Anyone else feel let down by the non reduction is abortuin time limits?

[NotABanana]

I think the second scan should be at 18 weeks and abortion should only be available up to 20 weeks in extreme circumstances. No excuse for 24 weeks imho.

No.

Not my decision, the elective representatives have done their job, if I didn't agree I'd look at how my MP voted and vote accordingly in the next election.

I don't think people who are carrying a child with an abnormality that is incompatible with life should be forced to carry to term. I think that should be their decision and I hope I'm never in their shoes.

agree vivace, but feel the spirit of the law would have changed if teh 24 limit was lowered and it would have filtered down to doctors - in practice i feel it would make it harder for women facing such difficult decisions.

in my case everything was ok.

I've noticed it fio and it's shocking

Edward's can be terminated at 40 weeks if you wish under the law so 22/24 weeks makes no difference.

Goodness me, there is no abortion law at all in Canada.

so what happens in canada?
theremust be some formof law surely?

bundle- people carrying a baby with Edwards come under enormous pressure to terminate (and not everyone wants to) so I don't think that a change in 22/24 weeks would make any difference.

Mentioned recently was the woman offered a termination at 35 weeks for DS (far far less severe than Edwards- the LD's associated with DS are usually moderate at most) - and I have friends who were put under all sorts of pressure to terminate for DS so I doubt 22/24 weeks would ever make a difference to conditions such as Edward's.

No, no law at all! All attempts to make one have been thrown out by supreme court. Not sure what happens in practise.

Bundle, I don't think the 20 week limit would apply to terminations as a result of anomalies, only those done for social reasons.

Surely if we have to be in line with Europe on most laws and rules, then we should be in line with them on this???

but this has nothing to do with abortion for abnormalities. A termination can be carried out up to 40 weeks for abnormalities, so if the abortion for social reasons was reduced this would not change so that argument is invalid.

I also don't buy the "some people don't find out till late" argument. There are always going to be circumstances where someone finds out too late to terminate. What if a woman finds out at 25 weeks, she is too late then. It's rare that a woman doesn't find out until 20 weeks.

I guess I'm just aware of how political an issue it can be because we have just moved to the States. Luckily as dh has had the snip it's never going to be an issue for me, but if we had had a problem it's not good to feel that your options are reduced. I can't help but think of all the Irish women who come over to England for terminations. That just can't be the way to go.

We aren't in line with Europe for most of our legal system. The EU treaties are quite limited on convergence.

No I don't feel let down I feel relieved.

Now to continue the fight to get politicians, doctors and lawyers to butt out of the decisions a woman makes about her own body. No-one tells men what they have to do with theirs'.

I agree with Turniphead RE the juxtaposition. I don't quite understand that argument, it's abnout choice, if a baby is born prematurely, the doctors fight to save its life, if a woman wants an abortion because she doesn't awnt a baby, that's her choice too.

Re juxtaposition, on one ward they're gving some 80 year olds drugs to keep them alive after heart attacks, on another they're giving them massive amounts of drugs so they can die painlessly. And? So what?

Have never bought the juxtaposition argument.

Nope. (to OP)

And actually I thnk most of the views on the other (intensively and civilly discursive) thread come down in fabour of the staus quo.

I think SpiceMonster's post on the other thread about cortex development and the stage at which pain can be felt and responses are beyond reflex are important to me.

want to say I was relieved that the law was NOT changed. Not because I believe abortion is a wonderful liberating thing- it clearly is not, and whenever one can be avoided, I would personally hope that it would be.

I am just terrified by the assumption that by passing laws we effectively force the birth of unwanted babies. Until this society actively takes care of every pregnant woman and every baby whatever its circumstances we simply have no right to do this. What we can do is improve social support so that more women who find themselves pregnant and in difficulty might feel able to make the decision to have children.

yurt i can't imagine anyone choosing to terminate an edwards pregnancy at 40 weeks.

I am also glad that the limit has not been changed. Yes, this is a very emotive issue but I felt that the pro-life lobby (a term I hate, btw, as it implies that pro-choice people are somehow against life in general) relied far too much on emotive arguments and not good evidence. Of course there is a place for both emotion and evidence but when they are debating an issue that will affect thousands I am glad that evidence won out.

And I am also glad that this debate has been carried out in a sensible manner, with none of the crazed personal attacks we see in the US.

no nor can I bundle, but the option is there and as medics are happy too encourage terminations at 35 weeks for DS I can't see why they would suddenly think again about Edward's if the limit was lowered to 22 weeks.

i supppose i'm thinking of the consultant i was looked after by - she was very level in her thinking and no pressure was applied to me at all