Amendment to reduce abortion time limit to 22 weeks - Right to Life Campaign

[Mothercareyschickenhut]

https://righttolife.org.uk/littlefighters

Postcards are available to send to MPs.

Erm no

Nope

Firm no

Thanks for this, I didn't realise this was a massive campaign just now.

I will be writing to my MP and asking them to keep things exactly as they are to try and counteract this. I hope others do the same.

We have enough restrictions on our bodies as it is.

I'm curious, did you really think Mumsnet would support this?

Politicians can fuck off changing the law around abortion - it's fine as it is in the UK and can only be a slippery slope to the mess the US is in at the moment. As early as possible, as late as necessary. Always.

Thanks OP for the heads up that there is yet another attack on a woman’s right to control her own body.

Your postcards can get fucked.

No.

@SnapdragonToadflax I'm curious, did you really think Mumsnet would support this?

I don't know, I've only just started posting
I thought it was a site for parents and for parents' discussion about childrens' welfare.

@Sloaneypony Thanks OP for the heads up that there is yet another attack on a woman’s right to control her own body.

You obviously haven't read the reasoning behind it. It is a cross-party petition by 25 MPs,
It is to stop a contradiction in the Law.

The time limit of 24 weeks for abortions performed under section 1(1)(a) of the Abortion Act 1967, was introduced by section 37 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990.
Prior to this change, the abortion limit had, de facto, been 28 weeks gestation set by the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, which made it illegal to “destroy the life of a child capable of being born alive”.

The introduction of a 24-week gestational limit in 1990 was significantly motivated by the results of a Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) working party report on neonatal survival rates, which noted improvements in survival rates before 28 weeks of gestation.

"You obviously haven't read the reasoning behind it"

How bloody patronising.

Maybe you don't understand the reasoning behind a further attack on women's right to autonomy being a bad thing for us all.

Have you seen the shit happening in America?

@StopTheBusINeedAWeeWeeAWeeWeeBagOChips

"Have you seen the shit happening in America?"

We aren't in America and the advances in neo-natal care needs the law to change to accommodate that.

No, it really doesn't.

And if you can't see the correlation between women's rights being corroded so much they are now non existent in parts of America, and trying to corrode women's rights potentially leading to the same thing happening here then maybe you shouldn't be speaking on the subject at all.

A womans care is between her and her doctor, your personal opinion doesn't come into it.

@StopTheBusINeedAWeeWeeAWeeWeeBagOChips No, it really doesn't.

Can't you see the dichotomy in the law?

There could be a situation in a hospital where a baby of 22 weeks was in a neonatal unit while at the same time a baby of that age was being aborted.

It makes no sense.

And most importantly the baby doesn't get a choice.

I'm sorry you feel the need to be so unpleasant.

As a scientist surely you can see the logic of the argument?

That makes as much sense as saying one woman could be getting sterilised in the same hospital as someone having fertility treatment.

The two have nothing to do with each other as its down to the choice of the woman.

@SnapdragonToadflax I'm curious, did you really think Mumsnet would support this?

What has MN got to do with it?
Do they have a policy of not discussing certain topics? If so please point me to where these rules are.
Thanks.

Tried to click the link and my browser showed the link as malicious.

Was hoping to see the details so I can write to my MP and ask him not to support it.

Basically the arguments are

"Other countries do it differently"

"One medical team may be saving a baby at the same gestation as another is being aborted"

And "There's a majority support from a bias survey"

Here's the main 'points'.

I've emailed my MP already to clearly state I wouldn't support this at all.

A site used primarily by woman is generally not supportive of taking rights away from woman.

RightToLife UK don't want any abortion at all. This lowering the limit by two weeks thing is just getting a wedge in the door. They're also fans of harrasing woman outside hospitals and clinics.

Which MPs already support this? Also is it England or England and Wales only?

Depressing that accourding to their survey (although I'd take it with a pinch of salt) most people apparently think under 16s should need parental consent to get an abortion. So they're not old enough to decide they want an abortion, but are old enough to give birth?

A site used primarily by woman is generally not supportive of taking rights away from woman.

But quite happy to take rights away from unborn children who may grow up to be women?

RightToLife UK don't want any abortion at all.

In an ideal world I'm sure no-one would want abortions. However, we don't live in an ideal world and have to try to make the fairest laws to try and balance the situation.

They're also fans of harrasing woman outside hospitals and clinics.

No-one should be subject to harassment of any kind.

Interestingly some prochoice posters on this thread thought it was OK to harass me/name call because I had a different point of view.
*One rule for one" eh ?

An abortion is a medical procedure and under 16's need parental consent for medical procedures.
This is nothing new.

So they're not old enough to decide they want an abortion, but are old enough to give birth?

What do you mean by "old enough to give birth"?
There is no law that says how old a female has to be to give birth !