Boris has nailed colours to mast

[Ridcully82]

On gender transition at PMQs:" biology overwhelmingly important", preceded by urging respect for those feeling they need to transition. Sounded calm, respectful,and kinda where we were on course before the TRA actions.

Some useful background here:

‘The House of Commons yesterday voted to make telemedicine for early abortion care permanent in England. The vote has been warmly welcomed by the Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare (FSRH) and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) as it will result in improved access to essential reproductive healthcare for girls and women across the country.

Yesterday’s vote was the result of an amendment to the Health and Care Bill, initially tabled by Baroness Liz Sugg in the House of Lords. It reverses the Government’s decision last month to end access to the telemedical pathway after 30 August this year.

The amendment will mean that women will have continued access to home use of the first pill used for an early medical abortion (mifepristone), following a virtual consultation with a qualified nurse or midwife. The vote brings England into line with plans set out by the Welsh Government.

Dr Asha Kasliwal, President of the Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare, said:

“The evidence shows that telemedicine is safe, effective, timely, more accessible than the alternative and preferred by most women.
“We are delighted that Parliament has chosen to listen and respond to the strength of the medical evidence, and the views of women and organisations working to support reproductive health.

“We salute the parliamentarians who have voted to stand up for the rights of girls and women to access an essential form of sexual and reproductive healthcare.

“And we hope to see a continued focus on the needs of women in the publication of both the Women’s Health Strategy and Sexual and Reproductive Health Strategy in the Spring.”

Dr Edward Morris, President of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, said:

“We are delighted that MPs have voted in favour of the amendment, which follows the Welsh Government’s decision to make telemedicine for early medical abortion a permanent feature of abortion care in England.
“This is a vital decision that protects women’s rights to access the healthcare they deserve and gives them the choice of accessing early abortion care at home.

“We would like to thank all the campaigners who have helped to make this possible as well as the MPs who voted yesterday to champion women’s rights and who listened to the medical evidence that telemedicine for early medical abortion is safe, enables women to access treatment sooner, and is a service that many women prefer.”

www.rcog.org.uk/news/parliament-votes-to-make-telemedicine-for-early-medical-abortion-permanent-in-england/

Yes I think some procedural changes needed to be made. That doesn’t alter the substance of the issue at stake though. Women’s health.

Yes, I can certainly see a few safeguarding concerns from that extract I would want ironing out.
Thanks for the information.

Tabby and PhonyPony as you say you have no idea about this issue and you would be interested to find out about your concerns, here’s a link to a thread that discusses those issues:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_campaigns/4511045-We-need-you-Lobby-your-MP-for-the-last-chance-to-retain-the-right-to-telemedical-abortion

Thanks. It passed, didn’t it? It’s permanent now.

Personally I trust in the wishes of women who want to access a safe, legal abortion as early as possible once they have decided they need it. I trust in medical professionals working to care for them and their evidence about the advantages that retaining telemedical abortion has brought to their patients, including some of the most vulnerable women who are facing abuse at home. So that’s why I support this.

Obviously there are women experiencing abuse and coercion within any system that supports women. Sadly that’s a complete given.

Particularly for services that support women and their health. Even more particularly to do with women’s reproductive health, which abusive men will typically try to control, for obvious reasons.

Awareness of abuse and what to do when it’s suspected or is found is a key part of care within any professional system of abortion or maternity care. Women can be forced to have children, as much as they can be forced to not have children.

So safeguards need to be developed that are robust enough to support women’s own decisions within safe, modern, responsive, accessible services that women need and want. Safeguarding needs to be constantly refined and tested to make sure that it’s working well. It has to be fit for purpose.

So because of all that, I can’t support anyone (specifically Boris Johnson’s government, in this instance) putting barriers in the way of essential services in their entirety that women want, and professionals support, because of the potential for abuse.

That concern about system failure hurting women has to be weighed very seriously against the objective potential for benefit for women. Given the very evidenced benefits to women of easier access to safer, earlier abortion, the onus is on the abortion providers and the government to navigate safeguarding women into the legal system.

The answer to the problem isn’t to make access to abortion later and more onerous and additionally stressful for everyone.

I'm sorry, I don't understand here.

I looked through that thread and yes, there were a few pro lifer trolls, but in amongst that were genuine safeguarding concerns.

Ones which I would want explicitly addressed before I put my name to that amendment.

So you can't assume a vote against is because misogyny, prolife etc.

It might be someone with safeguarding concerns. A yes or no vote doesn't address this.

Also it passed, correct?

Given that people's views on abortion don't tend to be split along sex lines, except to the extent that women are sightly more likely to be conservative about abortion, I think assuming misogyny is at the heart of any objection is rather reductive and not all that much different than saying people who have issues with gender ideology are transphobic. You can disagree with a position without those kinds of assumptions about motives.

I will never vote Labour again. And I will vote Tory now, at least until the gender id
thing is sorted. Labour have become an absurd party who have elevated bizarre theories to a matter of prime political importance and consequently made themselves look ridiculous. How can they ignore the concerns of half the population for the sake of a tiny minority ? It's so stupid. Labour, in promoting these ludicrous theories, also ignores the dangers to children. If Boris removes trans activists from schools, hospitals and the workplace, I'll vote for him for life. This is not a small issue in comparison with really important ones - it is major as it will define girls' and women's futures.

Yes it passed.

You may be asking about this in good faith, but a lot of discussion when it comes to abortion (which is always less risky at any gestational stage than going through full term pregnancy, labour and birth) focuses on objections to abortion based on questions of medical safety and safeguarding, questions which keep being raised even when the evidence around those questions is reassuring. When professionals support it. Even when evidence from women shows that the service is benefiting women. The whole service gets called into question. The vote was not to put in safeguarding (that’s already there) it’s to provide the service that way or not at all.

The worries about safeguarding raised around this, are never raised to the same level about the risk that women are being forced to continue pregnancies they don’t want, which is equally an awful problem needing lots of professional structures and safeguards around it.

But nobody is seriously arguing that maternity provision should be made in total less accessible because of fears of reproductive coercion. They just argue this about abortion provision. Why is that?

Well I'm pro choice, so I would raise concerns if the reverse came up, but as I understand it abortion, at least in the early stages is far less of a strain on a woman's body than carrying to term.

Not sure what you are trying to say really, other than implying anyone who raises questions about safeguarding is misogynist, pro life extremist.

I don't think polarisation helps.

OK then.