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

[policywonk]

yikes

I'm in favour of the right to choose so don't distinguish between disabled and non-disabled fetuses at all. BUT I think there are good reasons for allowing termination up to term for disability, even if it's not available for other reasons. For instance, if I was pregnant and my baby had, very sadly, a condition that meant it would die shortly after birth, I would want to have that option available.

but it is done for non life threatnig disaibity as well

here

"In England and Wales in 2002 there were 175, 932
abortions of which 2,874 were performed at 20 weeks and above. Over the past two decades the number performed after 24 completed weeks has varied from 60
to 101."

i can't find any more current definite statistics than that - can anyone?

i think its vital when debating 'a small number' of terminations after 24 weeks that we know what we are talking about exactly.

i found a times online argument from 2005 with much the same argument since the 3D technology was introduced in scanning.

the thing is that this is such apolitical hot potato that it won't be touched by anyone.

One would have to be a very strong polititian with strong potision and backing to touch this issue

it won't get changed.

my personal opinion is that at at 12 weeks the fetus squirms if prodded, neurological connections in the brain. touching the palms makes the fingers close, touching the soles of the feet makes the toes curl down and touching the eyelids makes the eye muscles clench. at 16 wks The circulatory system and urinary tract are in full working order, and s/he's inhaling and exhaling amniotic fluid through his lungs.

so yes it should be lowered.

if this infringes on personal choice then we need to look towards education and prevention. we are in an age where this shouldn't be happening anymore.

the vast majority of terminations are carried out before 12 weeks....

i'd keep the law as it is.

2shoes - it would be impossible to draw up a policy that said 'you can have an abortion for these particular conditions but nothing else' - just unworkable. Where would you draw the line? You'd end up with terrible anomalies.

If we are to keep abortion as an option for babies that are very severely disabled/have conditions incompatible with life, then we have to leave it fairly open and up to the individual woman and her doctors. No-one knows better than them.

but your still saying it is ok to have late abortions for disabled babies, babies that will be viable(I am not talking about not conpatable with life) why should there be a different cut of point for disability?
surely it should be the same

I'm saying it should be entirely up to the woman concerned and her doctors - personally I wouldn't have an artifical cut off date or this distinction between disability and non-disabled fetuses.

But given we do have a different cut-off point, I wouldn't start trying to define what counts as 'disability' - if you try to restrict access to abortion by drawing up a list of which disabilities are life-threatening or incompatible with life you will get into an unholy mess, that will be desperately unfair to some people in very tragic circumstances.

2shoes...sometimes a disability isn't picked up until late in the pregnancy....uncomfortable as this may be to you, alot of parents don't want disabled children.

edam surely then it is better to have the same cut off for all. so raise the limit.

This wouldn't win my vote at all. I support abortion until term for maternal request.

raise the limit for all terminations to term? >

harsh statement daftpunk.
As parents surely we can't just send back our children if society deems them less than perfect.
Children are not a commodity there is no refund available.

he wont get my vote for this either

Am dou8bly convinced I am against late eterminations today as Mum just called to let me know a friend who had suffered several miscarriages lost her baby today at 38 weeks and also lost her fertility

Life is fucking cruel at times

Agree, absolutely, with Custardo.

no, anon, but some parents avail themselves of the option not to carry to term.

sorry, didn't mean to sound so harsh....but that's the way it is...testing starts with amnio/cvs...why do women have those tests?

as cruel as life is peachy, you cant force women to continue pregnancies just because some women cant have kids

for your friend tho, it sucks

yes, but stopping late terminations , which are rare, won't stop tragedies like that , peachy.

also, why is it worse to terminate for a disability than for simply not wanting a 3rd child for example? or for not being able to afford another child? or for termination due to the mother having depression ?

disability is not the sole reason for terminations

Dp as often as niot IME (and this includes me) because they don't know what it really is like to have a disabled child, that you love him or her just as much.

AM not anti termination but do feel if disabled people were better integrated across society that terminating babies whose condition was not life threatening would be far less common. Fear is a powerful agent.

SWC no, sadly not.

Dp you're right, I can't force anyone- I can, however, feel very angry and claim a right to not see straight today.

peachy that is sad. poor lady