Supporting abortion to term.

[VegansTasteBetter]

Asking this question in feminism because, 1. I don't want a pro/against bunfight and 2 because I have only ever seen this comment made by feminists. *

I have seen the comment made that someone would support an abortion up until term for any reason (so in theory just because they changed their mind would be acceptable I guess).

If you take this stance is it because you feel to decide a cut off date for abortions would be to choose an arbitrary date in a pregnancy and that we need legally to have free access to abortions... but actually if your mate said, "just found out I am 37 weeks pregnant really don't want it, going for an abortion" you would be horrified and because you know it isn't likely to ever happen

or

if in the above scenario would you happily (assuming it were legal) take your friend down to the clinic to get an abortion because you belive the mother's choice trumps the fetus/babies right to life?

I'm prochoice but I have a real difficulty with people saying that it's acceptable for any reason up till term. And in the above scenario (if it were legal) I'd support my friend's right to demand to be induced early for her mental health and to give the baby up for adoption but not for an abortion.

• disclaimer: I am a feminist but don't support this view

I would say I am a feminist who supports abortion to term. I supported a friend who terminated at 32 weeks for anomalies which though suspected earlier weren't thought to be as serious as they turned out to be.

I presumed this thread was inspired by the news story about the UK woman who bought drugs online and terminated practically at term? I don't know anything other than the outline of the case but it is the woman I really pity . I wouldn't want to judge her actions and don't think the court system an appropriate response.

Women who can access quick and safe abortion overwhelmingly choose to do so. There wouldn't be many women who choose late terminations.

Does the decision involve the father to be? Not at all and the societies where state/men/church control abortion the most tightly are the places of real abomination.

Delivery of a live preterm baby is a medical and legal nightmare. Whatever the mother would be trying to achieve it couldn't be a good option for her and most probably not for the baby either.

adoption ditto, it is so simplisticaly presented but not a simple solution. I placed a baby for adoption and I wouldn't be in a hurry to recommend it as a choice.

Personally I would only abort for medical conditions incompatible with life but I do trust other women to choose what is right for them.

It's a horrid ethical question that I would prefer to see negotiated between health care providers and the individual rather than absolutely legislated against.

Helxi

I'm happy to debate with you who owns a woman's body.

(I didn't get to read your earlier post prior to its deletion.)

I presumed this thread was inspired by the news story about the UK woman who bought drugs online and terminated practically at term?

Actually, I am not sure this is what happened. I read that the drugs were used to bring on labour, so presumably the baby was alive when it was born and then she murdered it?

Or is murdering a child shortly after birth the same as aborting it shortly before birth?

SardineQueen - of course the outcome for the baby is better the longer it is inside the woman. But her body is her own, and I absolutely support her right to demand the foetus be removed from her at any point she chooses. It would then up to medical professionals and the state to decide what, and how much, should be done for the newborn baby.

Purplesprouting - delivery and subsequent adoption of a preterm newborn may be tricky, but surely killing that foetus just because it is a medical, logistical and emotional problem is a crude and very ethically questionable solution. If the mother doesn't want the child, it becomes the same as any other unwanted baby. I don't see why it should be afforded less rights as any other human being which is able to survive as an independent unit.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/scrap-outdated-infanticide-law-say-judges-495016.html

As above infanticide is distinguished in English law from murder so calling abortion murder is an American anti-abortion import.

I know of a 24 week abortion of twins. One had a severe abnormality and would be in pain and die within a few weeks of birth. The doctors didn't know if the other twin had the same condition or not. A partial abortion was deemed too risky so they recommended a complete termination. The couple reluctantly agreed and went ahead.

A year later they had a healthy pregnancy and child.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/scrap-outdated-infanticide-law-say-judges-495016.html

I have just looked at the news reports for the woman who had taken the misoprostol after buying it on-line, and it doesn't seem to be certain that the baby is dead. No-one knows what happened to it, and the police were DNA testing other abandoned babies to see if it was hers, so there cant be any conclusive evidence of death.

The baby boxes are highly controversial in the countries that have them.

And when you say "better than abortion" in what way? What type of abortions? Who is it better for?

Some of teh arguments against them are in the article:

"The psychologist, Kevin Browne of Nottingham University told the BBC: "Studies in Hungary show that it's not necessarily mothers who place babies in these boxes - that it's relatives, pimps, step-fathers, fathers.

