jump to last post 1-11 of 11 discussions (52 posts)

Abortion politics

  1. lizzieBoo profile image79
    lizzieBooposted 4 years ago

    The British government refuses to consider lowering legal abortion from 24 weeks to 12 weeks. Thoughts?

    1. lizzieBoo profile image79
      lizzieBooposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I guess no one gives a shit. No surprises there then

      1. innersmiff profile image78
        innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Steady on. It takes a while to get a reply on anything at the best of times.

      2. kathleenkat profile image88
        kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Or maybe those of us who care haven't logged in the in past 66 minutes wink

        I think 12 weeks is a completely reasonable amount of time to decide whether or not you want a baby. 24 weeks is 6 months...If you haven't decided by then, may as well go through with it cause you're already showing anyway.

        That being said, I don't think that the legal abortion 'age' would be adjusted unless there was due cause for it. People can whine about the rights of the unborn all they want, but I doubt it will change anything until someone comes along and proves something. Although I have heard of babies being born really early, and surviving. Maybe even as early as 24 months, but I don't know for sure. Research it.

        1. lizzieBoo profile image79
          lizzieBooposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          They can live at 24 weeks yes

          1. psycheskinner profile image81
            psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Survival rate would be around 30%.

        2. Hollie Thomas profile image61
          Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Yes, but you neglect to mention that some women have what appear to be perfectly normal periods a few months into the pregnancy. It isn't always that they *haven't made their mind up* but *didn't know they were pregnant* in the first place.

          1. psycheskinner profile image81
            psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Or they are a terrified 13-year-old living in the house of their abuser and no one detected it until then.

            Or they only discover from the amnio that they children is going to die a horrible painful death shortly after birth due to a genetic condition.

            Or any one of a hundred of other possibilities.

            1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
              Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Exactly, there are a plethora of reasons why a woman (or girl) should be given 24 weeks before reaching a decision.

              1. kathleenkat profile image88
                kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                These are the exceptions, not the rule. For the majority of women, they notice they are pregnant by the time it's 3 months.

                Abortions for medical purposes and well being of mother/baby are more than acceptable to me.

                1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
                  Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Can you provide a link (other than from a pro life group) which indicates that those women, who are in the minority by the way, which opt for termination post 12 weeks, are just those which have *not made up their minds*?

                  I fail to understand your reasoning, when you say that a woman who is approaching 24 weeks might as well *go through with it anyway* because *they are showing*  What do the outward signs of pregnancy have to do with the decision to terminate, or not, as the case maybe?

                  1. kathleenkat profile image88
                    kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I don't have any links. There are many reasons why women would want a late-term abortion, most of which probably aren't documented (that I know of, you don't have to say "why" to get an abortion where abortions are legal). I was referring to my personal beliefs, that is is MY belief that a woman is given more than enough time to decide at 6 months whether or not to carry a baby to term.

                    If not for medical reasons facing life or death, I say she may as well go through with it because 6 months pregnant is really far into the pregnancy. Her body would have already gone through changes, and passing a terminated fetus through the vagina would be similar to giving birth because of it's size (if she doesn't want the baby for reasons of vanity). May as well be a live baby, if we're talking medical expenses and whatnot. Fetuses have been known to survive at 6 months, too.

                    We all believe different things. Whether or not I feel like posting links doesn't validate my beliefs. Look it up yourself if you want. Don't ask me to post a link for you, if this is something you truly care about.

    2. profile image61
      jzcposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      This should not even be a consideration, since life begins when the egg is inseminated. Abortion is the scurge of mankind. in the U.S alone we have lost over 51 million babies. Imagine what we have lost! MABE A DOCTOR WHO WOULD FIND THE CURE FOR CANCER OR MAYBE THE CURE FOR OBESITY OR MENTAL ILLINESS OR WHY THE BRAIN SUCCOMS TO MANY ADDICTIONS.
      jUST IMAGINE IF YOU WERE mURDERED AT BIRTH YOU WOULD'NT BE READING THIS NOW........................

                  ABORTION IS THE DESTRUCTION OF A LIFE.
         AND WHO OR WHAT GIVES US THE RIGHT TO DESTROY WHAT GOD HAS CREATED, WETHER SOME OF YOU BELEIVE IT OR NOT HE CREATED YOU TOO.

  2. knolyourself profile image59
    knolyourselfposted 4 years ago

    What you want me to give a "s**t" about?

