Abortion debate

[barrymarshall]

*Bob* Wrote:

> Normally more female than male, I'd day. Mostly

> because a quarter of SE22 has a bun in the oven,

> and you can't watch Rikki Lake all day long.

LMAO! :))

[Nero]

I just don't see how just because a foetus doesn't look like a fully-developed baby one can delude onseelf into thinking it is somehow not human. It is human, but at a very early and very singular stage of development. I argue that it is impossible to deny that and that is why I was very brass tacks, Mockney.

I believe sincerely that taking the life of a thumb-sized foetus is as bad as taking that of an adult or child. The fact that there is a sanctioned and systematic structure in place to facilitate such actions is even more distasteful.

If you accept what I've said, then all the talk of 'viability' and '20 weeks' loses all meaning.

If it counts for anything, I think the death penalty is also wrong. Nero

[downsouth]

Another man I'm afraid - This really is a tricky and sensitive subject. I have a similar quandry to MP in that I believe there is an inherent 'wrong' in the matter but I can understand and fully support the choice. I do think there should be a lower upper limit as I do think that a baby whether it can yet live independently or not is a human who should enjoy the rights that we have. So for my part an earlier decision where no pain is felt (although I'm not sure if there is pain felt early or not) would be best.

Also, I wonder, is this a decision that should be left to the woman only?

[zephyr]

The current debate in the news concerns 'social' terminations. It has been legal to terminate a pregnancy on medical grounds at any gesation since the 90s when the laws were last changed. That means termination can be carried out on a pregnancy (even uto 9 months) where the 'baby' has serious medical complications which would mean that it would suffer after birth or will suffer and die (i.e. no treatment available). In these cases procedures are undertaken to ensure that the baby is not alive at birth.

The law in the USA is different than here. In the USA an unborn baby is afforded rights under law and you can be procecuted for killing an unborn baby i.e. if a pregnant mother is killed by someone that person may be charged for two murders. Here unborn babies have no rights in law and thus do not have the same legal protection.

Very very very rarely a termination can be carried out over 24 weeks for the sake of the health of the mother.

[DaveR]

"Here unborn babies have no rights in law and thus do not have the same legal protection."

It is an offence to cause a child capable of being born alive to die before it has an existence independent of its mother or to procure a miscarriage other than as allowed by the Abortion Act (max penalty in either case - life imprisonment)

[Keef]

Bloke or not, I'm going to chip in.

I believe that abotion should be available with minimum fuss and extra stress for the woman. However, I strongly believe that there should be an end date. I do believe that after a certain stage, a foetus becomes a baby before birth, and even if it's one in a hundred that would survive at 20 weeks, that's still one too many for me.

Of course there are health implications, and if birth would harm the mother (more so than normal), or if the child would have a very poor quality of life, then things change.

It's such a wide ranging debate, and I believe it's impossible to be hard and fast on one side of the fence or the other, without leaving yourself open to some serious contradictions.

2 friends that I can think of have had terminations recently(ish), and I must admit to feeling slightly annoyed with them (not sure what word to use other than annoyed) because these people had gone and had a good time (nothing at all against that by the way, I'm not a prude), not been careful, and gotten pregnant, which frankly there is no need for.

I'm not against abortion, but I'm against it being the next best thing to contraception! Accidents happen yes, but where avoidable, they should be avoided.

I also believe a bloke has just as much right to an opinion on this as a woman. Of course the woman's decision is final, it's not the bloke who is expected to carry and give birth to the child. However, I think women forget sometimes that the bloke will be effected by the decision too.

[*Bob*]

I think the reason why we're seeing more men than women voicing their opinions is because most women (apart from a few with strong views) are sensible enough to realise they probably won't know for sure how they feel about it unless it actually becomes a choice they have to make - hopefully never.

[mockney piers]

As far as I can see the make-up of the forum posters (outside the wanted section) pre 5 o'clock is heavily male, especially in the lounge (no offence anna, cwald and occasionally dm), and it evens up significantly in the evening.

Not sure why this is the case, maybe women are more conscientious at work, maybe not; I dunno, just my observation.

[*Bob*]

Perhaps we should have a 'Forum Census', Mr Admin?

[Administrator]

Maybe one day

[Annasfield]

I'd like to reiterate that I wasn't saying that chaps shouldn't comment on this or have an opinion. I was just really surprised to see an all male response.

Couldn't agree more *Bob*, what a horrible decision to have to make. I hope it's one I never have to deal with and that's probably why I sit firmly on the fence.

Mockney - are you saying I'm not conscientous!? ;-)

[lozzyloz]

I'm pro-abortion. Always have been. When I was in my teens/early twenties I didn't place a high value on the unborn foetus. Too me abortion was basically another form of contraception. When my first child was accidently conceived I desperately argued with my partner to abort. She refused. Thankfully. Everytime I look at my eldest I feel a tinge of guilt that if I had my way due to my stupidity and ignorance he wouldn't be around today.

