UK woman convicted of abortion

[Veterinari]

Full story here www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/woman-given-suspended-sentence-for-having-abortion-in-the-uk-a6968676.html

Very sad. Is there a will in NI to update legislation on this issue? As it stands everyone loses

Its just an awful case but the thing I keep coming back to is while it's easy to blame the flatmates this is about NI law and the fault lies there for me. I'd be really upset at the thought of a foetus in my bin also, but its NI's law that led to it and everyone being in a horrible situation

Which came first the chicken or the egg?

NI law is there because a significant minority - like the flatmates - support it and want it to continue and impose it on the majority who want changes.

If there are foetus in the bin, that they don't like then that it a consequence of abortion laws being so tight. The whole thing is about the fallacy that the existence that laws will prevent the demand/need for abortions. There will be abortions whether they are legal or illegal. The morality comes in deciding how you should allow abortions to be carried out - either safely or unsafely and whether this places the most vulnerable in society at most risk. The morality of whether 'lives will be saved' is something of a red herring, if women are merely travelling or carrying out abortions themselves.

If people believe tight laws are the moral thing to do and that people should be punished then they need to accept this type of scenario as a reality and a consequence of their beliefs and something that will happen. If they are moral people, they should seek to help and support someone, who in their desperation does something they see as so immoral. You know, do what Jesus would do and forgive and show compassion rather than dragging the story through the media with fire and brimstone. If they wanted to prevent other women from doing the same, there are compassionate and caring ways to get the message across without being judgmental in the process.

So I'm afraid, I don't think you can separate the two. Blame does go to as much to those who support the laws to remain unchanged and unchallenged their legality, legitimacy and morality as well as the law itself.

I'm sorry, but morality has lots of aspects and covers lots of bases. You can be opposed to one thing but still show morality in how you behave in response to the consequences of your belief. After all morality about treating all human life with respect and dignity, includes treating those who do 'wrong' with respect and dignity too, even if you disagree with their actions.

If the woman lacked morality, then so did her flatmates in their actions too. They don't get a cop out for saying 'its the law' if they support the very existence of that law.

I agree redtoothbrush. My point is that it wouldnt have happened had the law been in line with the rest of the UK's and that's what needs to change. Slagging off the flatmates in this case isn't going to help other women in the same situation.

I don't think clinical practice can ever operate in a moral vacuum though.
It doesn't. It is rigorously scrutinised by ethics panels.

Slagging off the flatmates in this case isn't going to help other women in the same situation.

I beg to differ.

If it helps others who are opposed to abortion, to act in a more compassionate way, despite their beliefs then at least someone else isn't going to get the additional crap that's gone along with this case and made it even more repellent. Its the additional circumstances surrounding the case that contribute to it being even worse than the law by its self.

"I do not agree with you, but I am going to simply give you the help and support you need now rather than judging you and compounding things" is a way that anti-abortionists can behave without supporting abortion or being immoral themselves.

I'm an atheist but because people often evoke religious reasons for acting a certain way, I do wonder if they ever think, "What would Jesus do" as redtoothbrush suggested.

Thinking about Bernadette Smyhth and her hate-filled organisation, I wonder if the thought ever crosses her mind as she calls for the suspended sentence to be increased as it's "too lenient".

Augusta
I say that these females have been subjected to vitriol because on this thread they have been called liars or accused of lying at least 16 times, when none of the posters have any actual proof that any of what they said was lies,
One lady has been accused of conspiring to get herself a baby 6 times
They have been told they should feel shame forever at least 6 times
They have been called disgusting
They have been called scumbags at least four times
They have been called despicable at least twice
They have been wished to be haunted until their dying day
They have been told they are irrelevant
They have been called vindictive at least twice
They have been called arseholes twice
Their statements have been called bollocks
They have been called irredeemable
They have been called awful human beings
Their motives have been assigned to wanting punishment at least 4 times
They have been called small minded
They have been called thick
They have been called fucking vindictive bitches
They have been said to fuck her over
They have been described as talking ball shit
They have been called unchristian
They have been described as not having a conscience
They have been called abhorrent
They have been called despicable
They have been said to be motivated by revenge
They have been called sanctimonious twats
They have been told what goes on in their home is none of their fucking business
They have been told their motivation was self serving justification
They have been called bloody nasty
One has been called an unwell woman
They have been told their motivators were spite and nastiness
They have been told they were traumatised my arse
They have been told being harassed on line is their just desserts
They have been called judgemental cunts

