Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Turkey plans to curb abortions

44 replies

enimmead · 04/06/2012 23:04

www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2012/06/20126316302678229.html

OP posts:
enimmead · 04/06/2012 23:10

Abortion has been legal in Turkey since 1983 up to 10 weeks from conception.

But under the proposed legislation wants to drastically reduce the time limit to as little as four weeks.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister, has called abortion "murder" and he has repeatedly called on women to have at least three children.

"They say it is my body, my choice. Feminists say this but no one has the right to abort a fetus in a body," Erdogan said during a rally in the country's southeast on Saturday.

The health minister had also announced plans to penalise hospitals that carry out elective caesarean sections, calling them unnatural.

OP posts:
LineRunner · 04/06/2012 23:12

Turkey has not been admitted to the EU for all sorts of reasons. This seems par for the course.

Popoozle · 04/06/2012 23:18

Oh dear Sad. What use is a four week limit for heaven's sake? Many women will not even know they are pregnant that early on and, for those that do, it really doesn't allow thinking time does it? However, I suppose that is the whole point.

A huge jump backwards for Turkish women. I would imagine there are already quite a high number of illegal abortions taking place beyond the already low limit of 10 weeks. Lowering the limit to 4 weeks will only increase that and put many more women at risk.

It's shit.

AGunInMyPetticoat · 04/06/2012 23:26

And what exactly gives this pompous arse the right to determine the acceptable minimum number of children Angry?

FWIW reducing the limit to four weeks is IMO pretty much the same thing as outlawing abortion altogether: unless you are TTC you may simply not even suspect anything at that stage, especially if your periods are irregular; I certainly didn't with either of my two pregnancies (one of which was in fact planned).

If you're going to outlaw abortion outright, at least say so!

beansmum · 04/06/2012 23:41

If abortion is murder, it's murder from day one. I don't understand the logic that allows some, but not all, abortion.

MiniTheMinx · 05/06/2012 00:20

I think the move to prevent doctors from advising women to have c-sections where needed on medical grounds is even more worrying though. They have no regard for the health or indeed lives of women. This will put women's lives at risk.

47to31in7days · 05/06/2012 10:06

beansmum, we can't tell if "day one" has happened (conception) so a woman taking HBC/ EHC is not INTENDING to kill anything as that is not the way contraception is intended to work. That would be the problem with a "personhood from conception" law.

A 4-week ban would allow for just about every deliberate abortion to be prohibited without interfering with any contraceptive method, and so be popular with pro-lifers who do not have an extreme hatred of birth control.

See Ohio's "Heartbeat Bill"- very similar law.

golfsale · 05/06/2012 14:01

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

chibi · 05/06/2012 14:08

i have reported golfsale's post

golfsale · 05/06/2012 14:11

i have reported chibi's post

CardgamesFTW · 05/06/2012 14:12

Look at all the women protesting in the streets - if only the ministers would listen, and stop the crazy plans. 4 weeks - that's almost making abortion illegal all together.

KalSkirata · 05/06/2012 14:14

it seems like women's rights are being attacked worldwide. Stating with us controlling our own fertility and bodies.

enimmead · 05/06/2012 14:14

What is the heartbeat law?

I do think it is really interesting looking at news websites from around the world. So much goes on that is not reported in the UK and this has been a real eye opener towards attitudes in less advanced countries.

I cannot understand how they can outlaw C sections. What do they think will happen?

OP posts:
PrematurelyAirconditioned · 05/06/2012 14:23

I'm baffled by the c-section thing, sadly not surprised by the abortion thing.

When they say "10/4 weeks gestation" I'm guessing that's what we would normally refer to as 12/6 week after LPM? (can anyone confirm?) which makes 12 weeks doable (80% of UK abortions are carried out before then) and 6 weeks pretty much impracticable.

Hurrah for the women of Turkey who are protesting in huge numbers about this - and good luck to them.

SardineQueen · 05/06/2012 19:57

This is appalling.

Agree that women's rights are being attacked all over the world at the moment - even in places where they don't have many to start with Sad

LRDtheFeministDragon · 05/06/2012 20:01

Well said beansmum. It doesn't make any sense.

