Abortion

[murtle]

One thing that strikes me is the discussion around the latest time you can have an abortion. I truely belive no one goes to have an abortion at 24 weeks *for fun*, it must be one of the hardest decisions to terminate so late in pregnancy and the lasting effects of that need to be managed. I have had two friends in my life who have each had to go through this due to the risk to both of them. Neither had planned the pregnancy but both were more then devestated to have to go through this. One was advised never to get pregnant again because of the health risk, yet wasn't allowed a hysterectomy (sp).

 

However, the MP's etc feel it's a suitable discussion point. IMO there are more key areas to discuss within the abortion area, such as the counselling and support provided to anyone that has one. The reason behind *the need* for young people to be having repeated ones, the concern here for the spread of STD's that has been on the increase and the potential to ruin many lives. I would hate to see abortion not available to those that want it and would like to see a decrease in the number of *unsuitable* parenting that is happening in this country. I know I am getting older but seeing pregnant girls in school uniform will continue to shock me.

 

In which case I think there should be more discussion around the whole sex education, benefits that are provided and support that is given to people what ever they choose.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that I am pro-choice, pro-choice that a female can choose to have a disabled child if they want to, and also that a female can terminate any fetus if they don't want to continue with the pregnancy.

 

Although we say that a *child* can survive at 24 weeks, this is often only the case because of the intervention of medical science.

 

to those that have shared very intimate parts of their lives here.

[Ian]

I think one thing people should really look into when they say 'Pro Choice' do they only mean its the woman's right? I personally think the father (if known) should have as much right as the mother to say Yes or No to a abortion. What if the father says No but the mother say Yes, I know legally the woman can go ahead but is this right?

 

Cindy

 

I'd just been sat here thinking exactly the same thing. Personally, although I can't imagine any circumstance in which I would choose to abort my own child, I'm pro choice & don't believe that anyone else in society has the right to choose for a couple but, with the exception of reasonable justification for denying that (such as rape or extreme malice after breakup, eg trying to force her to have the child against her wishes but not being willing to take custody himself) I don't think a woman alone should be able to enforce abortion on the father regardless of his opinion.

 

Some of you may argue that she's the one who has to carry the child but I would say that there are choices - abstinence or contraception for example - so if somebody either gets too drunk to know what they are doing or makes a concious choice & has already made her choice (ie to have unprotected sex) when a child is conceived then I think it's for the couple to reach a decision not her. If they can't both agree on termination then I'm afraid I wouldn't legally permit it to happen.

 

In, for example the case of a careless / irresponsible one night stand she can already decide to keep the child against his wishes & he's then forced to support that child for the next 18 years so I don't think it's any less reason for the woman when he doesn't want abortion.

 

Whilst I haven't gone looking I haven't yet seen any particular evidence that would cause me to support a reduction in the 24 week limit presently enforced & despite the odd idiots (didn't have time & third abortion? - I would probably question the right to frequently repeated abortions for anyone) cited in this thread I would imagine that most women who have left it to that late do not enter into it lightly.

Edited May 24, 2008 by Ian

[wickychoo]

I'd just been sat here thinking exactly the same thing. Personally, although I can't imagine any circumstance in which I would choose to abort my own child, I'm pro choice & don't believe that anyone else in society has the right to choose for a couple but, with the exception of reasonable justification for denying that (such as rape or extreme malice after breakup, eg trying to force her to have the child against her wishes but not being willing to take custody himself) I don't think a woman alone should be able to enforce abortion on the father regardless of his opinion.

 

Some of you may argue that she's the one who has to carry the child but I would say that there are choices - abstinence or contraception for example - so if somebody either gets too drunk to know what they are doing or makes a concious choice & has already made her choice (ie to have unprotected sex) when a child is conceived then I think it's for the couple to reach a decision not her. If they can't both agree on termination then I'm afraid I wouldn't legally permit it to happen.

 

In, for example the case of a careless / irresponsible one night stand she can already decide to keep the child against his wishes & he's then forced to support that child for the next 18 years so I don't think it's any less reason for the woman when he doesn't want abortion.

 

Are you my OH? Or have you been talking to him? This is exactly what he says when we argue have a heated debate on this subject. And, whilst I agree that in an ideal world that should happen. A baby is made by a couple and thus an abortion is a joint decision. *But* the practicalities of actually making that happen, legally and ethically make it pretty impossible. Aside from the job of trying to find the father in some circumstances (whether that's because she doesn't know/can't remember/he's done a runner etc) what if its rape/abuse etc?