In my book this is vitriol and they have my utmost sympathy.

That list must have taken you a long time to compose vintage.

Though it might have been quicker for you just to report the posts you felt broke talk guidelines.

Not very long at all actually.
Witnessing what spews forth helps me form my opinions.

It's clear that they lied. They said that they found an identifiably male baby, when it's just not possible if it was a ten week foetus.

They also lied when they claimed that the woman asked for scissors because the foetus was hanging out of her on an umbilical cord. That isn't possible either.

They lied when they said where they described in which circumstances they found it.

*they lied when they described.

My apologies for terrible grammar there

If it was a 10-12 week foetus (as estimated) then it is possible that they saw what they interpreted was a male sex organ, and which in fact did turn out to be a male sex organ.
You don't know what occurred because you were not there.
If they looked in the bin and it was in a plastic bag then there is no reason to suppose it wasn't.
These people's reactions and actions have been interpreted, represented and described in neither accurate, truthful nor civilised ways.
They have been subjected to vitriol and invective on this thread and the posts say more about those making them than the ladies themselves.
The girl in question would appear to be moving on with her life, having become pregnant again relatively shortly afterwards, and now with her baby and partner.
The two ladies who rented a room to a stranger and were brought into a situation they had no option of walking away from, save moving house, have been bullied on line and have now to try and get on with THEIR own lives. I wish them well.

The girl [sic] in question would appear to be moving on with her life, having become pregnant again relatively shortly afterwards, and now with her baby and partner.

What relevance does this have to anything?

You don't know what occurred because you were not there
Neither were you. We just have their accounts to go on. Which have been pointed out to be full of holes and contradictory.

If they looked in the bin and it was in a plastic bag then there is no reason to suppose it wasn't.
I thought it was folded neatly into a towel? Which was it? Screwed up in a plastic bag or in a towel?

And I too fail to see why her moving on is relevant. Good on her for it.

I think it's obvious why vintage mentioned the woman moving on. Just wanted to know what she says her reason is.

Erm, your point is vintage?

I think things can be summed up pretty quickly. If they had TOLD THE TRUTH then I doubt there would have been a reaction of a similar nature.

TELLING THE TRUTH is not a hard thing to do. Especially if you are trying to take the moral high ground. If you fail to TELL THE TRUTH you fail to take the moral high ground I'm afraid.

So no. They don't get sympathy because THE TRUTH would have been enough and they should let the law do the rest.

Instead they were trying to make a political point. When you try to make a political point then actually you move from being 'victim' to something else entirely different and it is fair to criticise the argument and indeed methods used if they are of a dubious nature. They have acted in ways that would not be out of place in a dirty tricks election campaign. Please do not suggest that their subsequent actions have not been in any way politically motivated because its just insulting everyone's intelligence if you do.

Beside which in the process of lying, they are walking a thin line and were in grave danger of prejudicing the process of law.

HTH

One indisputable action is that the other women called the police to report this woman, having a good degree of awareness about how NI would view this self-management of a medical procedure.

I expect that's the reason for 'vitriol.'

If it was a 10-12 week foetus (as estimated) then it is possible that they saw what they interpreted was a male sex organ, and which in fact did turn out to be a male sex organ.

They may have seen what they interpreted as a male sex organ, but there is no way that they actually saw one. A week after the termination I strongly doubt they saw anything.