  3. psycheskinner profile image81
    psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago

    You demand discussion within 30 minutes?

    My opinion is the UK government has to be guided by their citizens and standards, not mine.

    I personally see no pressing need to lower the limit.  Outside of never/always it is a judgement call.

  4. Hollie Thomas profile image61
    Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago

    Jeremy Hunt came up with this judgement call. He is now also the minister for health, wants to cut NHS costs where ever possible and maximise profits for the private (medical) sector. I'd be interested to see whether he proposes that NHS terminations should only be performed on patients at 12 weeks into pregnancy, or across the board.

    He's not particularly fond of science and working women, either.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012 … n-comments

  5. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago

    Ok... everyone who supports abortion up to 24 weeks.

    If the fetus is birthed at 23 weeks, and is living... would it still be OK to kill it? After all, it's still under 24 weeks.

  6. psycheskinner profile image81
    psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago

    80% of abortions are pre-12 weeks.  Most of the rest will represent special circumstances.  I think the system leaving it to the patient and doctor is working well.

    People see things differently.  But as the fetus is not conscious until it breathes I consider it a potential life, not an actual life, until birth.

    Everyone has their own take on it. But if I ended up with an unwanted pregnancy *I* would want to decide what to do about it.

    1. kathleenkat profile image88
      kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      How do you know it's not conscious? If only babies could talk...

      1. psycheskinner profile image81
        psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        From the rather extensive research which shows that consciousness is suppressed by a triple redundant system until the blood is oxygenated by breathing.

        But I am not asking anyone to think the same way as me.  Just saying that there are rational, evidence-based, sincere differences of opinion here.

        It is not a clear case of good-clever versus evil-stupid with a magical millisecond of pregnancy when personhood occurs.

        1. kathleenkat profile image88
          kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Actually I am genuinely interested. I would like to read about this, if you have any links.

          1. psycheskinner profile image81
            psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The experimental data relates mainly to animals, here is a review http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_uploa … are/94.pdf

            1. kathleenkat profile image88
              kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Thank you! I would never have known where to look. So much pro-this, pro-that when you search "abortion" or "fetus" on the internet.

  7. Paul Wingert profile image79
    Paul Wingertposted 4 years ago

    Government and religion has no business in abortion. That is up to the woman, her doctor and her family.

    1. kathleenkat profile image88
      kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Unfortunately, the government has everything to do with abortions when they are brought to court.

      I have seen on the news where the male has brought the female to court to prevent abortion of the child. Abortion was legalized (in the States) because of a rape victim that brought it to court.

      Because of these happenings, laws were created. To protect the 'exceptions' that fell through the cracks of the original law/s.

  8. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 4 years ago

    I consider late abortions to be murder. Some research shows that a fetus can experience pain at 18-20 weeks:

    http://news.discovery.com/human/fetus-p … n-law.html


    A British study says 24 weeks, and an American study says 28 weeks:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162- … 91704.html

    I also read (I think in one of these articles) that women can opt for pain meds for the fetus during an abortion. I'd never heard of that. Anyone know anything about it? If that's true, and if the fetus doesn't experience pain, the abortion wouldn't seem so horrendous. That's my opinion. I think early abortion should be legal, by the way. A 24-week fetus, however, is not just a mass of cells. I know several babies that age who survived. In fact, we have friends who had a daughter born at 22 or 23 weeks, and she's a healthy first grader now.

    1. movingout profile image59
      movingoutposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @Habee...I applaud your saying early abortion should be legal.  Unfortunately, If I'm correct? Your candidate, Mitt Romney, is against any form of abortion or planned parenthood for that matter?

      1. habee profile image90
        habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        He's for abortion only in the case of rape, incest, or if the mother's life is in danger. I'm pretty moderate (sometimes liberal) on social issues, but I'm a fiscal conservative. The economy/debt/deficit are very important to me now. I can never find a candidate with whom I agree 100%. Anyway, I don't think Romney is going to push any anti-abortion legislation. I think his main focus will be on the economy. I'll always believe he's a moderate at heart, and if he becomes POTUS, I think and HOPE he governs that way, instead of being pulled to the right by the extreme right wing.

        I respect people who are against abortion for moral or religious reasons. I can certainly empathize, but I'm looking at it from a more practical point of view. Women are going to have abortions - legal or not. They've been doing it in some form or another for hundreds of years. I don't want us to return to deadly septic procedures.

