Abortion limit should stay at 24 weeks - do you feel different about abortion after having a baby?

[TheDullWitch]

It is the 40th anniversary of the abortion act and I do feel that there is a generation of 20-somethings who take this right for granted and are doing nothing whilst others seek to chip it away.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7059169.stm

And no-one is 'comadeering' terms. Each side of the discussion uses the term which they feel best highlights the key factor in their argument. For those who are 'Pro-choice', the moral high-ground is staked out on 'choice'. For those who are 'Pro-life', the ground is staked out on 'life', i.e. the life in utero.

madamez, i don't want to enter the euthanasia debate. All I was saying is that human rights are the same for everyone, no matter their condition, because of being "human".

As suebarooeoo says -and leaving aside any moral or religious considerations- thinking logically and being consistent with my belief that a foetus is a human being, I have to disagree with abortion.

Well said, givemewine.

What's really also needed is to stop scapegoating lone female parents, too, and start going after the partners who leave the kids they chose to sire to the whims of fate without so much as a second thought.

-------

Quoted for truth. Damn right.

Agree with SueBarroeee, GiveMeWine and BonitaMia.

Well, my view is that I am pro-life and agree with abortions. I also happen not to believe that life begins at the point of fertilisation. I beleive in life for the living.

I haven't had a termination but I am pro choice up to a point. My views became distorted when as a student nurse I had to go into theatre with a women who was having her FIFTH abortion. That is IMO disgusting. I think once is a mistake, 2 is careless and stupid but three is like using it as a form of contraception. Everyone has their own reasons and I don't judge people having ONE or even TWO, however, I think that if someone requests a third then they should have to agree to sterilisation at the same time, or keep it and have it adopted if they feel so strongly that they don't want it. I also had to scrub for terminations whilst I was TTC which was awful. I suppose having seen first hand how brutal it is I would like to see stricter controls. I have also seen the unhappiness and guilt felt by the patient afterwards, which is just as awful.

It's all very well to say the foetus/embryo has human rights, but that doesn't necessarily lead to saying no to abortion. The mother also has human rights and for the foetus' rights to take precedence means the mothers rights have been over-ridden. Should a mother be forced to carry a baby even though it would cause her death, or extreme physical or mental suffering? If you say no then you are putting the mother's rights over the baby's. If yes, then the baby's over the mothers.

Even if you bring the rights of the foetus into it it is still a question of conflict of rights and the mother's could legitimately take precedence over the foetus'.

anyone? anyone?

if having an abortion at 24 weeks for 'social' reasons is acceptable to you, then have you got a problem with women who have abortions because their child is a specific gender - usually female?

this is their 'social' reason, is it less valid than just not wanting to have a baby for any other reason?

Forgot to answer the op!! 24 wks is IMO way too late. The senses are formed and at that point it is a baby, not a foetus. I think that the anomally scan should be brought forward to enable action to be taken sooner if needed.

If that is the "social" reason, thne yes, I would think it was wrong. In Glasgow (which, like Lothian, unless things have changed, only "routinely" does 12 week scans) they have a ploicy of not telling the sex - probably partly for this reason.

However, I do not know enough about the circumstances of those "social" abortions that are carried out at 24 weeks - do any of us really know - to be able to comment on what those individuals are going through.

Seeing as no-one has even replied to me about a friend who found out she was expecting at 18weeks, after being violently raped, what are your views on this (to those who believe that life starts at fertilisation)?
She had the abortion late, was she wrong?

Since having a chilad I have definitely changed my views on aborttion.

I believe even more that every child should be a pro-actively wanted child.

I think that early termination - before 12 weeks (and with as much speedy efficiency to mean that most, in practice, can be done at 7-8 weeks) should be on demand.