"Therefore, the big question is: are these baby boxes upholding women's rights, and has the mother of that child consented to the baby being placed in the baby box?"

Professor Browne continued: "The baby hatch is so anonymous, and so removed from the availability of counselling, that it creates a damage and a danger to the mother and child."

On this argument, by making it so easy to get rid of a baby, mothers are less likely to get the real help they need in their situation of great emotional trauma and even physical risk."

crescentmoon the idea that women will choose to have late term abortions in any kind of significant numbers shows a low opinion of women I think.

if women really wanted these late term abortions, they would be procuring them through illegal means and it would be on the news the whole time and seen as a big problem and what are we going to do about it.

And TBH everyone knows that in the UK if you want to get rid of a baby you leave it at a hospital. It happens all the time. And there are always appeals for the mother to come forward because of concern about her situation / mental health / physical health. Concern about the mother. The baby boxes take a different stance.

Also how on earth are people actually using them? If you have a baby and then suddenly you don't have a baby, people will notice. The situations of people using this service must be pretty dire if no-one around them will care or notice if a baby goes missing. That is what needs looking at, surely.

"i mean it would be better for abortion in late term. i can completely sympathise with the woman who is pregnant with a initially supportive partner who then, when she is in the later stages of pregnancy, decides to leave her be a single parent. then what? the time for a legal abortion has passed? i think the baby box idea is very useful in those situations."

Give it up for adoption through the usual channels at hospital? You know, just as a thought. Rather than taking it home and then taking it to a baby box.

The idea that a woman would decide to abort late in pregnancy as her partner left again shows this fundamental idea about women being cold, selfish, lacking in emotion and empathy etc. How many women do you think would actually do that. Seriously. Not many, is the answer.

Maybe, and I know this is shocking, the woman will be happy to be a single parent.

I know it's bizarre, that a woman would do that, but there you go.

I know someone whose partner kicked her out of his house at 39 weeks. She never even considered late abortion. I agree with sardine that you must think lowly of women if you think they would make a decision like that.

To answer another q- women who left a baby at a uk hospital would be caught on CCTV- it would not be anonymous.

There probably are hidden unwanted pregnancies we never hear about. Eg trafficked girls who probably have the babies removed killed and buried in a remote place.

No of course not. I mean what I said.

That the idea that significant numbers of women would present for abortions late in pregnancy because their partners left them is a highly unpleasant and unrealistic view of women.

And that your suggestion that a woman who is left when she is pregnant is automatically not going to want to continue with the pregnancy / not going to want to keep the baby is also peculiar. Many women are left when they are pregnant and they have no desire to terminate the pregnancy / give the baby up when it is born.

margery yes and I think it is better to find who these people are in society and help them, rather than simply giving them (or others) the opportunity to get rid of babies no questions asked and the woman/girl remains in whatever kind of godawful situation she's in.

I completely agree with Annie.

Of course a woman cannot and should not be forced to be pregnant against her will. I am not arguing that at all. But late abortion (ie beyond 24 weeks ) is not the same kettle of fish as abortion of a foetus of non-viable gestation. Once a foetus reaches the outside world and breathes it is a legal human being with all the rights attached to being one. Which is why late-term abortion involves ensuring that that foetus does not reach the world alive. 2 crucial inches of flesh separate that foetus from life at 24, 28, 32, 36 etc weeks. I don't think it is sensationalist to point out that what medical staff are asked to do during late term abortions is knowingly kill a viable human being with 2 inches of flesh between it and life. I can't imagine (and would hope) that such late abortions are not carried out without a huge amount of counselling and information, but equally can imagine that decisions have to be made quite quickly.

I can see the argument for minimising risks to the mother by delivering a child with an abnormality incompatible with life earlier rather than later, but always worry that no testing is 100% accurate. Also birth is never 100% safe at whatever stage of gestation- obviously delivering a 1 lb baby is going to put less strain on the mother than a full term baby, but the risk of PPH etc is still there.

duchesse what would you like the law on abortion to be in the UK?

Your last para puts the baby before the mother BTW.

Aborting a foetus which is biologically viable does not sit right with me at all. The State already claims ownership over our bodies, for example it decrees that we are not allowed to expose our bodies to certain substances and punishes us if we use them ie. the criminalisation of certain drugs.

I don't think the idea "sits right" with anyone to be quite honest with you. It's a horrible thought.