 

I know its harsh but if you remove the final decision from the woman it is possible thefore for a woman to be forced to have a baby against her will. Is that not the ultimate abuse? Is that the way a child should be brought into the world? Yes, its unfair for a child to be aborted against the father's wishes, but is the loss of that *potential* life worse than forcing a woman to carry a child against her will? Again, its about protecting the most vulnerable women in society.

[BillyMalc]

I'd just been sat here thinking exactly the same thing. Personally, although I can't imagine any circumstance in which I would choose to abort my own child, I'm pro choice & don't believe that anyone else in society has the right to choose for a couple but, with the exception of reasonable justification for denying that (such as rape or extreme malice after breakup, eg trying to force her to have the child against her wishes but not being willing to take custody himself) I don't think a woman alone should be able to enforce abortion on the father regardless of his opinion.

 

Some of you may argue that she's the one who has to carry the child but I would say that there are choices - abstinence or contraception for example - so if somebody either gets too drunk to know what they are doing or makes a concious choice & has already made her choice (ie to have unprotected sex) when a child is conceived then I think it's for the couple to reach a decision not her. If they can't both agree on termination then I'm afraid I wouldn't legally permit it to happen.

 

Have to disagree here. Unprotected sex is something that both parties enter into, I'd be highly surprised to hear of a woman coaxing a bloke into having unprotected sex (it's usually the other way round as far as I can tell, with guys complaining that they "can't feel anything" ). If they are both too drunk to make a conscious decision, then they've both been stupid but I still don't think that that warrants the guy to have a say with regards to the woman's body. Obviously if the woman was leathered and the guy wasn't then the question whether it was consentual sex or not comes into it as well ...

 

In, for example the case of a careless / irresponsible one night stand she can already decide to keep the child against his wishes & he's then forced to support that child for the next 18 years so I don't think it's any less reason for the woman when he doesn't want abortion.

 

Well, the price for a woman's carelesness during a one night stand is that she might have an abortion to consider, for a guy it might be that he has got 18 years of financing a kid to consider if she doesn't want to abort it. Even more reason for both parties to make sure that they are safe.

 

Whilst I haven't gone looking I haven't yet seen any particular evidence that would cause me to support a reduction in the 24 week limit presently enforced & despite the odd idiots (didn't have time & third abortion? - I would probably question the right to frequently repeated abortions for anyone) cited in this thread I would imagine that most women who have left it to that late do not enter into it lightly.

 

Apparently babies by that time have got a working central nervous system, i.e. are capable of feeling pain, which to me would be a deciding factor. 24 Weeks is 6 months - to me that is an unacceptable long time to decide whether or not you want to keep a baby.

 

IMHO there are way too many humans on this planet already, and the less that get born the better. On the other hand, if you take responsibility for a life, whether that is human or animal, you owe it to that life to provide for them as best as you can. If you do not intend to care for them to the very best of your abilities, then it is not in the interest of that life to be created/adopted by you.

[KathyM]

I first voted in this poll in 2006 and my view hasn't changed a bit. I still think it's 100% the woman's choice (and would hope that most take the partner's views into account, but if not it's not really something that can be changed).

 

I am disappointed some people use abortion as contraception, but if that was changed all we'd have would be lots of unwanted and unloved children.

 

I don't believe a man has a right to tell a woman to continue with a pregnancy (or to abort it) - not because I think it's *fair* that a woman gets all the say, but because it's only the woman and child at risk. Have to agree with Billymalc that if a bloke doesn't want to pay child support, he shouldn't make children.

[ranirottie]

having seen living babies in a premature baby unit all born before 24 weeks and battling on, crying and feeling pain I think the time limit should be lowered. Abortion should be for foetuses not babies. unless there is a really good reason. Obviously if the mothers health is at risk then that should be considered but in "normal, run of the mill" abortions I think 24 weeks is far too long to wait.I do think the mother should have the choice of whether she aborts or not.x

[nouggatti]

I'm pro choice but not comfortable with the limit of 24 weeks being so high.

 

We don't have abortion here, and until 1995 it was even illegal to give someone advice about procuring an abortion in a country where it was legal, and travelling to a country where abortion is legal to have one.

