Personhood laws for foetuses - risks for all women of child-bearing age

[DebrisSlide]

I can't say much about this in text because I am frothing beyond coherence, but given the muted response in FWR, I thought I'd see what the wider MN community thought about this not a DM article

Rational response (imho) here

[OrangeFizz99]

Its a shame that SGB's posts were deleted. Late abortion and sex selective abortion are extremely uncomfortable subjects but it seems illogical to limit abortion based on reasons and time limits if you have decided that a woman has a right to choose.

Handmaid's Tale references everywhere. I totally heart Margaret Atwood.

I struggle very badly to understand people who say they are pro choice but support this law. However, on mn the definition of pro choice is fairly shaky as I found out the hard way a few months ago.

[AuroraRoared]

Minipie - yes, I agree the article isn't perfect, but I do like the fact that it does effectively demonlish the "but what about the baybee's human rights" argument. We don't allow actualised, born human beings to live off others like this, so why should it be a special case for pregnancy?

I do think the question of whether or not abortion of pregnancy should also always mean death of the foetus is an interesting one, and I've read lots of persuasive arguments that it shouldn't necessarily if the foetus is of a gestational age where it could live outside the mother's body.

I disagree though that there should be any standard of a minimally decent samaritan - women should be as free to act selfishly as anyone else!

[minipie]

Yes, I agree, it does a good job of debunking that argument. In essence: even if a foetus is a person, no person has a right to live parasitically off another person.

Re late abortion vs early delivery of unwanted baby: I am not persuaded about this. I had a premature baby and having looked a lot into the impact of prematurity I cannot advocate any "solution" that would increase the numbers of premature babies, especially premature babies whose mothers by definition did not want them. I actually think late abortion is preferable to this idea... (That's a gut reaction, I haven't thought it through fully).

[NumptyNameChange]

i am reporting this post to request MNHQ explains why SGBs posts have been deleted. given there were no personal attacks by all of our reckonings it just looks like censorship or like someone with prejudice in the way had their finger on the button in this instance.

[AuroraRoared]

Yes, Mini I totally accept that argument too. I am not a parent (yet!) and I don't have any experience of prematurity, so I don't really have enough knowledge on the subject to make an informed judgment. I just find it an interesting topic, and I think one which we have room to explore without having to threaten the rights of women.

[NumptyNameChange]

the woman would still be a mother and under the law now there is no right to anonymity in the adoption process or even in sperm donation.

[NumptyNameChange]

besides if you could sue a mother for potentially having caused fas surely you could just as well sue her for not carrying you to term and your subsequent health conditions that were a result of premature birth.

[nennypops]

I asked about SGB's deleted posts in Sitestuff - www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/2002206-Personhood-thread-in-In-the-News . No response yet.

[duchesse]

The woman has legal status, the foetus does not. The foetus cannot exist without its mother. That automatically makes it more vulnerable if the mother is not hellbent on protecting it.

Does that mean the foetus gains rights before birth over its less than careful mother? Of course not.

In an ideal world, expectant mothers would all be skipping through the daisies about being pregnant and nothing would ever go wrong in their lives.

We do not live in an ideal world. I am perfectly at ease with the woman having all the rights and the foetus none because the alternative is frankly fucking scary.

[minipie]

Oh we wouldn't be skipping anywhere duchesse, that would be too risky, we might trip and hurt the foetus.

[StealthPolarBear]

good post duchesse. It's a short jump to restricting women's life further. Maybe I shouldn't have had children as I didn't stay home with them for the first five year's of their lives?

[StealthPolarBear]

all this obsession with hopping, skipping and jumping!

[AuroraRoared]

Numpty - definitely as the law currently stands, abortion of pregnancy leading to premature (live) birth would not be possible. But we don't have abortion on demand at any stage of pregnancy in this country, so to a certain extent it is a moot point I think! I was just musing on the different ways in which we can look at the question of abortion of pregnancy until the point of birth, that's all.

And I completely, totally disagree with a child or local authority or anyone else being able to sue a mother for harm done to the child while it was in utero.

My point was more looking at what sort of system we could have if we reformed current abortion laws significantly, and as part of that we would have to accept more fully than we do at the moment I think, that a mother is not legally responsible for the wellbeing of a foetus in utero.

I think we're pretty much on the same page on the whole FAS question.

[AuroraRoared]

(And sorry, I do accept it was a bit of a thread derail, but these questions are all linked aren't they?)

[OrangeFizz99]

Nice sum up duchesse!

[AmyMumsnet]

Hi all,

Thanks for flagging SGB's posts to us. The first one in particular looked a bit beyond the pale to the person on duty - many MNers, of course, have suffered the tragedy of losing a baby pre-term, and SGB's words about 'a few hundred dead or damaged foetuses' were reported by a few people as being dismissive. But on reflection we can see that that was probably the wrong call, so we've reinstated it now. We would be grateful, though, if posters could remain sensitive to the feelings of other MNers whose feelings about pre-term pregnancies are understandably very raw.

Apols for any confusion in the interim.

[NumptyNameChange]

that's the right call.

of course it's important to be sensitive to people's feelings however issues still need to be discussed and i think the nature of the topic makes pretty clear that it could be triggering for someone such as you describe.

[BackOnlyBriefly]

Glad to see the posts back.

I just want to add that in my view this wasn't something said for the sake of it, but an important point that needed making in response to arguments that the reverse should be true.

[AuroraRoared]

I think that is the right decision too. These things need to be discussed openly and without censorship of people's views.

While some mnetters will of course be upset by discussions about prematurity, abortion etc, that doesn't mean we shouldn't have them. It is fairly obvious from the thread title what sorts of topics are likely to be being discussed.

Life doesn't always work out the way that we want it to - I want to have a baby and so far it isn't going exactly to plan but that doesn't mean that I think posters should just not post about unwanted pregnancies etc because I might be upset. (Fwiw, I wouldn't be - what upsets me is women being denied bodily autonomy!)

[pointythings]

Well done, MNHQ. This is a huge and difficult issue, but it really needs discussion - especially because it does not seem to be happening in the mainstream media. Sleepwalking into a situation where we put women in prison because their lives don't conform to the ideal of happy pregnancy would be a disaster.

[minipie]

Right call MN. SGB's post was stark but not dismissive IMO. Much better to have posters who openly acknowledge the logical consequences of their position, however unpalatable, than posters who wrap things up in clean linen.

[CoteDAzur]

I hope MNHQ takes this opportunity to train some of the newer recruits about the meaning of free speech. Posts are being deleted at much higher proportions these days, and not always for deletable offenses.

"Beyond the pale" and "dismissive" are not grounds for deleting posts, unless Talk Guidelines have significantly changed since the last time I looked.

[OrangeFizz99]

It is a difficult subject matter and it is the very fact that in society we don't like to push on beyond the initial horror that laws like this can get passed.

[perfectstorm]

Good post, Duchesse.

Glad SGB's posts have been restored, too.

[AuroraRoared]

Good point Orange