AGunInMyPetticoat · 05/06/2012 21:43

I'm baffled by the c-section thing

... and I'm baffled by the notion that something being 'unnatural' in medicine is now a reason to restrict it.

I'm assuming that vaccines, treatment for cancer, transplants, anti-biotics and all types of prosthetic limbs will shortly be restricted too? Wouldn't it be nice if only we could all naturally succumb to the plague and smallpox just like mother nature intended?

47to31in7days · 06/06/2012 01:37

enimmead, heartbeatbill.com/ an excellent law to defend human life. If Mitt gets in and replaces RBG with a conservative SCOTUS justice who will uphold this bill and thus throw the "Roe v Wade" unborn baby out with the bathwater, it will go ahead.

oh and there is no such thing as a war on women. although this being a feminist forum I know you will claim there is.

MmeLindor. · 06/06/2012 01:48

Good for the Turkish women for getting right out there and protesting against this.

This law would be a disaster for them, and they know it.

Countries where similar laws have been introduced (ie. total or almost total ban) have seen a sharp rise in hospital admissions of women with botched backstreet abortions, and a rise in maternal deaths.

In Latin America, there are estimated to be four unsafe abortions for every ten births.

Why is the life of a baby worth more than the life of the mother?

PrincessFiorimonde · 06/06/2012 01:57

I don't have anything interesting to add. I just wanted to say I think this is a crap proposal.

Re: other posts - I have also heard that Roe vs. Wade is under almost daily attack.

Am just baffled by both of things.

47to31in7days · 06/06/2012 23:43

The solution to Latin America is to improve development and antenatal/maternity facilities, NOT legalise killing the unborn.

If those nations can increase the resources available and the efficiency of their distribution then less women would want abortions as they would not feel unable to provide for the child they were bringing into the world.

Romney gets in= Roe gets overturned when Ruth Bader Ginsburg steps down and is replaced by a less abortion-supporting Justice= unborn babies live.

47to31in7days · 06/06/2012 23:45

And NO baby's life is worth more than its mother's, but it should be given some value, which is where most feminists fail (or else they claim that it only has value if the woman wants it. )

sayanything · 06/06/2012 23:56

And what pray tell will happen to those who do want abortions because, regardless of availability of resources, still feel unable to carry a pregnancy to term/provide for a child?

Oh and yes, there is a war of women. Because I don't know how else to explain a proposed law that would make it compulsory for a doctor to force an implement into a woman's vagina against her will or that would allow a doctor to hide information from a woman about her pregnancy, lest she decides she wants a termination.

47to31in7days · 07/06/2012 00:17

Actually, that ultrasound law is so INFORMED consent can be provided, as she will have an opportunity to know what the unborn life looks like and hear its heartbeat. Official figures show that the majority of gynaecologists always or frequently use trans-vaginal sonography in TOPs in order to perform the operation, and that the woman cannot refuse, because it is part of the process of doing it safely. The woman must consent for an abortion in the first place, so she is not having anything done to her forcibly.

The women who call it "rape" miss something very big: penetration must be sexual for it to be rape (by any definition- if we take the mainstream definition we must also account for the fact that the ultrasound device is not a penis.) A medical professional inserting a device into the vagina to detect the position and gestational age of the life in the womb- and DO NOT say an abdominal ultrasound works, as all medical texts indicate it is less sensitive and specific than trans-v, doctors aren't doing it for the patriarchal heck of it- is part of the surgical procedure. It is not a sex act. To call something like this a "war on women" diminishes the experience of everyone who has suffered in genuine wars, including my relatives who perished in the Holocaust.

As for the second law, parents faced with a disabled baby that will be a strain on their finances should be given money to help, but calling it "wrongful birth" is just horrible, as it betrays an attitude that they shouldn't be alive. Every human with disabilities deserves to live. In most cases I've heard of it is a married couple and both parents have to face the disabled child, so it is not anti-woman.

havingabath · 07/06/2012 00:32

You miss something big 47 to 31: respect for other women, empathy, understanding of rape, the role of ultrasound... But not modesty wow you solved Latin America.