        1. movingout profile image59
          movingoutposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          @Habee, everytime Romney shows his moderate side and makes a statement along those lines, his campaign quickly releases a statement opposite of what he just said. (ea: abortion). I also can't agree 100% of anything said by a candidate. What scares me is the used car approach to all questions answered to that particular audience. I have no idea where Romney stands on any position. He may be a moderate at heart, but the rest of his teams players arent. Makes me wonder who will pull his strings if he's elected potus?

          1. kathleenkat profile image88
            kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Where he stands isn't neccesarily where his campaign stands. As you stated, whenever he says something, his campaign releases something different (also, not sure that it truly is 'every time' as you claim).

            As Habee said, he may not personally believe abortion is right, but that doesn't mean he's going to push that agenda. So far as I can tell, what Romney cares most about is the economy (not social issues-such as abortion) and that is something I admire about him.

          2. habee profile image90
            habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            MO, I wasn't very happy with Mitt's choice of VP. I think he's bright, but he's too far to the right for my tastes. I wish we could have Romney/Huntsman or Huntsman/Romney.

  9. austinhealy profile image82
    austinhealyposted 4 years ago

    I think abortion should always be a matter of personal choice, and the decision to perform it belongs to the woman involved and if she wishes so, her immediate family. Nobody else will ever know all the reasons that will make a woman decide to have an abortion. Nobody walks in that woman's shoes. I'm a man and as such, I can only imagine it's a difficult decision to make. But in any case, abortion should be kept legal. Abortions will be performed no matter what. So, it's better if they are done legally and by competent doctors, with a proper follow up. But 24 weeks seems to me a little "late in the game", and in my opinion 12 to 14 weeks seem to be a reasonable limit. And since we're on the subject, imagine for a moment how easier things would be for everybody if politicians and religious people would stay out of the debate ?

  10. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 4 years ago

    The numbers here are kinda strange.
    It's currently legal up to 24 weeks. But it's being proposed to cut that in HALF? To 12 weeks?
    I mean, what about 20 weeks? Or 18 weeks? Or 16 weeks -- when you can have your amnio?

    And just because it's legal up to 24 weeks does not mean that women will automatically hold off and say, "Oh well, I have plenty of time to decide this. I'll just wait until I'm showing and decide then."

    On a related topic, has anyone seen or have thoughts on the new study that finds free birth control cuts down on abortions?
    Thoughts?
    http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/ … s-17400116

    1. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Finding middle ground is a reasonable suggestion, MM. Do you know anything about anesthesia for the fetus in an abortion? I asked in an earlier post, but I guess no one is familiar with it.

    2. kathleenkat profile image88
      kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      That's an interesting way to look at things. But it's a hard conclusion to come to (accurately). Birth control prevents pregnancy, and thus, probably prevents abortions. It does also prevent births, too. So who knows what these women would have chosen had they not had birth control?

      1. Josak profile image60
        Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Statistically almost half of accidental pregnancies in the US end in abortion.

        1. kathleenkat profile image88
          kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          But how do you measure the would-be pregnancies stopped by contraception? Hmm? That is my point.

          1. Josak profile image60
            Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Since the legalization and common availability of contraception the rate of accidental pregnancy has fallen about 20%.

            But avoiding an unwanted pregnancy is very different to having an abortion.

            1. kathleenkat profile image88
              kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              That's just an educated guess, at best, that those two statistics are related. You never really know what would have happened.

              Or do you have a Tardis?

              1. Josak profile image60
                Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Which two statistics? After the legalization of contraceptives accidental pregnancy plummeted and and continued to do so as they became cheaper, since price and availability have steadied out in the late 90s so has the accidental pregnancy rate at a rate about 20% lower. There is no mystery or educated guess to it, it's simple statistics.

                1. kathleenkat profile image88
                  kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Yes, but you cannot possibly know that these women would have accidentally gotten pregnant had they not been on birth control. That is the educated guess part.

                  1. psycheskinner profile image81
                    psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    You can know that it would be possible and so would in some cases occur. 

                    We know it would occur at non-trivial levels given that about half of pregnancies carried to term were unplanned at conception.

                    So the connection seems pretty obvious to me.

  11. Hollie Thomas profile image61
    Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago

    Social science may not be an exact science, in terms of social research perfect relationships almost never occur, but that doesn't mean relationships between variables are never found, nor does it mean that the social sciences can't offer substantial evidence when it comes to approaching societal problems.

 
working