 

Linky here It's still considered malpractice by the Irish Medical Board for any doctor licenced by them to carry out an abortion

 

So over here, anyone now who wants/needs an abortion has to travel to the UK

[Ian]

I first voted in this poll in 2006 and my view hasn't changed a bit. I still think it's 100% the woman's choice (and would hope that most take the partner's views into account, but if not it's not really something that can be changed).

 

I am disappointed some people use abortion as contraception, but if that was changed all we'd have would be lots of unwanted and unloved children.

 

I don't believe a man has a right to tell a woman to continue with a pregnancy (or to abort it) - not because I think it's *fair* that a woman gets all the say, but because it's only the woman and child at risk. Have to agree with Billymalc that if a bloke doesn't want to pay child support, he shouldn't make children.

 

I can only assume that neither of you read my post correctly. I didn't at any point suggest that if he didn't want to pay child support, or that both parties shouldn't make sure that they were "safe", but that if he did want to support a child that they had both ultimately decided (whether deliberately or by their inaction) to create then he was entitled to a part of the decision. It seems to me that by each of your reasoning if the woman want's the child - regardless of what the man wants - then that's okay, if she doesn't that's okay too - so he has no say?

 

If you disagree then tell me where does the guy get a say? As Billymalc said it takes two to create a pregnancy. When she chose to have unprotected sex & not use any of the various forms of contraception she gave away her sole right to the decision in my opinion. There are plenty of contraception options if you really don't want a child, some drunkeness is irrelevant too (eg implants) & the I was drunk, didn't know what I was doing excuse is therefore utter rubbish in my opinion.

 

 

Wickywoo, Whilst I appreciate your point about rape / abuse I did myself say "with the exception of reasonable justification for denying that (such as rape or extreme malice after breakup...." & I certainly wouldn't condone the law forcing a woman who had been raped to carry the child against her wishes. That is a completely different thing to someone who chose to have sex without contraception in my opinion

Edited May 24, 2008 by Ian

[Kats inc]

If what you want was to come into force Ian I can foresee lots of women not telling men they are actually pregnant therefore not feeling forced into sharing that decision.Either that or saying I don't know who the father is,I've had several one night stands with men I don't know.

Personally I wouldn't let any man force me into a decision that will affect me for the rest of my life and realistically it is always going to affect a woman way more than a man whatever way you try and look at it.

[Red Rotties]

I suppose we are looking at it from the womans point of view, but Ian my Barry (god I sound like I should be on either dinner ladies or last of the summer wine ) is in the same camp as you he feels its unfair that men haven't got the same choice as the women, even in marraige their voice isnt listen to where the life of a unborn child is concerned

[cheryl33]

I went with a close friend to have an abortion almost three years ago - she was 18 weeks gone. It was awful to see her afterwards (she had to have a pill, give birth and then got sent on her way ). She was in a very violent relationship at the time and had no family to support her.

 

Agree with what Billy says though

[BillyMalc]

I can only assume that neither of you read my post correctly. I didn't at any point suggest that if he didn't want to pay child support, or that both parties shouldn't make sure that they were "safe", but that if he did want to support a child that they had both ultimately decided (whether deliberately or by their inaction) to create then he was entitled to a part of the decision. It seems to me that by each of your reasoning if the woman want's the child - regardless of what the man wants - then that's okay, if she doesn't that's okay too - so he has no say?

 

If you disagree then tell me where does the guy get a say? As Billymalc said it takes two to create a pregnancy. When she chose to have unprotected sex & not use any of the various forms of contraception she gave away her sole right to the decision in my opinion. There are plenty of contraception options if you really don't want a child, some drunkeness is irrelevant too (eg implants) & the I was drunk, didn't know what I was doing excuse is therefore utter rubbish in my opinion.

 

Thing is Ian, and I'm sure you are aware of this, there is a lot more to raising a child than paying a contribution towards that upbringing. Maybe if a man can give a 100% guarantee that he will be solely responsible for bringing up that child - and the woman pays child support - then he could possibly have a say in whether or not he agrees with it being aborted. As it stands, men can do all the screaming and crying that they want to keep that child, but if after a couple of years their personal circumstances change or they simply loses interest in being part of that child's life - nevermind turning out to being someone you'd much rather never see again! - they can turn around and walk away, and set up a DD for the legal amount that they owe the mother of the child for the child's upbringing. Many women just end up being a sole carer for that child that the guy wanted so badly initially.

