Please can we talk about what "pro choice" means?

[BertrandRussell]

Some threads on here, and coincidentally, a couple of real life conversations prompted by a recent television programme, have made me think that there is an attempt to erode the meaning of the term. For me, pro choice means that a woman should be able to have an abortion within the law because she wants to. Her reasons are immaterial.

You can be pro-choice and still think that sometimes the choice made is a bad one, or is made without full understanding, or is made for dubious reasons which you don't support or which wouldn't convince you to do the same in that situation.
That would make you pro-choice but a judgemental dick.

Not my fetus, not my body, not my business.
No one should be involving themselves in someone else's womb.

I think the law is about right at the moment and fully support it.

I think the pro choice lobby demanding the right to abort to term for any reason just damages the pro choice argument. I also think aborting females is terribly damaging and a disproportionate number of young men in a society unleashes all sorts of problems.

how comfortable are you with the hypothetical situation where one doctor is desperately trying to save the life of one foetus/baby while next door another doctor is trying to end the life of another foetus/baby? Say both at 30 weeks gestation for example.

Pretty comfortable really. I would feel sorry for, but supportive of, both women.

I am entirely comfortable with that scenario, Milk, just as I would be with a woman 12 weeks pregnant being treated in a way that would keep her pregnancy while next door another woman would be having a termination at 12 weeks. It's (or should be, in my view) the pregnant woman's choice, not the foetus', not the doctor's, not the man/woman on the street who is uncomfortable with the idea of late term abortions. Coupled with the fact such a small percentage of abortions are late term, and the vast majority of those I'd guess were for reasons other than "meh, I just don't want it anymore", I'd see it as even less reason to limit abortion.

Oh and I would describe myself as absolutely pro choice even though I support the current limitations.

I also think aborting females is terribly damaging and a disproportionate number of young men in a society unleashes all sorts of problems.

But by not allowing the abortion you aren't saving anyone. The mother or the daughter. The girl is liable to be killed anyway, or abused, or the mother will find non-legal/safe means to abort. You need to fix the society, not ban abortions.

Being pro choice doesn't mean you can't be unhappy with the law as it currently stands. The legality of termination right up to term for non life threatening disability is wrong in my view.

Otherwise pro choice is for any reason - even if you find something personally abhorrent (termination of females for example) doesn't mean you would seek to prevent others from doing so.

I agree, I think the law has it right.

Apart from needing permission from doctors (wtf), I think there should be counselling through abortions, especially late term ones but I don't think anyone should be denied an abortion up until 24 weeks.

However, I don't agree with abortion to term. So does that make me completely pro choice?

I'm completely pro choice for any reason at any time.

Not my uterus, not my problem!

Fair enough. I wonder how the doctors would feel though.

9am - terminate foetus/baby A @ 30wks
1pm - save life of foetus/baby B @ 30wks

Tbh I'm not comfortable with that, and therefore support the law as it stands.

I guess I'm neither pro choice or forced birther. In my little utopia a woman would have the right to say "I don't want this baby. I don't want to be pregnant anymore.", be induced, baby off to NICU, woman signs all rights/responsibilities away.

The only time "I am pro-choice" should be followed by a "but" is if that is followed by "I wouldn't have one myself" (ie someone saying "I fully appreciate another woman's right to bodily autonomy even when pregnant but if I were pregnant I wouldn't have an abortion myself")

I am pro-choice. I had an abortion when I was 18. It was one of the hardest decisions of my life but, looking back, one of the most sensible decisions of my life.

Would I have a termination now (aged 39, married, homeowner)? Probably not but I absolutely wouldn't judge anyone who did.

I fully support a woman's right to have her own reasons for termination... but aborting female foetuses is really difficult to get behind!

In India poor women cannot afford ultrasound scans or access terminations so if they have an unwanted girl they drop a few grains of uncooked rice down their throat, it swells and causes asphyxiation.

