New Minister for Women - Maria Caulfield - is pro life.

[ArabellaScott]

www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/anger-as-mp-who-suggested-cutting-abortion-time-limit-is-made-minister-for-women/ar-AA13vIjr?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=af0ca7de70284591967a666f2eeebfad

'The Lewes MP has previously come under fire for arguing babies born at as little as 18 weeks “grow up to live long, healthy lives like the rest of us”,'

I thought it was Women & Equalities, has that changed?

Seems like Kemi Badenoch is Women and Equalities while Caulfield has a deputy minister role in that department.

if you search “Caulfield” on gov.uk the info is there, she was appointed on 27th October.

seem like it’s a joint role as Minister for Women at Department for Health and at Kemi Badenoch’s Department for Trade.

Thanks.

Caulfield is correct when saying that the regulation of abortion in the UK is more liberal than in many other countries, and she is also correct when saying that with medical advances, the meaning of ‘viability’ has changed. If viability wasn’t a criterion, then you’d have to ask why we don’t allow abortion up until the moment of birth (unless there is a medical reason).

Personally, I don’t agree with her about the buffer zones, but I’m also a bit frustrated with the intransigence of those who refuse to enter any discussion about any aspect of abortion legislation. This is how you end up with stubborn hardliners on both sides, and a US-style outcome.

An 18 week old foetus is not viable.

Yes, she’s talking total bollocks. I imagine she’s confused 18 week prematurity (viable) with 18 weeks gestation (not). That hardly inspires confidence in her abilities or intelligence.

I don’t want to get into the trans debate, but those who think women’s rights are safer under the Tories are in for a shock.

Agreed. But quite a few 24-week old foetuses are now, aren’t they? I think it’s better to have an honest discussion about these questions, especially as late-term abortions are so rare.

And I don’t think there is any appetite in either party to ban abortion in the UK. That’s just fear-mongering.

Hm. The outlook for babies at 24 weeks is certainly not rosy.

This article seems pretty balanced and compassionate:

www.bpas.org/get-involved/campaigns/briefings/premature-babies/

In any case, as far as I know, TheirEminence is correct and I'm not aware of any appetite to outright ban abortion. I read some of the recent debate on buffer zones (within the Public order bill) and the issues involved were as much about policing protests as anything else - the legality of abortion wasn't even touched upon.

They had the option to include it in the proposed Bill of Rights to avoid a Roe v Wade situation - they declined.

I think many in the UK are getting more right wing & Conservative

Whilst I don't think its necessarily a thing to be concerned about now, I really don't think its something we can be complacent about.

I think its appalling that a Minister for Woman is anti abortion.

When it comes to attitudes in the UK, pro-lifers receive far more discrimination compared to pro choicers. So her "equalities" appointment sounds fitting to me

I think you have misunderstood the equalities brief.

Well I'm 'pro-life'. I'm also pro-choice, pro-women, pro-contraception of all forms up to and including TOPs as necessary.

It's estimated that between 1 in 3 and 1 in 2 women in the UK will have a termination at some point in their life. Most of them either already are or will become mothers. Can we not obliquely suggest that these woman - many of whom are us, let's face it - are not 'pro-life'? That's just a bit mad.

I'd prefer we stick with the term anti-abortion tbh. Or 'in favour of abortion restrictions'.

Maybe it's just me, but I think the words matter.

That is concerning. I’m not convinced there is much appetite in the UK for placing further restrictions on abortion, so hopefully her views will be irrelevant. One to watch out for though.

I don’t think there is much (if any) need to discuss viability of foetus tbh. Later abortions are almost always due to foetal abnormality / condition incompatible with life. I trust women to make the right choice for them.

Also, as somewhat of a side-note, I find the term “pro-life” a bit annoying. We’re all bloody pro-life, but some of us (usually pro-choice people) recognise the life of the pregnant woman as having actual value beyond being a human incubator!

In order for any change to the abortion law there needs to be a majority vote in favour of the change.

The numbers just aren’t there.

The personal opinions of various ministers are neither here nor there.

Maria Caulfield is pro life but she’s also a registered nurse and very alert to the health and social issues faced by women.

A change to the law needs to reflect the democratic will of the people and most people do not want to see abortion banned.

Consistent polling demonstrates that actually women are far more in favour of tighter laws than men and would like to see a reduction in the limits, but as I said, this would only happen if the majority of the house votes in favour. Labour and the left parties always whips on the issue and the Tories allow a free vote. Many deliberately abstain.

Abortion really isn’t under threat in the U.K.

That’s not me spreading disinformation but just looking at the political situation objectively.

I'm Pro-choice but I think there are many Conservatives that are anti abortion, Rees-Moggs has been quite vocal about his opinions on life starting at conception and that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances (ignoring that his trading company was financing abortion pills in other countries at the time). I suppose at least she's a woman and has a right to her view opposed to a man who should have no say over women's bodies at all, she is only deputy too so hopefully she does not have too much sway.

Thats not really how it works

and everyone is pro life…obvs

The term pro-life is used because it's how that group sees their position, fundamentally. Human life as the most primary of all rights.

Similarly pro-choice is used because it's what many in that group see as the best characterization of their perspective.

If you start trying to let those with the other perspective choose the descriptor of their opponents it very quickly creates an environment where it's impossible to have any kind of viable discourse. You get terms like "pro-death" or "forced-birthers". Great if you want to feel self-righteous, not so much for a healthy political culture.

The term “pro-life” is marketing. It is very much about stopping women from terminating pregnancies and being unable to have control over the number of children they have and when.
Whose lives are they concerned about? Not the women doing the birthing and rearing. Not the women dying of sepsis.
Politically, they’re often the people who don’t want single mothers to receive government benefits and they don’t fund child services.
I prefer the term “anti-safe-and-legal-abortion”.

Can we call it what it is - anti-choice, anti-abortion, pro-forced-birth... take your pick, just something more accurate than "pro life." Language does matter.

Viability is a red herring - it's about ensuring that there is a choice for women with pregnancies where foetal abnormalities are discovered. Given that serious issues may not be discovered until the 20 week scan (which itself due to scheduling may not take place until the 22nd week), there then needs to be a little time to give these women time to consider their options.

Despite the advances of medical science, until a foetus is fully developed, we can't confirm it has developed normally. There's no way around that. So shaving random weeks off the limit just means an increase in babies born with things like spina bifida (which is one of the conditions which can't be confirmed until the 20 week scan).

Just because it seems vaguely relevant, there a 'will she won't she' late abortion story running in The Archers at the moment. The teenager tried to handle it all on her own then others kept telling her it was 'her choice', and she dithered, only sought medical advice late, then discovered she didn't know how weeks were counted. She is somewhere between 18-20 weeks now, due to have her termination this week...

I don't think we can afford to be complacent on this. There are a large number of vocal anti-choice MPs now and they are many in cabinet. Restrictions could easily come in as an amendment that was covered by a 3 line whip. Under the current majority that would require a lot to rebel. The whips will be working hard to ensure minimal rebellions after the past year. I don't think we can say this won't happen. Dorries has spoken on greater restrictions before and Coffey is anti-choice too. Women's rights are at risk from this government in a variety of ways.

If you start trying to let those with the other perspective choose the descriptor of their opponents it very quickly creates an environment where it's impossible to have any kind of viable discourse

got no problem personally with people picking their own descriptor, wouldn’t dream of changing how they describe it

but pro life doesn’t make sense to me and as long as im not using another descriptor or forcing anyone else into a descriptor then i think its fine to say so

(i know you aren’t saying i can’t mangy…but i seemed to go from ‘silly term’ to ‘self righteous and stopping discourse’ without passing go)