No foetal pain before 24 weeks so OK to abort....?

[StableButDeluded]

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/10403496.stm

I'm a bit about this. Just because they supposedly can't feel pain still doesn't necessarily make it OK. It just doesn't sit right with me that doctors can be aborting a baby of 24 weeks in one part of a hospital and saving the life of another baby that was born at 24 weeks in another.

I still think that with all the medical advances that now enable premature babies of this age to survive, the abortion time limit should be lowered, apart from in exceptional circumstances. Pain or no pain.

I have walked in these womens shoes actually and I decided to take responsibility.

I just dont get it, there is no excuse for unwanted pregnancy unless a woman is raped, then I can fully understand the need to terminate.

These women who`s choices seem defendable were once foetus !

There is a reason the cut off is before 24 weeks Hecate - and that is because of the level of foetal development.

Honestly, these are scientists who don't have an agenda except to find things out. There is nothing 'convenient' about it - it's not a conspiracy

And OnEdge - and who is going to determine if a woman has been raped? Is her word good enough? I can't believe that you want women to force women to have children they don't want.

This thread is a return to medieval times

Sharbie - I think they were trying to make you feel better.

I think newborns have a sort of delayed reaction to pain but of course that doesn't mean they don't feel it. However I don't think medical research is going to move on to a degree whereby pain can be magically felt when the neural pathways don't exist

Oh balls balls balls.
No contraceptives are 100% Accidents can and do happen. I hate the whole 'it's only acceptable in cases of rape' arguement. How do you prove it? How do you then deal with all the men falsely accused? And frankly, I am appauled that someone who is 'prolife' can say that a foetus resulting from rape is the only one that doesn't matter.
I am pro choice btw. Too many prolifers will do all they can to ensure the baby gets born. After that? Well, most of them won't give a shite. A baby born unwanted is already a damaged child imo and ime. The mental harm of making a mother go through with an unwanted pregnancy, and the effect that then has on the child is never preferable to abortion imo. And yes, I eagerly await my response to be twisted and torn apart.

Late terminations for contraceptive failures can be a case of 'had an accident, got pregnant, 20 week scan showed major problems' though onedge.

Personally I could not abort a child I'd felt move inside me. I am not even sure I agree with abortions beyond 12 weeks - it's a baby and while I understand not every baby is loved and wanted and I understand that in some case, abortions happen because the parents believe the child is better off not going through the pain of life with severe illness, I still couldn't do it. It makes me feel sick to think about a doctor, who has trained to save lives, reaching inside and crushing a baby's skull.

You seem very knowledgable LadyIn the radiator

My freinds case was indeed as cold as i laid it out.

I was sat outside with her on a sunny day, and she told me that she had been 12 weeks pregnant. It was a real pain in the arse because she had booked her round the world trip. She was 35 at the time, and was with a long term partner. She owned her own house and had a very well paid job of £40,000. She had been in the job for 10 years and would have received full maternity pay. Her partner was very keen to start a family.

I am not naive to beleive that there is no excuse for unwanted pregnancy. I just have different opinions than you regarding this.

In the UK in 2010 I dont beleive there is an excuse. I am not naive just because I disagree with you.

If a woman is raped, I agree that her unborn baby has the same rights as any other. But even I am not that naive to beleive that a woman in that situation does not have a choice.

You are very blinkered onedge.Lets say theroetically your contraceptive failed. Then what? Still 'no excuse'?

LadyintheRadiator good post

"Adoption is not an easy alternative. Adoption is traumatic, for both mother and child, and gives children a very far from ideal start in life." --- utter utter utter nonsense!
What is wrong with adoption at birth? The child will have adoring parents who have so desperately longed for a child; the birth mother will go on knowing that they didn't kill their child...
Is it really easier to face the termination rather than having the unwanted child adopted?
I know many very happy and successful people who have been adopted and also many who have adopted and love their children with all their heart.
The argument that adoption is too traumatic and termination would be the easier option is so faulty it makes me sick.
We are talking about late term terminations here.
As I said in earlier post, if termination is truly necessary, then it should be performed within the first trimester. Anything past that should be for medical reasons only.

