sccsux Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 The abortion law was set at a specific number of weeks, precisely because - at that time - any foetus born earlier than that had zero chance of survival. There's also the fact that if we lowered the 28 week cut off for abortions, there would be a massive increase in back-street/home abortions. Not a good prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 I think any reason is a good enough reason for abortion. Even used as a contraceptive. I don't think anyone can say what's right for another and everyone should have the right to a judgement free abortion. I couldn't agree more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Star Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 There's also the fact that if we lowered the 28 week cut off for abortions, there would be a massive increase in back-street/home abortions. Not a good prospect. Very true! We don't want to go back in time! If they remove the cells in the first 9 weeks it's just a couple of injections or pills and a heavy period Everyone is happy then, as no medical proceedure and no risk for the future... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amaranthus Posted July 4, 2011 Author Share Posted July 4, 2011 I think any reason is a good enough reason for abortion. Even used as a contraceptive. I don't think anyone can say what's right for another and everyone should have the right to a judgement free abortion. Abortion can have harmful effects on people, they may regret it afterwards and feel hurt, guilty etc. and for those reasons alone I don't think it should be used as a contraceptive. I'm not trying to be judgemental or controversial here - I find myself in a not so nice position because someone I care about is thinking of doing something which may cause them pain in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karis Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 I totally hear you and I've been in this very same unenviable position, and, because of that I think it should be open to all, with a liberal dose of non-judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Star Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Abortion can have harmful effects on people, they may regret it afterwards and feel hurt, guilty etc. and for those reasons alone I don't think it should be used as a contraceptive. I'm not trying to be judgemental or controversial here - I find myself in a not so nice position because someone I care about is thinking of doing something which may cause them pain in the future. Do you mean that someone you love is thinking of going ahead with a unwanted pregancy, and you are trying to convince them to abort? If they go ahead, it arrives and they then decide they are not bothered, they can give it away for adoption... This can happen even after months or years... Abortion is the best route for many, as it stops any nasty mistakes knocking on your door in 20 years time! But that isn't to say that it's for everyone... If they are already looking at abortion, just bare in mind that they are not you, and everyone ultimately makes the best decisions for themselves... What might be a concern for you, may not even appear in their minds at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Like I said about an hour ago, if you don't want a kid, don't get pregnant, simple! Abortion is murder IMO. In an ideal world, Rich, there is contraception that doesn't fail, there are women who don't get raped, and children who are conceived that don't have life-limiting conditions. It is not a decision that the woman takes lightly. No-one else can say to the woman who is forced to make the decision to terminate that she cannot make that decision. There's also the fact that if we lowered the 28 week cut off for abortions, there would be a massive increase in back-street/home abortions. Not a good prospect. As much as I find abortion distasteful, I am big enough and ugly enough to agree, and understand that it's the woman's right to choose an abortion, and that it MUST be done safely, in sterile, hygienic conditions, with all available support and counselling to help the woman make the right decision, and to cope with the decision afterwards. As you say, sccsux, there is no way we can allow ourselves to go back to the dark ages of backstreet abortions, and women dying in the prime of their lives. Abortion can have harmful effects on people, they may regret it afterwards and feel hurt, guilty etc. and for those reasons alone I don't think it should be used as a contraceptive. I'm not trying to be judgemental or controversial here - I find myself in a not so nice position because someone I care about is thinking of doing something which may cause them pain in the future. As I said above, the woman making the decision needs all support and counselling available, before (and after, should she choose to abort) to make sure she is not railroaded into a decision either way. Only the woman herself can make the decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twiglet Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Like I said about an hour ago, if you don't want a kid, don't get pregnant, simple! Abortion is murder IMO. It really isn't that simple Rich. There are plenty of people in loving committed relationships or even marriages who for whatever reason aren't yet in a position to bring up a child and their contraception fails. You can't tell them that they should completely abstain if they don't want children, it isn't realistic. And abortion, by legal definition, is not murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
summa Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 In the debate about 'a woman's right to choose', the potential risk of preventing a WANTED pregnancy in the future rarely crops up. Abortion can prevent you EVER having kids It sickens me that there is now an overlap between the dates from which an early born baby can survive, and legal abortion can take place - why is one child declared a human being (with all the legal rights that go with that status) whisked off to an incubator and given life support, and another removed and incinerated? Why shouldn't late aborted babies be given the same chance of survival and put up for adoption? There was a chance that my first son may have had to be delievered at just over 24 weeks, I was told he had a 50/50 chance of surviving. What went through my mind was in the same hospital women were terminating their babies close to this age. I don't know how they can do it, I'm not trying to be judgmental but I just cannot understand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twiglet Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 The chances of survival in today's technological age has indeed increased. I think it (the cut off period for abortions - unless continuation of the pregnancy could injure the woman - should be based on the chances of survival without medical intervention. This is the crucial part. An abortion above 24 weeks is only allowed in very specific circumstances (either the foetus is non-viable or the life of the mother is at risk). A baby at 24 weeks will need medical intervention on a dramatic scale in order to survive, and runs significant risk of suffering long terms complications and disability. While every effort is taken to provide this care when a baby is born into a loving and committed family, would it really be fair to take drastic measures to save a baby that isn't wanted and is likely to have long term demanding care requirements? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.