Abortion

Moby

Dick
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
51,358
Location
Barcelona, Catalunya
Medical practice has legal regulations generally and for good reason. Abortion is no exception. The decision to conduct an abortion should be between the woman and doctor, but I see no concern with a legal viability standard: if a doctor believes a fetus is viable outside of the womb and healthy, birth should be induced.
I think we are getting confused with the word 'legal' - what I meant was there wouldn't be any law outlawing the decision to abort beyond any time limit - that would be completely down to the doctor and parents, and in that process the doctor is obliged to follow the medical guidelines hence why them having to submit a formal justification in either case that can hold them accountable. And of course as with any other medical practice, if the practice isn't correctly followed, the doctor/institution can be held accountable.

The whole point is to not have a blanket time limit applied to each and every case, just like you don't have such restrictions applied to any other medical procedure. Let the doctor analyze each case as it exactly is and make the call. If their medical guidelines don't allow them to abort the child, then they have the right to deny and inform the parents with the same - and for that they need to provide exact justification. If they find any reason that justifies an abortion at any stage as per the same guidelines, they can go ahead and do it. Let the doctors do their job without having to worry about what a bunch of lunatics sitting in the parliament have come up with based on their political/religious agendas.
 

Penna

Kind Moderator (with a bit of a mean streak)
Staff
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
49,660
Location
Ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est.
I think it's exceptional, but aren't there cases where women don't realize they are pregnant until they are already a few months into their pregnancy? Like, I think I've read about cases where someone continued to get her period whilst being pregnant, stuff like that. Since the viability of a foetus will continue to be earlier and earlier due to advanced technology, this could lead to (once again, likely exceptional) situations where a woman finds out she's pregnant but can't abort anymore.
The situation you describe isn't particularly uncommon. Some women continue to have bleeds during their pregnancies, some had very irregular periods anyway so think nothing's different, some don't show much weight gain, some are very large women and the weight gain is masked, some put the baby's movement down to stomach troubles, some don't experience nausea, some just don't want to admit that they're pregnant for various reasons and simply ignore it or conceal the pregnancy and don't acknowledge it.

It happens, I've seen it myself and have cared for women in labour who were very surprised to find themselves in that situation. In these situations, the parents or mother either quickly adjust to the fact or place the child for adoption. There isn't any other alternative.

I recall one woman delivering twin girls, she said if they were white she'd keep them, if they were black she'd give them up for adoption. They were black and were adopted by the most lovely couple (we had the babies on the neonatal unit for quite a few weeks, so we got to know the adoptive parents). I always felt that if skin colour was the basis for the mother's decision-making, the children were much better-off being adopted.
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
11,464
Some weird and frankly nonsensical takes in this thread. Thank you for being a voice of reason and experience @Penna.
 

2 man midfield

Last Man Standing finalist 2021/22
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
45,667
Location
?
Woman should simply have fulls rights to her body and the right to terminate her fetus at any stage of pregnancy until the day it is out of the womb.

It's her choice to keep or eliminate and she shouldn't be needing to 'justify it' due to rape or health implications. Period.

America is a joke. It's bad enough, that late term abortions need to be still justified across the world.
What? :lol:
 

cafecillos

Full Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2014
Messages
1,387
I recall one woman delivering twin girls, she said if they were white she'd keep them, if they were black she'd give them up for adoption. They were black and were adopted by the most lovely couple (we had the babies on the neonatal unit for quite a few weeks, so we got to know the adoptive parents). I always felt that if skin colour was the basis for the mother's decision-making, the children were much better-off being adopted.
This is possibly the most heartbreaking case of racism I've ever heard about.
 

Peter van der Gea

Likes Pineapple on well done Steak
Joined
Feb 17, 2018
Messages
3,657
@Penna I think your advocating something similar to what I proposed earlier.

Have a time limit for abortions, 24 weeks is a good line because of current foetus viability with our medical care, but in the case of rape, a woman would be allowed to induce birth at any point and then choses if the child goes to NICU to increase the chance of survival.

A rape victim may decide against NICU, and if the child does survive, it's put up for adoption. But, by not giving it over and above medical attention is still giving it the right to life, but leaves it to nature's hand to determine whether the child is wanted, if not by its birth mother, by someone else in the world.

I'm not a fan of late term abortions, simply because of the viability of the foetus at that point, but at the same time I'm not a fan of forcing a woman to be pregnant for any longer than she is willing to be. As the only parent at the time of the birth, only she has the decision about NICU, same as Jehovah Witnesses and their refusal of blood transfusions for their children.
 

Roane

Full Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
2,330
I think we are getting confused with the word 'legal' - what I meant was there wouldn't be any law outlawing the decision to abort beyond any time limit - that would be completely down to the doctor and parents, and in that process the doctor is obliged to follow the medical guidelines hence why them having to submit a formal justification in either case that can hold them accountable. And of course as with any other medical practice, if the practice isn't correctly followed, the doctor/institution can be held accountable.

