The British government refuses to consider lowering legal abortion from 24 weeks to 12 weeks. Thoughts?
I guess no one gives a shit. No surprises there then
Steady on. It takes a while to get a reply on anything at the best of times.
Or maybe those of us who care haven't logged in the in past 66 minutes
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.
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.
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.
Exactly, there are a plethora of reasons why a woman (or girl) should be given 24 weeks before reaching a decision.
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.
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?
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.
When you make a statement such as "these are the exceptions not the rule" the burden of proof lies with you, not me. And as you quite rightly pointed out, specifics regarding late term abortions are pretty difficult to find- I thought that you may be privy to some information which the rest of us arn't. Nevertheless, you have confirmed what I thought to be the case, this is just your opinion- and in no way factual.
Not everyone who gets an abortion is raped, or a teenager, or in mortal danger. And that isn't just my opinion.
I agree completely, however, if the cut off for termination was 20 weeks, those who had been raped, teenagers, those whose lives were threatened etc would be treated as if their pregnancy was *normal* or they conceived in *normal circumstances* And, personally, I for one do not feel that I have any right to make decisions on behalf of another woman, who may have found herself in nightmarish circumstances such as this.
I do believe that the decision to permit termination up to 24 weeks was made for specific reasons.
20 weeks? 24 weeks? 12 weeks?
Does it change? There is always a cutoff point where a pregnancy is treated normal, and 'not okay' for abortion. We are already making decisions for other women, because quite frankly, the law has gotten involved all too many times (in your country, my country, and many others). Unfortunately to have the freedom of rights, we have to have laws regulating. Perhaps if there were no laws about how late in the pregnancy someone can have an abortion, people would just get them as soon as they go into labor because the pain is too unbearable.
This is all I'm saying: 6 months? That's half a year. That's pretty far into a pregnancy, too.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
How do you know it's not conscious? If only babies could talk...
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.
Actually I am genuinely interested. I would like to read about this, if you have any links.
The experimental data relates mainly to animals, here is a review http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_uploa … are/94.pdf
Government and religion has no business in abortion. That is up to the woman, her doctor and her family.
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.
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.
@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?
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.
@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?
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.
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.
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 ?
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?
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/ … s-17400116
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.
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?
Statistically almost half of accidental pregnancies in the US end in abortion.
But how do you measure the would-be pregnancies stopped by contraception? Hmm? That is my point.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Obviously, likely, or probable.
But not provable. THAT is what I'm saying.
It's not provable that the sun will rise tomorrow, but I am still setting my alarm clock.
And you have no way of knowing that had you not set your alarm clock, you wouldn't have woken up anyway
If you are going to demand such semantic levels of cause and result proof then absolutely nothing in the political or economic field is provable and we might as well all give up.
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.
by theirishobserver. 7 years ago
In 2010 almost 8,000 Irish Females travelled to England to have their unborn babies terminated. Some of these females were as young as 11 years old; the majority of terminations were convenience terminations, Doctors being told that the women simply did not want another child or that they were...
by LailaK 7 years ago
The 2012 presidential election is approaching! Do you think that the new presidential candidates should support or ban abortion for women of all ages? Why?
by Susie Lehto 15 months ago
It is a start in the right direction as I believe.I believe everyone has a right to life. Everyone! Thankful for the progress made. I cannot express how thankful I am, not here. All Lives Matter!
by Scott S Bateman 2 years ago
The abortion debate is dominated by two extremes. On the one side, "pro life" extremists insist that abortion is murder. On the other side, "pro choice" extremists insist that abortion is a personal choice.I have met quite a few people who think they belong to one or the other....
by theirishobserver. 8 years ago
We have been told time and again that unborn babies under 24 weeks have no chance of survival and so the legal limit in the UK for killing an unborn child is 24 weeks - however - we know from the story below that the 24 week limit is a lie - but who told it and why?Together they weighed about the...
by peter45 4 years ago
how can i terminate a 6 weeks old pregnancy?
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|