Abortion

[rb14]

24 reasons to defend 24 weeks

[melons]

moral stand point or are we just going to take the piss here?

[Elmyn Noos]

24 reasons to defend 24 weeks

 

I agree with all that.

[melons]

fuck it the more i read the more i want a moral stand point,

 

what a load of shite, there are just and valid reasons for a termination. Would i ever deny anyone one? would i hell. It is their choice but the line has to be drawn somewhere and for me, 24 weeks is pushing it too far.

[rb14]

moral stand point or are we just going to take the piss here?

I certainly don't want to take the piss. It's a highly emotive subject and I hesitated before posting. As I said elsewhere, I didn't want to hijack other threads.

[RedKnight]

If you ever want to start an argument with a woman then your best bet is abortion.

 

*Leaves quickly*

[She Knows It]

Can I point out also that lowering the abortion cut-off limit also means legally lowering the recognised point of viability. I know a woman who had a little boy at 23 weeks and 6 days. He was born and put in her arms and she held him while he suffocated to death; all the time she was begging the medical staff to try to save him and they refused because their policy was to not attempt to keep alive babies under 24 weeks.

[robbief]

i think abortions should be given if wanted. i see it as better to loose a few cells than to bring a person into the world that you aren't prepared to look after for what ever reason.

 

on the other hand i saw a picture of an aborted baby that had full shape of body and it made me quite sad.

[Strontium]

Can I point out also that lowering the abortion cut-off limit also means legally lowering the recognised point of viability. I know a woman who had a little boy at 23 weeks and 6 days. He was born and put in her arms and she held him while he suffocated to death; all the time she was begging the medical staff to try to save him and they refused because their policy was to not attempt to keep alive babies under 24 weeks.

 

I am deeply sceptical about this. I find it hard to believe that doctors would refuse to save a life that could be saved, unless that child would be severely disabled.

[Tom R]

[Elmyn Noos]

Can I point out also that lowering the abortion cut-off limit also means legally lowering the recognised point of viability. I know a woman who had a little boy at 23 weeks and 6 days. He was born and put in her arms and she held him while he suffocated to death; all the time she was begging the medical staff to try to save him and they refused because their policy was to not attempt to keep alive babies under 24 weeks.

 

That is surely bullshit.

[Elmyn Noos]

For my money - this is about choice. Once you legislate for something you remove any powers of discretion. Women should have the choice.

 

To over-ride the rights of the woman with concerns about the rights of a foetus is outrageous. As is alluded to in RB14's link, this whole motion before the house of commons is corrupt. The tory MP that raised the issue is anti-abortion, full stop. Her arguments for lowering to 20 weeks are fraudulent as even she does not believe them - this is simply her way of getting a little closer to her insane abortion-free utopia. The people that vote for it will also be guilty of the same fraudulent behaviour as they will be doing it for the same reason she is. There is no medical argument for a 4 week reduction, and for my money, no moral or ethical argument either. This is simply the anti-abortionist lobby trying to further their own agenda.

[melons]

Women need access to safe, legal abortion

Agreed. but do we not have access to that for the 24 weeks prior?

 

There is no right number of abortions.

to be fair no number is the right number, but it happens, there are reasons and it happens.

 

There is no right time to have an abortion

agreed again, but the emotional burden on the woman, family, couple increases with the gestation of the pregnancy. on most cases for this the early a termination takes place the better.

 

Women should not be pushed or panicked into having abortions before they have made their decision

agreed, however, there is a time limit on the decision, 9 months will usually give an answer whether we like it or not.

 

There is no right reason to have an abortion

its up to the individual. what one person sees as a justifiable reason, anoterh person wont.

 

Women often make their abortion decisions based on their desire to be good parents.

I've lost count of the number of women i work with who have sited this as a reason, or the fear of developing a pregnancy related illness, tocophobia, postnatal depression and so on. however, the longer they take the more strain it seems to put on them, raising cortisol levels and according to new research linking that with the future health on the child.

 

Changes in women’s circumstances can mean that a wanted pregnancy becomes unwanted.

one of the reasons in this was foetal abnormality. IF the foetus has a gross abnormality, then legally a termination of pregnancy can occur right up to birth. on the other hand, bollox to it, you don't just decide one day you want a baby, get pregnant, then oops! its not my terms, best get rid. What a crock of shit. if it was here, what would they do then? hand it over to social services... life isnt a bed of roses.

 

Women can take several months to realise they are pregnant

So?

 

Women can be let down by contraception

again, so?

 

Women know that they are carrying a human fetus well before there are photos to prove it.

Actually quite a few women struggle to recognise this, especially in their first pregnancy.

 

Unwanted children carry a significant physical, emotional and financial cost.

no shit? i think we know that before 24 weeks though.

 

Women’s mental health does not suffer as a result of abortion

another load of shit, anyone wanting links to papers i can provide them. i know i have them saved somewhere.

 

Women’s physical health does not suffer as a result of abortion

ok? i believe there is evidence to say latter abortions are more at risk of complications then early medical terminations.