Rollmops - did you read that report I linked to?

'Ok to kill them I suppose because they're not perfect rosy Hallmark babies?'

That's abit ignorant really. It's naive to think people who abort for abnormalities do so as the baby is not perfect, that is a pro life spin. No baby is perfect but some babies have severe/fatal defects and most people just want a baby that will survive. I know many parents who have had a termination due to abnormalities, non did it as they 'didn't want a baby who wasn't perfect'.

One lady had a son with a rare disease and she then found out her next baby would also have the same condition and she really could not cope with a second baby with needs 24 hours a day. Was she selfish by considering her existing child's needs aswell as her own ability to cope? Did she merely discard a non rosy non perfect baby? (or did she make one considered of two very hard choices)

Your link got me to the Global Safe Abortion website and to be honest, clicking through the pages, it's evident that the organisation is strongly pro-choice and the studies they pick to link can be subjective.
I am also pro-choice but it is a terrible choice to make and comes with incredible burden of responsibility and must not be taken flippantly.

Roillmops, I'm afraid you are wrong about adoption, I know because I was adopted, I also opted for late abortion over having the baby, because it is the easier option. For one you can keep it secret, as I did.
Do you really think all my family (crap at support), friends, neighbours, random people I see all the time, oh and my then 5yr old would have congratulated me on giving my baby away and then let me move on with my life?
What about in 18 years, when this child I never wanted turned up, then what do I do?

Oh and as for adoring parents who adopt babies. Yeah right, my mother was lots of things, adoring wasn't one of them, and yes, I once did ask her why she had kids at all, never mind go through the adoption process because she didn't appear to even enjoy being a mother, and never once in 23 years told me she loved me.

This is the most selfish reasoning for termination I've heard.
So, you'd rather that you didn't exist?

You don't sound like your pro-choice at all.

I give up - you're not listening

Why is it selfish?

Even if you take the friends/family/neighbours/random people out of the equation (which of course you can't really), what about my existing child?
How do you think she'd have coped with it?
I had an abortion as much for her as I did for me, though of course she doesn't know.

I'm glad I do exist, I'm glad my birth mother had a choice, and though I never met her and she's dead now so I'll never know, I hope she made the right choice for her, as I did.

Oh and my adoptive mother, a bit crap as she was, was vehemently pro-choice, even though someone choosing adoption allowed her to have a second child. (my brother is her biological child).

I don't care the slightest what you think I sound like as it seems that you haven't read any of my posts. I maintain that abortion as a choice comes with terrible responsibility and should never be taken carelessly; if needed, termination should be carried out in the first trimester. Later terminations should go ahead for medical reasons only.

Is anyone seriously suggesting that a woman will have a late termination for anything other than medical reasons?

In all of these abortion debates, there seems to be a default assumption that the mother is stupid, has no clue as to the enormity of her decision. Just can't be arsed having a child and goes for the soft option

jellybeans what about DS? not life limiting or threating in "most" cases

I have read your posts. But you're not prochoice in my book if you would deny women terminations when they don't know that they're pregnant. Of course Marie Stopes has an agenda - to make abortion safe and legal for everyone. That report is trying to dispel some of the myths around late abortion and I'm sorry if you can't empathise with any of the women who were brave enough to tell their stories

I am pro-choice, including for reasons such as 'I am not ready to have a baby' (defined as 'meantal health as the mother' or somesuch when doctors write it down). A woman's readiness to have a baby might be changed by the knowledge that the baby will be born with disabilities. Someone who feels ready to have a "normal" baby could easily be unready to take on the responsibility of a disabled child.

OnEdge I hope that if you have DDs they never experience any contraceptive failure, and never get carried away in the moment. In fact I hpoe it for your DSs too.