Beyond that I think that the woman needs lots of very special counselling and supoprt - I can't personally see myself being involved in a termination at a late stage (unless I was told my baby had a condition incompatible with lif...and even then, after reading lots of experiences on MN I would now think twice) BUT I think that a woman forced to carry a baby inside her that she really does not want growing inside her body is a terrible position to put somone in...and I never, ever think that anyone should be forced to have a baby in any kind of punitive dynamic - 'it's her fault she got pregnant, she should put up with it'. How can that ever lead to a happy childhood?

Lothian has a policy of not telling you the sex even if you go in for scan after the 13 week one for medical reasons.

Don't know if it's to avoid lawsuits if they get it wrong or if because some will abort or a combination of both.

jobe04 - I can't begin to imagine how your friend might have felt...so certainly wouldn't start saying whether she was right or wrong.

if she wanted a termination, I hope she was able to get one.

I understand people who believe that life, as in developing cells, or an embryo, is sacrosanct. But if you make one exception, then you are being pragmatic. If jobe40's freind should be able to have an abortion, but someone who had consensual sex should not, then you are, in effect, saying that the baby is your 'punishment' for carelessness, an accident or whatever.

jo- in answer to your friend, no, I don't think she was wrong under such dreadful circumstances. That would have been a constant reminder and she would have suffered immeasurably if she had gone ahead with the pregnancy.

Tori...thanks for the reply. Just wondering what some of the pro-lifers feel about it!

Only read OP.

Difficult subject. I've never had an abortion, but I almost think that there should be two levels to this.

One for people who want to termitate a pregnancy for personal reasons at perhaps 16 weeks? Not sure.

There would need to be another level though, to allow terminations following a 20 week scan, should there be anything wrong.

I know that very few pregnancies actually get terminated after the first trimester in reality, but more and more women are having to wait ages for a termination, meaning they need a more invasive and traumatic procedure.

Jofeb04 - personally, I believe that there are plenty of methods out there to end a pregnancy much earlier.

I think the example of your friend would be extremely rare to say the least, as MAPP and 'chemical abortion' (sorry, dont know the correct terminology for that) would be available and in general, after a rape, most women would test for pregnancy.

But then, I dont believe in no termination of pregnancy at all - just would prefer it to be done as early as possible.

'But if you make one exception, then you are being pragmatic. If jobe40's freind should be able to have an abortion, but someone who had consensual sex should not, then you are, in effect, saying that the baby is your 'punishment' for carelessness, an accident or whatever.'

Then by that same token, having a late-term abortion because your child is a certain gender is also acceptable. After all, the person doesn't want to go through with the pregnancy, for whatever reason.

So Blu do you think its perfectly acceptable to use abortion as a means of contraception? Bearing in mind that each one costs thousands of pounds. Each one is usually preventable (rape excluded obviously).

Blu, I agree with you about exceptions, which is why I don't make any. I'll put this delicately, but I am not without experience in the extreme examples. I'm just very wary of bringing personal examples into the conversation, because that's when things get pejorative and unhelpful.

No I am saying that choice is good within reason, but it has come to be exploited by careless women who don't use contraception because they know they can have an abortion instead.

No, I don't think it is 'perfectly acceptable' to use abortion as a routine contraceptive method.

But I don't think that banning or restricting abortion is the way to prevent it.

The idea that people who are too stupid / careless / to think about contraception should be in charge of a baby is not good.

We need serious and radical interventions at an early age with both boys and girls...but it won't be allowed because the very idea of talking to children about sexual relationships sends the powers that be into a frenzy of moral outrage.

The teenage pg rate in the Netherlands is much lower than our. The age of starting sexual relations is much hihger than ours. And the Netherlands has one of the most liberal upfront environments for talking about sex in the world (as far as i can see0.

oh I do absolutely agree Blu. We are completely backwards here for sexual education. Its all closetted until secondary school, when many girls and boys are, sadly, no longer virgins.

I agree with Blu, especially about sex ed. Frankly, if young people knew there were enjoyable sexual options that carried no risk of pregnancy, and also the various ways of preventing pregnancy, we'd have fewer damn pregnancies.