Vintage, are you in any way prepared to accept that they have demonstrably lied and that that is not a morally defensible thing to do, particularly in circumstances when they have done so in order to vilify another person in a highly public manner?

The problem with the woman moving on is that she now has a criminal conviction, which on any basis is going to circumscribe her life choices from now on. Are you happy about that? Is it the action of a moral person to cause that to happen when there are alternatives to dealing with your personal concerns?

They may have seen what they interpreted as a male sex organ, but there is no way that they actually saw one. A week after the termination I strongly doubt they saw anything.

They saw the remains very shortly afterwards, I believe. They didn't wait for a week to do that. So scratch that objection.

I don't think they were lying, necessarily, if they saw what seemed to them evidence that this was a male foetus. It's not as if they came out with the words 'We saw a penis'.

It's entirely normal for there to be differences in recollection and differences in reporting as well. If you look at how any major event is recollected and reported, you will see the same. It's more likely that a completely 'accurate' story has been rehearsed and is not an eye witness account. It's also common for eye witnesses to genuinely believe whatever they were saying, even the things that aren't accurate. Very interesting field of research. This is all the more true if the people involved are undergoing high emotions. But you want to believe they're lying because it means they're definitely scumbags so hey ho. Actually, you have said the thread would be different if they hadn't lied, somehow implying that people would have tolerated their actions if going to the police was all they'd done. But the start of this thread shows that's not the case at all. They were hung drawn and quartered before the first 'lie' was mentioned here.

To those saying the pro-life cause falls down at rape, I would say that the 'women's rights' arguments falls down in a similar fashion at denying women the right to do what they want with their bodies post viability. Both issues involving a bit of a balancing act. To those who would say pro-lifers don't care about rape victims, I would say their attitude towards children suffering foetal abnormalities such as Down's Syndrome isn't great either. To those who accuse pro-lifers of women hating, I would say that this thread is a great demonstration of pro-choicers ability to also hate women.

I would have more time for the women's rights argument in abortion if these rights didn't magically disappear and reappear according to the desirability of the baby.

Augusta
Your timeline does not appear to coincide with what the flat mates described: cramping started on Friday night, the abortion was completed on Saturday, later on Saturday the girl put the plastic bag in the bin, the 3rd housemate returned to the house on Sunday after the weekend, at which point she and the older lady looked in the plastic bag in their bin where they saw the foetus on a towel. There was no week's delay in seeing it.
As sex organs are fully formed by 14 weeks it follows that they are partially formed by 12 weeks. They initially appear as a protuberance which could be mistaken for maleness.
In a List of items recommended to have to hand while awaiting a natural miscarriage in the first trimester to take its course is a pair of scissors. Fortunately I have no experience of this.
No, I certainly do not accept that these two females have deliberately lied; and certainly not for the purpose ascribed to them by you.
A criminal conviction does not preclude one from working, although they usually do have to be disclosed as part of an application process.
Frankly, I am more concerned for the mental health of the two flat mates who live in this small land and who have to suffer abuse such as that evidenced on this thread.

I dont understand the last sentence gone

Can you explain it again please

A criminal conviction does not preclude one from working, although they usually do have to be disclosed as part of an application process.

Please tell me this isn't you justifying the flatmates phoning the police and the woman being given a suspended sentence. If it is, you sound heartless.

I'm still waiting for your comments re: the unlawful law and why I have to butt out btw.

Red tooth,
If that is directed towards me then I'm sure you are aware that the Attorney General is the person who is at present dealing with that; judges rulings are quite commonly overruled.
As to "butting out", I would be absolutely certain that I would never use that term. You may be someone interpreting fact as opinion, I.e." My opinion is that English people should not decide N. Irish Law" - when actually I was stating what is the status quo I.e that N. Irish citizens vote in Assembly elections and thereby choose those who legislate here. That is a fact.