Abortion Law
Author
Discussion

JagLover

Original Poster:

46,735 posts

264 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Michael Howard has gone on the record as saying that he believes the limit for aborting a healthy foetus should be reduced from 24 Weeks.

I think it is high time that someone drew attention to the fact that babies can be legally aborted past the time when if they were born prematurely they might be able to survive outside the womb.

When does a baby become a person?

maxf

8,443 posts

270 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Not sure about when a foetus becomes a person - the point at which it can feel pain perhaps?

On the face of it his suggestion seems sound enough - 24 weeks is certainly very late.

Plotloss

67,280 posts

299 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
I thought after about 20 weeks the medical profession were very very very very reluctant to abort due to risk of harm to the mother anyway?

agent006

12,058 posts

293 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
I assume reduced refers to bringing the limit forward.

JagLover

Original Poster:

46,735 posts

264 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
agent006 said:
I assume reduced refers to bringing the limit forward.


He means bringing it down to 20 or 22 weeks

Mrs Fish

30,018 posts

287 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Having recently had a 12 and 20 week scan, I believe the limit should be bought down to between 12 and 16 weeks. I know the baby couldn't really live if it was born between these times but it is pretty much fully formed, even if the organs are not fully developed.

I have just gone past the 28 weeks mark and I have been feeling him move around for about 2 months now, I really can not imagine aborting as late as 24 weeks.

Plus at that late stage you would have to actually give birth to it anyway.

JagLover

Original Poster:

46,735 posts

264 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
The more I think about abortion the more it makes me uncomfortable-The fact that a human being can be killed just so that it does not cramp the lifestyle of the expectant mother-who could, if she wanted, give the baby up for adoption anyway.

Plotloss

67,280 posts

299 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
JagLover said:
The more I think about abortion the more it makes me uncomfortable-The fact that a human being can be killed just so that it does not cramp the lifestyle of the expectant mother-who could, if she wanted, give the baby up for adoption anyway.


So you'd have a 13 year old rape victim go to term just because she can give a child away at the end?

JagLover

Original Poster:

46,735 posts

264 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Plotloss said:

JagLover said:
The more I think about abortion the more it makes me uncomfortable-The fact that a human being can be killed just so that it does not cramp the lifestyle of the expectant mother-who could, if she wanted, give the baby up for adoption anyway.



So you'd have a 13 year old rape victim go to term just because she can give a child away at the end?


Lets phrase it the other way-say this baby was born and then she decided to kill it-would you support this?

If not-what has changed-it has been born-but it is still the same baby it was in the womb a few hours ago.

When does this baby become a person-this is what we are talking about here-a human being being killed-not some inanimate object.

Plotloss

67,280 posts

299 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
No lets phrase it my way.

Would you have a 13 year old rape victim go to term because she can?

JagLover

Original Poster:

46,735 posts

264 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Plotloss said:
No lets phrase it my way.

Would you have a 13 year old rape victim go to term because she can?


It depends on when we define a baby as being human. If she has passed that time 15 weeks or 20 weeks or whenever then yes.

Mrs Fish

30,018 posts

287 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Gazboy said:

This thread is a waste of time, it'll stir up the usual blinkered bullshit, go on for 40 pages with nothing new being said.


Indeed

Plotloss

67,280 posts

299 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
So regardless of the emotional trauma because it makes you feel uncomfortable, a person not connected in anyway with said 13 year old rape victim should go to term?

Do you see what I am getting at here?

Abortion is such a complicated issue that banning it would cause FAR more hurt. The law should not be involved that means that each case will be managed on the merit it deserves.

Prohibition leaves no wiggle room if you see what I mean.

Scoobz

6,578 posts

277 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
JagLover said:

Plotloss said:
No lets phrase it my way.

Would you have a 13 year old rape victim go to term because she can?



It depends on when we define a baby as being human. If she has passed that time 15 weeks or 20 weeks or whenever then yes.


Really? Yes?

Interesting... What if the 13 yr old was your sister / daughter.

JagLover

Original Poster:

46,735 posts

264 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Gazboy said:


As for cramping the lifestyle- what if one partner was made redundant and simply cannot afford to bring the baby up, nor have mertanity leave/sick leave to have the baby? This place is always full of anti-spnger posts and 'if you can't feed em-don't breed 'em', but now you are advocating just that.



have you heard of something called adoption.

JagLover

Original Poster:

46,735 posts

264 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Scoobz said:

JagLover said:


Plotloss said:
No lets phrase it my way.

Would you have a 13 year old rape victim go to term because she can?


It depends on when we define a baby as being human. If she has passed that time 15 weeks or 20 weeks or whenever then yes.



Really? Yes?

Interesting... What if the 13 yr old was your sister / daughter.


Since it has not happened I don't know

But it is interesting that this should be the argument used to justify abortion-what percentage of those seeking an abortion are 13 year old rape victims-is it perhaps 0%

Scoobz

6,578 posts

277 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Or any rape victim then for that matter. Whether she was 13 or 33.

Mrs Fish

30,018 posts

287 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Am I missing the part where Jaglover reckons abortion should be banned full stop I thought he was just on about reducing the limit?

Lois

14,706 posts

281 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
He does want to reduce it to 20 weeks.
There are a lot of clauses which it wouldn't affect. For instance severe abnormalities detected later on that 20 weeks...infact up to term, can legally be terminated. Also any risk to mother or baby if the pregnancy was to carry on.

I still don't know how I feel about this. On one had I do not like so called "social terminations". Yes they do have their place as you have to appreciate other people's situations, but lowering the dates would affectively take away choice for many people.
Some people can be unnaware of being pregnant until quite late, and then to add on the time it take to make an informed decision and arrange the termination, this can take away people's basic rights (and no matter what you believe, people to have a right as to what happens to their body).

On the other hand in an ideal world no one would want an abortion and if they did it would be done as soon as possible, like 4-6 weeks.

rude-boy

22,227 posts

262 months

Monday 14th March 2005
quotequote all
Mrs Fish said:

Gazboy said:

This thread is a waste of time, it'll stir up the usual blinkered bullshit, go on for 40 pages with nothing new being said.



Indeed


Thought about all sort of responses but deep down know that this is the only "right" answer.