Abortion - "its days are numbered"

[abilockhart]

In the US, there will quite possibly be a 5-4 majority on the Court to overturn Roe v. Wade when Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed.
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/7/10/17551644/brett-kavanaugh-roe-wade-abortion-trump

Meanwhile, here in the UK, Jacob Rees-Mogg, the bookies' favourite to succeed Theresa May, is against abortion in all circumstances, including in cases of rape:

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2017/09/06/jacob-rees-mogg-says-against-gay-marriage-abortion-circumstance/

Is access to abortion now under serious threat?

Its difficult floral

But my mum would probably have been the same

But she would never ever do anything to hinder that woman or judge her so i think I struggle more with people outside of clinics or campaigning for this sort of thing

prawn

for your SIL

In the case of a blanket ban, what do they propose in the case of ectopic pregnancy? Life or death situation for the mother and the embryo can't survive either way.

As a woman who has had two abortions myself, judgement is very far from my thinking on the matter. I'm not a crazy chanter, and I don't think graphic placards do any good at all, and fairly obviously, as someone who believes all killing is wrong, from the death penalty to euthanasia and abortion, I don't agree with murdering abortion doctors.
I don't demonise women who have made a legal choice, either. But I do disagree with abortion in almost all circumstances except the relatively rare situations where the life of the mother is in peril, and that is very much a difficult medical issue - ectopics and so forth.
I believe in being able to make my case in this regard, in a free society. But I am very aware of the reality of the situation that my views are in a very small minority, especially in the UK.

Oh sorry floral

I honestly meant that i think you have the same outlook as my mum

I hope I haven't expressed myself so badly that you think i was having a pop

apologies if it came over that way

Rufus, as my girls say, it's chill. I just know that I'm on a feminist board, and I'm not here to evangelize for my point of view - but I do want to have that point of view stated clearly so there's no confusion. This debate generates so much heat and emotion (completely understandably) I am always keen not to misrepresent anyone, given that it's a life or death issue for many on both sides of the topic.

There are plenty of states here in the US where abortion is so far out of reach for most women it may as well be illegal. A dozen or so states also have laws reverting back to pre-Roe bans should Roe be overturned. Those laws were enacted shortly after the decision came down in the 70s. The Republicans and their allies have been rolling back Roe from the beginning, if anyone here believed abortion was legislatively safe they weren't paying attention. Add to that the slow take over of US hospitals by the Catholic church and situation has been pretty grim here for as long as I can remember which would be the mid-90s.

The muderous "pro-lifers" here don't just shot doctor's in/outside of their clinics, they shoot them in their churches too.

I hope pps are right and that abortion is legislatively safe in the UK.

Abortion is not at risk in the UK.

The Tories are not abolishing the NHS.

There is a serious issue here re the US but the level of scare mongering on this thread is ridiculous.

The problem with the UK is that abortion (with the exception of medical necessitated terminations) is not legal. It is simply not prosecuted. Jacob Rees Nigg is neither here nor there. The prime minister can't singlehandedly end accessible abortion practices and he isn't going to be able to find enough anti abortion mps to enforce the current legislation let alone repeal it with an outright ban. The law needs to be reformed still. It only works because doctors are willing to abuse a loop hole to perform at will abortions. This isn't good enough. At will abortions need to be legalised with clear restrictions on who/where/how they can be performed and under what circumstances doctors can refuse an at will abortion/limitation period on at will abortions.

The UK I think won’t change the law. It’s based on sound medical data and very few politicians have extreme pro life views.

There are VERY few late term abortions by the way - the ones that are tend to be very much wanted babies that have a catastrophic condition or are endangering the health/life of the mother. It’s a Fraction of a percent as far as I remember.

The USA is a different ball game. DH actually brought the Roe vs Wade challenge to my attention yesterday in one of his rants about the erosion of democracy and the bias of the Supreme Court election procedure :) (he also stated that men shouldn’t even be voicing an opinion on abortion, it’s a female issue.)
The Supreme Court member sit for life, and although they should be impartial, they’re obviously put forward for the posts in a partial way by whichever lotcare in power. So there’s a huge potential bias there.
Women’s rights in the USA are under grave threat. I really fear and feel for them :(

Also agree entirely with the posters who say that brexit will trigger a reduction in rights and an opening of the NHS to US companies.

Very worrying.

I don't think abortion is under threat from RM - he's made his Catholic views very clear but equally has said he would think it wrong to impose those views on others.

