Foetus' right to life vs women's bodily autonomy

[AmberTheCat]

I've just been reading a paper written by a friend of a friend, arguing that a foetus should be seen as having the same right to life as a postpartum human, because there are no lines that can be drawn between a foetus and someone post-birth that couldn't also be drawn between two postpartum humans. He added a note to say that clearly there is a question of how this right to life relates to women's autonomy, but that this wasn't something he was addressing in this paper.

Given that this is surely THE question, can you help me refine my arguments for the primacy of bodily autonomy? My instinctive view is that I can't see any way of denying that a foetus is a human being, or at least has the potential to become a human being, depending on how developed it is, but that the decision of whether or not to allow that (potential) human to grow inside her must still always remain the woman's. I'm quite out of touch with the thinking around this, though, so would welcome pointers.

Thanks!

You know Larry if you asked random women on the street if they agree with late terminations most would say no or with provisos. I thought the same until I had Bern through preg and actually thought about it properly.

But if you lay out the arguments and show what can and will (already is in USA and Ireland etc) if you give the foetus rights then actually many realise that we cannot go down the path of doing that.

Women's bodily autonomy is too important. We already have a maternity system where women end up bullied and cajoled into medical procedures and treatment they often don't need, where women ate violated during Labour and birth and told its ok because it's best for the baby... Actually it's not ok and women are already subjected to a huge amount of judgement/policing when preg, we cannot give that a legal basis and start the road of legislating what pregnant women can and can't do.

Do I find the idea of late term abortions unpalatable and fairly abhorrent? Yes I do but I don't think any woman would put themselves through it without good reason, it may not be the path I would take but I absolutely defend any other woman the right to do so.

The Kermit case is horrific and also a very good illustration of why abortion needs to be safe, accessible and legal, as this is what "back alley" clinics could be like if it's not.

Btw in late term abortions they don't always kill the foetus, they are carried out when a foetus has a condition incompatible with life generally and some women choose to birth knowing the baby will die during Labour or shortly after. They do this for a variety of reasons, some want to hold the baby as it dies for example. But ultimately it is their choice, as it should be.

'In what other area of life do people find this acceptable with regards to bodily autonomy?'

Right around assisted dying. I don't think anyone believes that people should have ABSOLUTE autonomy over this, do they? I.E a perfectly healthy person desires to be killed. This is the ultimate in bodily autonomy.

captchaos - the USA laws at the moment are very, very scary.

A perfectly healthy person can (and will if they so desire) kill themselves.

Are there not cases where a fetus has some legal protection

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-28818110

pommedeterre

But they are not allowed to have medical intervention to help them. A woman needs medical intervention to terminate a pregnancy

Yes, a perfectly healthy person can choose to die, however, it is only people who are unable for whatever reason to end their own lives who would need assisted dying laws. While it is open to abuse, a person who has expressed a wish to die and is unable to do that for themselves, should be helped to do just that. And not in a unit on an industrial estate in Switzerland, but in their own homes, surrounded by those that love them best.

'A perfectly healthy person can (and will if they so desire) kill themselves.'

Yes, but they cannot get a doctor to do it. A woman can, if she wants, procure the chemicals and inject her foetus with them. Not nice, but nor is suicide for most.

The erosion of womens meagre rights in USA is scary.

You're not wrong Pomme and Rex. The patriarchal 'don't worry your pretty heads, we'll decide what's best for you and your babies' shtick is getting old.

stillfriggin yep I have been following the abortion issue in America and it's bloody terrifying, women are being arrested for miscarriage Ffs. It's been made practically impossible to get an abortion at any stage in some southern states... But it's all about women's health apparently...

So a woman needs help with her bodily autonomy which you would have her denied then?

Injecting your foetus (and just your foetus) by yourself is, I reckon, easier said then done (and I inject 2 x daily when pg so have some reference). thats imaginary land I think.

'don't want Larry's democratically elected by Daily Mail reading UKIP reactionaries most likely deciding what can happen to my family, body and life and then going home for a cocoa. '

Well, I guess you have to leave the UK then because, for better or for worse, this is how all our lives are regulated.

I wonder what would happen if all women all over the world stopped worrying their little heads about things. Just for one day what would the impact be?

I think right now and in the foreseeable future America is an unsafe place to be a woman, especially a sexually active woman.

I think it would have to be for longer than a day. Women not doing the unpaid grunt work, the low paid, low valued jobs, not doing the wifework, not holding the fort so their husbands can shine. You'd need more than a day's action to watch the facade that women sit on their arses all day eating bon-bons crumble.

Would be fun watching the mild panic though.

Buffy

I've lurked (mostly) throughout the thread.

I'm neither Daily Mail reading UKIP voting but believe that a woman does not and should not be able to terminate a viable healthy fetus past 24 weeks.

If you ask British women (UKIP voting or not) I don't think the majority think the law should be changed either.

If that makes me anti women, a forced birther or handmaiden or whatever than so be it.

I (for what my opinion is worth) think Larry has argued very well and not given into insults.

I think the right to terminate a viable fetus to term is quite an extreme view not held by most men or women.

Sorry, I still consider myself to be a feminist but will never agree on this.

Thanks for the discussion everyone and well argued Larry

Capt a two week holiday from everything. I mean we are just too stupid to be able to make any decisions.

So, where are all these women who wander into a doctor's eight months pregnant and say "I don't think I'll have this baby after all. Abort it"?
(As opposed to finding it has some catastrophic non viable condition I mean)?

It would be really helpful to know from Larry where are all these irresponsible women with perfectly healthy foetuses they don't fancy giving birth to after all, that he has spent 18 pages worrying about.

Personally I have never had an abortion, could only have conceived of having one at any stage of pregnancy under the most dire of circumstances, but have a deep suspicion of a man who has zero concept of what is involved in pregnancy or childbirth pontificating about the legalities of the vanishingly rare situation of a woman asking for someone to "kill" (as he sees it) a healthy eight month month foetus.

The law to protect the eight month old foetus (whatever the pregnant woman's wishes are) already exists, so I am at loss to know why Larry is so exercised about this.