Problem is not the abortion process itself. It's balancing access to the procedure versus persuading people to avoid being in the situation in the first place. I think in the majority of cases, with young girls, it's seen as just another form of contaception and not as a potential human life.

Abortion is a womans right, whatever the reason. Where possible the partner and medical profession should have an input but not the final say.

[Keef]

Annasfield Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> probably why I sit firmly on the fence.

Sit too firmly on the fence and you'll never get pregnant, so no worries ;-)

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

DaveR - It may be an offence (not sure about that tho because I have no idea what statute you are quoting) - but it's not murder, because it is not a human in the eyes of the law until it is expelled and has taken it's first breath.

Mikeb & Nero - I think there is no way you can give more weight to the rights of a feotus than you can to a sentient adult woman. if she knows she does not want a baby, why would anyone force her to have it? What kind of life would that child have?

Shaman - what makes you think the trauma of an abortion will never leave a woman? This is a patronising attitude that perpetuates the stereotype of the weak minded, unstable, infantile woman. I have had 2 terminations at 8 and 12 weeks, I suffered no trauma as I knew as soon as I was pregnant that I did not want to be. Women are capable of making difficult decisions about their lives and the lives of their family, without needing counsellors telling us how we should feel.

[Maurice]

I think you just offered us the case study we needed on so many levels.

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Trying to get an easy dig Maurice? And there was me feeling all warm towards you, because you had finally said something I could actually agree with.

[SeanMacGabhann]

I didn't think it was a dig - I thought it was a come-on ;-)

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Was i being sensitive? That's not like like me!

Hmmn, I think I'm too used to sparring with Mr M, sorry if you weren't having a pop.

[dulwichmum]

::o

[mikeb]

CWALD - my point was that in terms of sentience, there is nothing particular unique about the moment of birth.

Your other point is also open to debate as well: does a woman's choice _always_ outweigh the interests of a foetus? It's worth considering which rights are in question: on the foetus's side, something very close to the right to life; on the woman's side, something more amorphous. Does this moral calculus also apply after the child is born, as well as before birth?

[dave & ailing]

My post was just meant to correct the impression that might have been given that there are no laws in the UK which prevent harm to unborn children.

For the legal background, including offences, click here.. Not sure whether the fact that there are separate offences rather than murder means a foetus isn't a human.

[Maurice]

A dig indeed. You threw this grenade this morning hoping to get a fight. Most people agreed with the basic premise but that wasn't enough for you.

I'm sure women everywhere feel empowered by your post. 'Ah ain't nothin' abortin' a baby. Did it twice myself and was back down the pub by night time. Easy. Everybody should try it.'

Ghastly.

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

So do you think when there is war and famine and people living in poverty all around the world, because we like cheap organic food and shiny crap we don't need, that women who know thay cannot look after another child for whatever reason should wring their hands and wail because they decide to control their own reproduction and have a termination.

I never said I took the decision lightly, or was flippant about it. I said I was not traumatised. I did something i felt I needed to do and just got on with it, as many people around the world have to do every day in countless ways. Sorry for not being suitably damaged by the experience.

Also if we want to look at trauma, what about the woman who is denied an abortion, and forced to carry an unwanted baby to term, go through an agonising labour with all the physical and mental trauma that might entail and then what? Be stuck with a baby she can't bond with or cannot look after? Or maybe the infertile of you will tell her that she should give it up for adoption. What about the trauma caused every time she looks at the scars from pregnancy or remembers the baby she gave away? Or the fear that the kid will come looking for her with blame in it's eyes when it gets to 18? Or what about the kid, adopted by people with no genetic similarities, who grows up always feeling different? Or the adoptive parents who find they cannot love a child who seems like an alien because it has no similarities to them? What about all that trauma? Is that trauma preferable to the minimal/non-trauma of a termination?

By the way my first child was born 10 weeks early, so I know about special care babies, but that does not change my view that any child that is not wanted should not have to be born.

[Maurice]

Don't minimise what many women go through in making the decision to abort. And impoverished countries are not a fair comparison, though the rhetoric from you is predictable. It's like a cut and paste with you when it comes to enlightened liberal thinking. Oh for more truly deep thinking, unique liberals. I blame the internet.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Quite an interesting website entry as a reaction to the recent stuff which seems to be anti-religious, but nonetheless informative http://www.ministryoftruth.org.uk/2007/10/25/dr-anands-casebook/

For my pennyworth, I am anti abortion (and death penalty for the record).

Please note CWALD I am not judging you, just giving my opinion which we are all entitled to do. I'm not asking any of you to agree or disagree, just respect my right to hold that view which I in turn accord to you all.

[edited after some thought to remove crass reference to FH]