Even where there are schemes for girls to be abandoned anonymously women see the rice as being a kindness to their child and abandoning them as being wrong.

Take a look at some footage of Romanian orphanages fro the 1980s and at Chinese orphanages.

The girls who are missing from sex based termination would still be missing without termination.

Then there is sex based termination when a child of one sex will be severely disabled but a child of the opposite sex won't due to genetic factors.

I get a bit stuck. I believe women should have the right to terminate their pregnancy for any reason, on demand, within the law.

I also agree that the abortion should be induced medically, where those facilities are available, and not by any means the woman chooses, to minimise pain to the woman and foetus. But then in places like Ireland, I can totally support self-procurement of the abortificant drugs online, because women have little choice if they can't travel.

But I only agree with abortion to term within the law as it currently stands and not as an on-demand procedure. Does this make me pro-choice?

I have been told on Mumsnet that it doesn't, because to be truly pro choice, I would have to agree with abortion to term on demand. But I think that's extreme, and means that no one who agrees with the current legal guidelines would be able to identify as pro-choice.

I think you can think the criteria of the law needs changing (as with being able to choose for any reason up to full term for Down's. Perhaps the time scale should be limited but with exceptions for foetuses which most certainly would not survive birth or potentially cause a mother's death) but not expect a woman to have justify her choice to another person or judge women who exercised their legal right, whilst the law still stands as it is.

Once you state that the law can decide limits for women then you are restricting their freedom. I will happily accept that I am not completely pro choice because I think the law should limit it. I think there are too many hoops for women to jump through to obtain an abortion but I wouldn't be happy with it being freely available up to full term.

I agree Rock. I wouldn't choose abortion for myself, but totally support the fact that other women have a right to make their own choices and it isn't for anyone else to judge them.

Within what law, Bertrand?

Pro choice means that a woman should be able to have an abortion within the law because she wants to.

This has always been my understanding of pro choice. I am not sure how the meaning is being eroded? I missed the tv prog.

I am not pro choice, and have always thought I was. I agree with the law as it stands. I could easily say 'up to you' if you abort your baby at term just because you want to, but I could never understand how that would be ethical.

For me it is the freedom to choose what to do and to be supported in that decision, whether that is to terminate a pregnancy (for whatever reasons) or to keep it.
I feel it is pro choice not pro abortion

It is a difficult one to balance, no matter what information various services provide you with they could be accused of being biased or unsupportive in one way or another

Within the law as it stands there IS a limit of 24 weeks for any reason other than disability which is linked to viability. It's about right.

It should be termination after this point only for life threatening situations.

Before this point I support the right of all women to choose to terminate for any reason even if I personally disagree. That's my definition of pro choice.

I think that the aborting female foetuses and arguments for restricting abortion are two sides of the same coin. Reasons for restricting abortions and aborting female foetuses have the same root: misogyny and the control of women.

As a PP mentioned, it is society that makes both these scenarios valid. It is society that needs to change not imposing more restrictions on women. That is just tackling the symptom not the root. I also suspect that if society by some fucking miracle is changed and the world becomes more supportive of women and girls and children that abortion rates would also go down. Quite dramatically. However, I suspect that is another thread!

It would be nice to live in a society where bodily autonomy was assumed and valued.

Oh wait... men already live in that society.

Rock - no, I didn't think you were making this discussion impossible/inappropriate. There were posters on both threads who were upset by the discussion. In particular, there were posters who were saying that anything you would not say in a room full of people with disabilities is by definition, disablist. Well, I certainly would not want to initiate a discussion about abortion in such a gathering, so I decided I couldn't continue to post.

I though a thread with an unequivocal title would be best- and easy to avoid for anyone who doesn't want to join in.

Thank you for clarifying, Bertrand. That makes a degree of sense. Although I think it is possible to have a conversation about abortion, what 'pro-choice' means etc, without being disablist. You could certainly have a conversation in a room, concerning abortion and 'pro-choice' in a room full of people with disabilities - they have as much right to comment as anyone else.