 

Women’s access to abortion services is often not as rapid as it could be

cant argue with that.

 

There is no evidence of improved foetal viability prior to 24 weeks

no, but some still do survive. at 23 weeks, i think its about 15%

 

There is no evidence that foetuses feel pain before 24 weeks

In 1999 the British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology too stated: "Given the anatomical evidence, it is possible that the foetus can feel pain from 20 weeks, and is caused distress by interventions from as early as 15 - 16 weeks"

 

4-D images tell us nothing of relevance to abortion

agreed.

 

A 20-week limit would make very little difference to the abortion statistics, and a massive difference to the minority of individual women whom it would affect.

is that what the argument is about? i thought it was to bring the complications of late terminations down.

 

‘20 weeks’ is an arbitrary figure

agreed, but one needs to have one.

 

20 reasons for 20 weeks’ is a dishonest campaign

yep. only for the reasons she stated though.

 

Public opinion accepts that women need access to abortion

no one is arguing that are they? more the cut off point.

 

Political opinion accepts that women need access to abortion

no one is arguing that are they? more the cut off point.

 

Medical opinion accepts that women need access to abortion

is it me or is this getting tedious.

 

Women’s lives are too important to be played with by political poseurs

Agree with her argument here, but struggle to still understand why 24 weeks.

 

 

 

 

 

Please don't get me wrong GF, i do believe in every woman's right to choose, i just feel the earlier a termination takes place the better.

[She Knows It]

I am deeply sceptical about this. I find it hard to believe that doctors would refuse to save a life that could be saved, unless that child would be severely disabled.

 

All hospitals have their own policy. Some hospitals will attempt to save a "non-viable" birth, others won't. It's not an unusual case SD, many hospitals are very specific about their own cut off date.

 

ETA: It was Fazakerley Hospital, I think. For her next pregnancy she was referred to the Women's and they told her they would have put the baby in SCBU had she had it there.

[melons]

most hospitals have both a cut of date and a birth weight, so if the birth weight is reached but the gestation is still a few days prior to the cut of date they can refuse to treat and vise versa.

[Elmyn Noos]

I would trust the docs on this one. I doubt muchly that they would refuse to treat a baby that had a reasonable chance of survival.

[Redder Lurtz]

*opens the door, looks round, makes a fast exit, closing the door quietly*

[She Knows It]

For my money - this is about choice. Once you legislate for something you remove any powers of discretion. Women should have the choice.

 

To over-ride the rights of the woman with concerns about the rights of a foetus is outrageous. As is alluded to in RB14's link, this whole motion before the house of commons is corrupt. The tory MP that raised the issue is anti-abortion, full stop. Her arguments for lowering to 20 weeks are fraudulent as even she does not believe them - this is simply her way of getting a little closer to her insane abortion-free utopia. The people that vote for it will also be guilty of the same fraudulent behaviour as they will be doing it for the same reason she is. There is no medical argument for a 4 week reduction, and for my money, no moral or ethical argument either. This is simply the anti-abortionist lobby trying to further their own agenda.

 

With respect Noos, until you've carried a baby and felt that non-sentient ball of cells 'dancing' at 20 weeks when Neighbours comes on you can't really listen to people argue that there's no medical proof a 20 week foetus can't feel pain.

 

It is medically proven that they respond to stimuli - sound, touch, motion, light. How can it be proven that they can't feel pain when they are torn limb from limb? And let's make no mistake that's exactly what they do until very late in pregnancy where they will inject it first to stop its heart.

 

Some of the arguments for keeping the limit are risible. To say that there is no evidence that women don't suffer adverse mental effects from termination is fucking bullshit. My best friend terminated twins 3 months ago. I've had her on the phone crying almost every night since. She is in the middle of a breakdown over it and has never once been offered counselling.

 

They're arguing that women may suddenly find themselves single during pregnancy. Does that give a woman the right to kill their kids every time a man leaves? Exceptionally few woman choose to be a single parent. As Daytripper says, you just have to get on with it. Shit happens. Let's make no mistake, we know the possible implications when we open our legs.

 

I don't give a shit about a politician's agenda. All I know is that babies often survive at 23 weeks, and for that reason alone it should be illegal to kill them at this point. Realistically, I think 22 weeks would be a more realistic limit based on the medical facts available, though my heart tells me it should be lower.

 

I find it interesting that some of the liberals who argue so vociferously against the death penalty hold the life of an innocent child in lower esteem than a rapist or murderer.

[Elmyn Noos]

With respect Noos, until you've carried a baby and felt that non-sentient ball of cells 'dancing' at 20 weeks when Neighbours comes on you can't really listen to people argue that there's no medical proof a 20 week foetus can't feel pain.

 

It is medically proven that they respond to stimuli - sound, touch, motion, light. How can it be proven that they can't feel pain when they are torn limb from limb? And let's make no mistake that's exactly what they do until very late in pregnancy where they will inject it first to stop its heart.