I know, I know, his voting record. IMO these votes were made to appease his Catholic conscience safe in the knowledge that there was no actual chance of a change in legislation. See also: gay marriage.

I think that in the outside chance he were to be in a position of power, he could actually serve as a really interesting example of tolerance. Something the left needs to learn asap.

Whatever your political leanings, he is clearly a bright man. He knows that access to abortion is essential to the well being of our society.

Although I do think that as the political right rises there will be much more anti abortion discourse. This is not necessarily bad. It's a serious topic and discussion is good.

I do not believe at all that access to abortion is under threat.

I also don't believe leaving the EU affects abortion rights in the UK.The 1967 Act pre-dated the Common Market

The 24 week UK limit is one of the longest (possibly the longest?) in the EU.

If a baby may have a life long debilitating condition imagine saying to that women sorry you have to go through the rest of the pregnancy and birth (even if it will kill you also) as one baby out of 1000s survived before 24 weeks so the law was changed. It is barbaric

This is just scare mongering too. There are exceptions permitted to the UK mainland 24 week limit. Ireland allowed a woman to die because UK law would not and does not enforce what you are suggesting.

The UK is splitting from the EU, losing human rights legislation

Yes we are leaving the EU but that has no impact on the European convention of human rights. It is 2 entirely separate things.

I also don't agree abortion rights are at risk in the UK there is no real chance it would get through parliament

I don’t mind JRM having those views on abortion, they are his personal views - I’d only mind if he campaigned to change the laws to make it harder to access or to ban it.

Sorry meant to say- . There are exceptions permitted to the UK mainland 24 week limit. Ireland allowed a woman to die but UK law would not and does not enforce what you are suggesting.

A number of states in the US have effectively removed abortion as an option for women by closing all clinics and refusing to fund health care for women. They have also passed "heartbeat laws" that outlaw abortion at 20 weeks, just when the tests are done for anomalies.
Roe is more than a right to abortion. It is the only Constitutional decision that provides women a rights to privacy. The ERA was never ratified so technically women's rights are not addressed in the Constitution.

What are you referring to racecardriver? The 1967 Act allows abortion with permission of 2 Drs. What are you referring to when you talk about exercising a loophole?

I am firmly pro choice but have no issue with JRM holding his views, any more than I have an issue with MIL holding them. He's been very clear that he would not seek to change the laws in the U.K.

Mogg can go fuck himself

Mogg can go fuck himself

Grow up.

A quick Google, or even reading the thread will tell you that he has no desire to impose his personal beliefs on the country.

A region of the UK of GB and NI (NI) criminalises abortion right now - and has prosecuted and convicted women for obtaining an abortion within the past few years. I would focus on this rather than worrying what might happen in the future with RM.

Not sure what will happen in the US if they overturn Roe. I can't see a Roberts court overturning established precedent but you never know.
Far more likely that unreasonable restrictions on abortion will be upheld. Where I am - MA - abortion is already recognised as a constitutional right under our state constitution so it will not affect me. It won't affect women in the 20 states likely to outlaw it either - as long as they can afford to travel. So it is poorer women who will be affected - as usual.

At the risk of repeating myself, Roe is what gives women a constitutional right to privacy.
Overturn Roe and you strip women of their right to privacy.

I agree thebewilderness - losing Roe could affect people - not just women - in all sorts of ways we can't even anticipate - unless maybe the SC acknowledges the right to privacy but says it doesn't extend to right to terminate.

Heard some commentators wondering if the right to privacy is gone, could some women be consitutionally prevented from getting pregnant.

mind you, overturning Roe, could actually change the reality of politics in the US. Voters who feel passionately about abortion are often one-issue voters. I heard many of them interviewed before the presidential election. They were vehemently pro-life but didn't like Trump's immigration policies - thought them essentially unchristian. But they voted on what they thought was the bigger issue. If Roe is gone, the republicans lock-in on those one-issue voters is gone on a federal level.

That is actually an excellent point, pallisers, that I have not considered before. It's very true, I know people who held their nose and voted Republican even though they disagree on the broader platform, because of their commitment to the single issue. If the single issue was gone from the federal level, then frankly, all bets are off for them.

If the single issue was gone from the federal level, then frankly, all bets are off for them.

Absolutely. The day Roe is overturned is the day evangelicals and some catholics (not many) rejoice and the republicans realise they now lack a shoe-in for votes.

If I were the democrats, the day it happens I would say "ok, that's that, now look what else I can do for you on immigration, poverty, work, etc"