[akitas]

I started reading the thread not being aware it is already 2 years old, but obviously a very emotive subject.

 

I was just wondering if the same people who are pro life ( maybe not on this forum) are the same who then get worked up about young single mother on benefits who have children and take up all the council house ;-) ???

 

Ian, I can understand your opinion from a men's point of view, but...... Life is not black and white and not only drunken or raped people have to make difficult decisions.....

 

When I was married (so in a relationship with a well earning husband) I fell pregnant again. This was unplanned, due to failure in contraceptives.

 

I just had returned back to University, had organised my children and was truly happy about moving forward. For me it was devastating news to be pregnant again, beside my relation ship started slowly breaking up.. (Though I wasn't aware of that at the time ) and we had cases of Spina Bifida in the family and every pregnancy was always coupled with worries.

 

So I had to make a decision about what to do. My then husband was delighted to have another child, mainly because he was a control freak and didn't like me to go to University and meet other people.

 

It wasn't an easy decision. I decided to keep the baby. The pregnancy was horrible, not and easy delightful one, giving birth was horrible, not a nice experience as the other 2, and the baby was premature and not healthy.

I put all this down to stress and guilt I felt (about still not really wanting and loving the child).

Beside being delighted my husband didn't contribute at all to the ""Family" except earning money. He didn't babysit so I could have some time to relax (which I yearned for with another toddler and a 6 year old and no family living close, he wouldn't even pay for a babysitter)

 

Anyway, the baby was born, survived, a year later the relation ship broke up and today he doesn't give a thing about his kids.

 

It was then my decision (though we discussed it between us) to keep the baby, but if he had had a right to make a decision, he would have used it as another way to control me.

 

And yes, I had counselling and was told the option I had to keep the baby (support etc, which was close to nil )

 

I had a choice and I would wish this choice to every woman in the world. And there will always be people abusing the right, but I don't think the majority of women will make this decision lightly.

It is a responsibility to carry through with a pregnancy, which mainly lies with the mothers.

 

Sorry for the long post

[KathyM]

I can only assume that neither of you read my post correctly.

 

Really? Cos it seems to me you've assumed on no grounds that I was responding to you *lol*.

 

I didn't at any point suggest that if he didn't want to pay child support, or that both parties shouldn't make sure that they were "safe", but that if he did want to support a child that they had both ultimately decided (whether deliberately or by their inaction) to create then he was entitled to a part of the decision. It seems to me that by each of your reasoning if the woman want's the child - regardless of what the man wants - then that's okay, if she doesn't that's okay too - so he has no say?

 

He does have a say - he can use a condom or refrain from sex, not that difficult really. I do understand it's a woman's responsibility too, but ultimately it's her that takes it by raising a child, the bloke can (and mostly does in the case of unwanted kids) do a runner and not bother. Then it's a case of the woman alone paying for a child. No I don't think therefore the man should have a say - I don't think it's fair that he can't either (I did say that remember?) but that's life.

 

If you disagree then tell me where does the guy get a say? As Billymalc said it takes two to create a pregnancy. When she chose to have unprotected sex & not use any of the various forms of contraception she gave away her sole right to the decision in my opinion.

 

Ditto to a bloke?? The woman gets landed with the risks of a pregnancy and birth AND the responsibility of raising a child, and here we have a man saying the man shouldn't have to pay cos he didn't get a say. Call me cynical but aint that typical *lol*.

 

There are plenty of contraception options if you really don't want a child, some drunkeness is irrelevant too (eg implants) & the I was drunk, didn't know what I was doing excuse is therefore utter rubbish in my opinion.

 

What about sexually transmitted diseases? Again, why would the man not be responsible too?

 

I said I don't think it's 50:50 fair that a man doesn't get a say. But ultimately it can't be a man's choice until it's a man's risk and a man's responsibility, and it never is. CSA doesn't mean anything remember, legal obligation is worth nothing. Speaking from experience there!

[murtle]

From the other side I have a couple of male friends who have to pay maintenance but don't get to see their children and they would dearly love to, that I also don't think is fair, but I guess this is a different discussion, I'm not sure how a guy could have a choice, but I don't think it's fair that a girl can go ahead with a pregnancy and deny access to *their* child but still expect payments.