The whole point is to not have a blanket time limit applied to each and every case, just like you don't have such restrictions applied to any other medical procedure. Let the doctor analyze each case as it exactly is and make the call. If their medical guidelines don't allow them to abort the child, then they have the right to deny and inform the parents with the same - and for that they need to provide exact justification. If they find any reason that justifies an abortion at any stage as per the same guidelines, they can go ahead and do it. Let the doctors do their job without having to worry about what a bunch of lunatics sitting in the parliament have come up with based on their political/religious agendas.
Personally if me and my wife has caved into 3 consultants from Birmingham children's hospital instead of following our religious belief then my 17 year old son would have been aborted.

Just so you know my religion absolutely allows abortion for health reasons, rape etc.

As someone who was married for 25 years I also don't really buy into the woman's body woman's choice completely. As a husband/father I would like a say in the matter. And yeah ultimately it is the woman's choice but for me if there was no discussion etc then I would walk from that relationship.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,348
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Personally if me and my wife has caved into 3 consultants from Birmingham children's hospital instead of following our religious belief then my 17 year old son would have been aborted.

Just so you know my religion absolutely allows abortion for health reasons, rape etc.

As someone who was married for 25 years I also don't really buy into the woman's body woman's choice completely. As a husband/father I would like a say in the matter. And yeah ultimately it is the woman's choice but for me if there was no discussion etc then I would walk from that relationship.
Walking away from the relationship with that unborn fetus is not an option for the women if they're not allowed terminate their pregnancy. Hence their needs and wants have to be prioritised over the father's.
 

Blackwidow

Full Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
7,746
I think it's exceptional, but aren't there cases where women don't realize they are pregnant until they are already a few months into their pregnancy? Like, I think I've read about cases where someone continued to get her period whilst being pregnant, stuff like that. Since the viability of a foetus will continue to be earlier and earlier due to advanced technology, this could lead to (once again, likely exceptional) situations where a woman finds out she's pregnant but can't abort anymore.

The uniqueness of each case is what makes it so hard to codify something like abortion imo, because laws are usually pretty black or white, while this topic is anything but. As a man I don't want to impose anything whatsoever about what women should do with their own bodies. However, people who go on about "so we should just let a heavily pregnant woman go to the hospital for an abortion" are talking besides the point imo. If you want an abortion you'd have done it way earlier, I can't imagine a scenario where a mother-to-be carries a baby for up to 8 months, builds an emotional connection with it, then decides to have an abortion after that. Of course there are scenarios where the health of the mother is in jeopardy but like you say, that can/will be solved by giving birth rather than abortion.
I actually do not see a problem with that. Somebody I knew did not recognize she was pregnant until the 30th week. She did not want the baby, has born it and gave it to adoption. That is still the other way - especially in western countries where a lot women want but cannot have babies.
 

Roane

Full Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
2,330
Walking away from the relationship with that unborn fetus is not an option for the women if they're not allowed terminate their pregnancy. Hence their needs and wants have to be prioritised over the father's.
I don't necessarily disagree with all of that.

I made the point badly but what I was trying to say/highlight is that things are a bit more nuanced than what I see on here, which is people trying to make things black and white.

So for example a married couple and pregnancy is a little different to a one night stand and pregnancy. So for the first it's not as clear cut for me as saying woman's choice end of. I don't disagree that ultimately she has the harder role etc so has the final say but for me a discussion is warranted. The latter is a different issue altogether.

It's all just words on a forum really. I think real life is a lot different. Well it is in my own experience anyway. From a work and personal point of view I would say I've seen and heard more women have an abortion due to the man than having it despite the man's protests.
 

moses

Can't We Just Be Nice?
Staff
Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
42,765
Location
I have no idea either, yet.
Some fringe loons are having a rally here in Dublin on Saturday to stand up to Abortion.

It's getting little traction but they are just ready to seize any opportunity, bless them.
 

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,573
Location
Florida
Some fringe loons are having a rally here in Dublin on Saturday to stand up to Abortion.

It's getting little traction but they are just ready to seize any opportunity, bless them.
I posted a little while back a tweet of a large contingent of Dubliners in front of the American Embassy protesting Roe being overturned.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,348
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
I don't necessarily disagree with all of that.

I made the point badly but what I was trying to say/highlight is that things are a bit more nuanced than what I see on here, which is people trying to make things black and white.

So for example a married couple and pregnancy is a little different to a one night stand and pregnancy. So for the first it's not as clear cut for me as saying woman's choice end of. I don't disagree that ultimately she has the harder role etc so has the final say but for me a discussion is warranted. The latter is a different issue altogether.

