan investigations available.

Jensmum, I'm not saying it should be used as contraception, just that the idea that it and abortion ARE is a completely misguided opinion.

I just wonder where we get the idea that some women are either so stupid or so blase that they actually would try to use abortion as a method of contraception. It just doesn't stand up to the slightest scrutiny.

And as for making a mistake twice in a row, well it happens to the best of us and has nothing to do with stupidity.

I think it would be very difficult to lower the limit from 24 weeks when most people go for abnormality scans at 20+ weeks. If the limit was lowered it wouldn't leave much time if termination was decided upon.

I think it would be very difficult to lower the limit from 24 weeks when most people go for abnormality scans at 20+ weeks. If the limit was lowered it wouldn't leave much time if termination was decided upon.

All I am saying is my views on the subject which is what the title is asking.

I personally think that abortion is being used to much for birth control and people should be more careful. I'm not saying I'm anti abortion, I think that people in the situations you are suggesting have a right to an abortion. EVERYBODY has a right to an abortion, I mean people who go out every night and have unprotected sex, get pg, have an abortion and are right back out the next night doing it again. Thats the people I was aiming at.

I had a MC with the feotus at 11 wks and it looked like a real little person so I spose that biases my opinion abit.

I just had my abnormality scan at almost 22 weeks. Leaving aside the issue of 22 weeks being late to carry out a termination whatever the law says, even if the legal limit for abortions was reduced by only 1 week, that would leave me with just a few days to decide what to do if there was a problem, and I think I might almost feel pressurised into having a termination.

If the limit was reduced would we all be going for 18 week scans? Does anybody know why scans are generally at around 20 weeks? Is it in any way linked to the abortion law, or is this the earliest that they can do all the checks?

Well MadamePlatypus - I guess these 'advances in medical science technology' which are being discussed would mean earlier scans capable of doing all that the 20 week scans do now.

Currently, they only get a really good view of the heart vessels at 23+ weeks at the Trust we use.

So the technology would have to drastically improve for there to be any chance of giving people time to decide, should the option arise.

In cases where severe abnormalities are diagnosed that terminations can already take place past the 24 week limit. I know someone who had to go through one at 34 weeks.
I agree with the principal that terminations for social reasons/ rather than medical should have an earlier cut off point.
I have experienced induction and delivery of a baby at 15 weeks of pregnancy, for abnormalities that would have been 'incompatible with life'. Prior to 12 weeks these could not have been diagnosed, after 22 weeks ,my baby may well have lived for a short time with assistance. Don't know what my point is really- just that there is no easy answer.

Sorry that you had to go through that babylily

and sorry to others on this thread who have had similar

it is precisley these things that make this such a sore, sensitive, touchy subject

i guess it is good that it is at least being discussed

IIRC as others have said the 24 week limit is not just for medical reasons, as you can have an abortion later than that under certain conditions. However I do feel, as others have stated that although the technology exists etc, women are not offered all the relevant tests in time to decide prior to 20 weeks. This is the problem IMHO. Reduce the limit to 20 weeks, BUT leave the 'conditions' the same that beyond that limit abortions could be performed in some circumstances. There are MN here who have gone through 22 week terminations due to medical issues, they would not have found out problems earlier.

I suppose IMHO there should be a limit for 'abortion on demand' eg where a woman has the right (provided 2 dr's agree) to have a termination. This should be lowered to 20 weeks, or even 18 weeks. HOWEVER this would have to run in conjuction with better access to medical facilities so women are not waiting until 16 weeks to 'booking in' appointmenets. After this women should still have access to terminations for medical reasons, this could be for the baby or the mother, and include mental issues as I cannot imagine anyone being 'FORCED' to carry a baby to term simply because they were in denial or too ill to seek help earlier.

I do think 24 weeks is too much as I have seen babies of 22 weeks surviving. And I had a 27 weeker.

I'm sorry for your loss Jenswish, I'm sure it's trauma's like yours that makes this issue so emotive. I'm really not getting at you Jenswish, but I am so puzzled at where your opinion comes from if it isn't backed up by facts? Women have to battle against so much prejudice, to the point where people seriously think that they use abortion as birth control. Something that isn't actually possible due to restrictions already in place.

How many women do you think act as irresponsibly as you describe, having unprotected sex every night, having an abortion and being back doing exactly the same the day after? Do you really think there are a lot of women like this?

Really, it's a genuine question, I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm not going to call anyone any names. I just don't understand.

I dont think there are alot I just think that it is strange when you hear on the radio, news, newspapers how the abortion rate is growing. Surely people understand now how to stop it getting there in the first place. IYKWIM.

I'm not trying to start an argument either and no where along here have I said for medical reasons (or reasons as you have said) should an abortion not be allowed, I'm just saying that there must be a reason that the rate is increasing.

monkeytrousers - I have personlly seen women come back for repeated abortions because they have not used contraception. The biggest reason I have seen is lack of use of contraception so it is greater than you think. It is not difficult to obtain an abortion and I do think the limit should be lowered. This does not affect women with abnormalities as there is no time restriction currently for abortion in those circumstances.
For unwanted pregnancy, abortion is a type of 'birth control' whether we like it or not.

That was what I was trying to get across and I think you explained it better than me Mears thanks.

Are people honestly having abortions at 20 weeks for non-medical reasons? Would the number of abortions be reduced if the abortion limit was reduced? Surely people who have repeat abortions don't keep waiting till late in pregnancy to have them? I don't know the answer, I'm just wondering.

I spose what I was trying to explain was not that the age needed to be reduced because I dont think it does especially for abnormal babies. But maybe that something should be done about the amount of abortions for non-medical reasons.

I probably shouldnt have had this conversation on this thread.

I think that the rules are too loose for people who go out and think "it doesnt matter if I get pg, I'll just have an abortion" thats my problem

jenwish, I think that many others feel that way too. That is why the limit could be reduced, but not in the 'medical' cases.

Mears is right a lot of women do have repeated terminations, it should be harder for THOSE women and by reducing the limit MAY help prevent that.

Excluding people who take precautions that don't work, I think that most people who knowingly have sex without protection don't actually think at all. In the same way they don't think about STD's etc. I can't believe there are lots of people who seriously weigh up the inconvenience of getting a condom/saying no and the 'inconvenience' of having an abortion and think they will risk getting pregnant, whether they are 14 or 32.

Jensmum, assuming that they do think this way, what do you think should happen - they should have the baby and put it up for adoption? they should have the baby and keep it?(not trying to be agressive - just interested in your opinion)

tbh I'm not sure that reducing the limit would help in the cases of people who use abortion as contraception. I would imagine that many of these abortions are carried out well before 24 weeks anyway.

I do think that the limit should be lowered, I suppose what I'm saying is that it would have to be lowered a long way to prevent this kind of thing.

Not sure if the religious factor was brought up due to me mentioning Catholism. Just wanted you to know that my dh is catholic and he does not believe in abortion but he would never air his views to somebody facing that decision. I did not have the test to indicate a possiblility of Downes due to the fact that abortion, for us, would not have been an option. However, if I had a scan that may have indicated severe medical issues then who knows what I may have decided on, dh being a catholic or not? It really is such a difficult one.

And for what it's worth I know a 17 year old who has already had one abortion and is booked in for her second due to not using contraception wisely. She is not passed 12 weeks though.

Thanks everyone for adding your views and opinions to this thread.

It should be sent to any formal discussions and read aloud.