 

Some of the arguments for keeping the limit are risible. To say that there is no evidence that women don't suffer adverse mental effects from termination is fucking bullshit. My best friend terminated twins 3 months ago. I've had her on the phone crying almost every night since. She is in the middle of a breakdown over it and has never once been offered counselling.

 

They're arguing that women may suddenly find themselves single during pregnancy. Does that give a woman the right to kill their kids every time a man leaves? Exceptionally few woman choose to be a single parent. As Daytripper says, you just have to get on with it. Shit happens. Let's make no mistake, we know the possible implications when we open our legs.

 

I don't give a shit about a politician's agenda. All I know is that babies often survive at 23 weeks, and for that reason alone it should be illegal to kill them at this point. Realistically, I think 22 weeks would be a more realistic limit based on the medical facts available, though my heart tells me it should be lower.

 

I find it interesting that some of the liberals who argue so vociferously against the death penalty hold the life of an innocent child in lower esteem than a rapist or murderer.

 

Anything that gets excited when Neighbours comes on should be killed.

 

I'm not so sure of the survival rates at any given gestation period, so I'm not going to argue that point.

 

Mine is more a point of having the flexibility in the system to be able to build in some discretion and choice. If a doctor says that on balance at 23 weeks termination is appropriate, I'm happy to rely on that decision. The people in these situations have to be given powers of discretion without the state tying their hands for them. The woman, the doctors, the psychiatric experts, and all the professionals involved in this area should be the ones who have the final say. Ruling out options for them in what must be a horrendously difficult time for them is wrong.

[melons]

 

I'm not so sure of the survival rates at any given gestation period, so I'm not going to argue that point.

 

Premature Birth Statistics

 

Babies born at 23 weeks have a 17% chance of survival

 

Babies born at 24 weeks have a 39% chance of survival

 

Babies born at 25 weeks have a 50% chance of survival

[Elmyn Noos]

Premature Birth Statistics

 

Babies born at 23 weeks have a 17% chance of survival

 

Babies born at 24 weeks have a 39% chance of survival

 

Babies born at 25 weeks have a 50% chance of survival

 

That is interesting reading. Thanks.

 

The article does go on to say that of those percentages, the likelihood would be that the child would be born suffering, not live for very long and die in pain. I'm not sure that contitutes life for me.

[G Richards]

Out of interest, what's the survival rate for a baby, just born, if left there to fend for itself? Want food? Go and get it then! Warmth? Find yourself a blanket! And so on.

 

I'm being provocative, but only to make the point that babies can't take care of themselves, either in the womb or out of it. They need the correct environment to ensure that they are nurtured and have the conditions to develop. For me, this applies in the womb and out of the womb.

 

At some point you cut them loose to get on with it (usually adulthood) and prior to that in various incremental ways to prepare them for being independent.

[rb14]

Nobody is holding "the life of an innocent child in lower esteem than a rapist or murderer." Emotive language doesn't really help though. This is not about innocent children. Nor is it about having to be a woman to be able to understand foetal pain or dancing during "Neighbours". Nor is about being torn limb from limb.

 

The The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists said their is no CAUSAL link between abortion and adverse mental effects. They said "while some women have serious psychological problems following abortion, these cases are relatively rare, and they are often a continuation of problems a woman experienced before the abortion."

 

Where does this end? As prenatal care continues to improve, as we develop new ways of ensuring a foetus survives or understanding how it can respond to stimuli at one week, are you going to argue that there should be no abortion at that stage?

 

This isn't about murder. It's about whether your feelings should hold sway over everyone else in society. Nobody is stopping you from believing that your line in the sand is right, but surely others should be allowed theirs?

 

As far as I am concerned, as early as possible, but as late as necessary. The right of the woman comes before that of the foetus.

[Elmyn Noos]

Out of interest, what's the survival rate for a baby, just born, if left there to fend for itself? Want food? Go and get it then! Warmth? Find yourself a blanket! And so on.

 

I'm being provocative, but only to make the point that babies can't take care of themselves, either in the womb or out of it. They need the correct environment to ensure that they are nurtured and have the conditions to develop. For me, this applies in the womb and out of the womb.

 

At some point you cut them loose to get on with it (usually adulthood) and prior to that in various incremental ways to prepare them for being independent.

 

I might be being a bit dim, but I'm not sure what your point is mate?

[melons]

That is interesting reading. Thanks.

The article does go on to say that of those percentages, the likelihood would be that the child would be born suffering, not live for very long and die in pain. I'm not sure that contitutes life for me.

 

i cant see that there, for them to be in the study the child would have to still be alive at the age of 6.

 

4 out of 5 are born with some level of disability. other then the 22% in the severe bracket, i am sure the rest are of a good quality of life.

 

i have a child born at full term, genetically disabled, she as far as i am concerned has a fantastic quality of life, despite being told at a very young age not to expect much. her disability at the age of 5 was 'moderate' as defined on the article tommys provided. Currently my daughter doesn't even qualify for school support. she is no longer SEN. She walks well, and she can even talk!!

 

what i am saying is just because the gestation can be a risk factor in quality of life a full term baby isn't guaranteed that either.