If the Tories win, Cameron will support plans to reduce the upper abortion limit

[policywonk]

yikes

Would like limit to be reduced. But only when acces to abortion is made much easier.
Make it a far simpler and quicker process and easier to acces earlier on.

Shocked that anyone would support abortion to term for all women. Doesn't even bear thinking about.

FenellaFudge but surely as they won't lower the rate for disabled babies, they should make it all the same.

it iwll be impossible to stop abortion for viable babies with disabilities, as women ultimately have the choice as to continue with the pregnancy or not

the percentage of women who terminate after 20 weeks is tiny, absolutely tiny

it is just an attention grabbing soundbite policy to appeal to women voters

the limit is high, but i think it should remain where it is , women terminating after 20 weeks will be doing so due to complex and difficult circumstances.

i think that access to abortion needs to be easier actually. a lot of so called counselling services are pro life/chrisitan and are not impartial. I am sure as has been said, HCPs can put their own value judgemenmt on termination and make it more difficult.

women need to be confident if they want a termination, they can get access to a safe,quick and NHS termination as quickly as possible

I get fed up of people using the example of termination for disability as a reason to keep the 24 week limit
The FPA woman in the article should know better

I'm not sure where I stand on the limit for abortion for social reasons - no limit may be better

Personally I like to see the limit for all abortions reduced - whether it be becuase a disability has been detected or not.

If someone killed a day old baby there would be out rage. I don't see the difference between this and aboting a baby who hasn't been born.

I do not think there should be a limit on abortion.

No-one who who feels they have any choice has a late termination.
A woman's body is still a woman's body and I feel she should have the ultimate say as to what is in it or not.

I think there should be abortion on demand, absolutely on demand, up unil 12 weeks, and with counselling and more support after that. And more sex and sexual and emotional behaviour education, from an early age. 8, probably.

I could concede that termination of babies after a certain number of weeks could be by induction, and the live feotus / baby (once born) offered for adoption. And that that should ,of course, include disabled babies.

i disagree ,lynette

i disagree because the rights of the woman, and her right to her mental and physical well being has to be paramount to that of the baby she is carrying.

making it harder for women to get safe, legal terminations is going to create more problems and issues

women cannot ever be considered vessels to simply carry and incubate a baby

it does become a difficult debate when the baby being terminated could be capable of independent life, but i would err on the side of the mother's rights first.

yes, killing a one day old baby would be infanticide, but an unborn baby has different legal status

the morals and ethics are a totally different argument

The current limit of 24 weeks is linked to the viability of foetus up to that point. Nothing has changed to increase the viability of foetuses at 23 weeks or earlier, so to reduce the limit would be to sever that link.

Once the link between the limit and viability is removed, it becomes a moral question, and the limit can then be progressively eroded for no good reason apart from the tastes of the current government. It needs to stay at 24 weeks to ensure that access to abortion is safeguarded.

I remain shocked and upset every time I read that abotion to term for diasbilty or deformity is legally acceptable. It speaks in the most dreadful way to how society views disabled people.
I recognise that it is rare but it still horrifys me.

Sorry. I recognise that is an inarticulate view and a highly emotional one but I can't really help it.

I totally agree, Pagwatch. I do worry that as more disabilities are able to be detected, the fewer disabled people will be on this earth.

I can see, however, how some people wold see that as a good thing.

I agree pagwatch, discrimination starts before babies are born

I too find it morally horrible that there is a difference between termination for disability, and for other reasons.

And think that the only rational solutio is to say it is the mother's choice at any point.

Which for the reasons Lulumamn has outlined, is the overall position I take.

I TRUST women to take responsibility for their choices. And if they can't be trusted to make that choice (as some probably can't!), should they be trusted with a child they are FORCED to bear? I don't think so.

As Wem said, isn't the current limit set as it is highly, highly unlikely a baby born before 24 weeks will survive? Reducing the limit smacks of pro-lifeism to me.

I don't agree with abortion at all except when the child will not survive at birth.

But that is my personal religeous view and so I think that what Cameron proposes is a step in the right direction.

i echo those sentiments blu. it is repugnant on many levels, but the mother's rights stand first.

Exactly MadameCastafiore - a step in that direction, a very worrying one in my opinion.

wem's argument makes sense to me.

I recognise that it's a tremendously difficult moral issue and I can understand why some people find late abortions repugnant. I also see that the different provisions for disabled foetuses are difficult to justify (except perhaps where the conditions that are diagnosed are severely life-limiting and painful?)

Seems like a cheap attempt to gain popularity to me.

No-one is better placed to make a decision about a pregnancy than the woman herself, with advice from her doctor(s).

People don't have late abortions for fun. And even if one or two people in that position were irresponsible, does anyone really think the best cure for that is being forced to carry an unwanted baby to term?

Fingers crossed Nadine 'pro life' Dorries is booted out by the electorate over the exes scandal anyway. After wailing, ooh, the public is horrid, we are all just waiting for the first MP to top himself. And following it up with 'oh, someone broke my patio furniture, SEE, all this fuss about expenses is just nasty people being nasty to us poor ickle MPs.

Yes Len, it does seem odd when you put them side-by-side. I'm not completely convinced by the strategy of treating a foetus and a baby as though they were completely different things - but if you remove this distinction, a lot of things get very sticky.

Is Dorries likely to get thrown out at the GE? Would be great if she does (IMO).

Agree with Blu. Except in a very few cases the experience for the fetus of a late termination is identical whether disabled or not. And the trauma to the mother is presumably the same. Access to termination is IMO part of a civilized society so allow it to be the mother's decision until birth. I can't imagine there'll be a rush of people trying to access late termination and it will define a disabled life as equal to an apparently non- disabled one.

If you think late termination is ok for disabled babies but not for apparently non disabled i'd be interested in why.