It's all just words on a forum really. I think real life is a lot different. Well it is in my own experience anyway. From a work and personal point of view I would say I've seen and heard more women have an abortion due to the man than having it despite the man's protests.
Definitely agree with you that it’s a lot more nuanced than most would admit. In the scenario we’re discussing I do think the woman should have the ultimate decision (her body her choice) but have a lot of sympathy with the man who got her pregnant and might be hurt by being excluded from that decision.
 

Blackwidow

Full Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
7,746
So for example a married couple and pregnancy is a little different to a one night stand and pregnancy. So for the first it's not as clear cut for me as saying woman's choice end of. I don't disagree that ultimately she has the harder role etc so has the final say but for me a discussion is warranted. The latter is a different issue altogether.
It actually is not as your behaviour for sure influences your wife, too. Positively or negatively. Just because you want it and she does not should not matter if she does not believe that that makes it worth keeping the child. Fathers for sure have a role in all of that - but they should not be the ones that have the say.
 

moses

Can't We Just Be Nice?
Staff
Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
42,765
Location
I have no idea either, yet.
Definitely agree with you that it’s a lot more nuanced than most would admit. In the scenario we’re discussing I do think the woman should have the ultimate decision (her body her choice) but have a lot of sympathy with the man who got her pregnant and might be hurt by being excluded from that decision.
I am the father of twins with a generally acknowledged lunatic. She told me she was getting an abortion. I was devastated. Much moreso than I ever imagined but never once questioned the fact it was her decision, especially as we weren't in anything that could be called a relationship. It was life changing for me. I left Dublin and bought my place in Sligo.

The crazy loon never kept me in any loop and ceased contact but turned up three weeks before the due date with the news that not only was there no abortion but there was two kids imminent!

So even though I got totally messed around it didn't make me waver in that fact that it's the woman's choice.
 

sun_tzu

The Art of Bore
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
19,536
Location
Still waiting for the Youthquake
If they wanted to pander to the religious right they should have just lowered the time limit. 15 weeks is pushing it but really a woman should know something is going on after 4 months of pregnancy. The 20 week scan would have been a better point.
I believe about 80% of abortions were in the first 9 weeks
That's why Texas pushed for the 6 week rule... And I believe it's 6 weeks from the last period not when somebody actually gets pregnant so basically tantamount to a total ban

15 weeks was not going to stop the religious right pushing for more and more and they won't stop till they get a federal total ban
 

Halftrack

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
3,921
Location
Chair
As someone who was married for 25 years I also don't really buy into the woman's body woman's choice completely. As a husband/father I would like a say in the matter. And yeah ultimately it is the woman's choice but for me if there was no discussion etc then I would walk from that relationship.
It's is, completely, as it's her body and health on the line.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
Woman should simply have fulls rights to her body and the right to terminate her fetus at any stage of pregnancy until the day it is out of the womb.

It's her choice to keep or eliminate and she shouldn't be needing to 'justify it' due to rape or health implications. Period.

America is a joke. It's bad enough, that late term abortions need to be still justified across the world.
You might be able to make this logical argument based on a balance of rights especially if personhood is the criteria because most definitions of personhood include a degree of self awareness, which isn't really a scientifically identifiable point in this context but much later than current abortion limits or even after normal birth.

However, a balance of rights could just as easily suggest that once a foetus reached a certain stage of development its right equalled those of the mother and therefore abortion beyond this point would be prohibited under normal circumstances.

Practically it is probably better to err slightly on the side of caution as long as there is an adequate period for a woman to decide to have an abortion. No solution will be perfect and emotion is almost inevitably going to play a part, no matter how logical we try to be. I'm not sure that using the time a foetus can sometimes survive after deliver due to medical advances is a good guide as most born this early die or suffer long term medical issues. I tend towards thinking that the 26 week point, where the anatomical development of the majority would potentially allow paid to be felt, is a good working delineation and then maybe drop it back a couple of weeks to be on the safe side.
 
Last edited:

Relevated

fixated with venom and phalluses
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
25,995
Location
18M1955/JU5
You might be able to make this logical argument based on a balance of rights especially if personhood is the criteria. As most definitions of personhood include a degree of self awareness, which isn't really a scientifically identifiable point in this context.

However, a balance of rights could just as easily suggest that once a foetus reached a certain stage of development its right equalled those of the mother and therefore abortion beyond this point would be prohibited under normal circumstances.

Practically it is probably better to err slightly in the side of caution as long as there is an adequate period for a woman to decide to have an abortion. No solution will be perfect and emotion is almost inevitably going to play a part, no matter how logical we try to be. I'm not sure that using the time a foetus can sometimes survive after deliver due to medical advances is a good guide as most born this early die or suffer long term medical issues. I tend towards thinking that the 26 week point, where the anatomical development of the majority would potentially allow paid to be felt, is a good working delineation and then maybe drop it back a couple of weeks to be on the safe side.
In a society driven by emotion, and only emotion, logical views like this have no place.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
In a society driven by emotion, and only emotion, logical views like this have no place.
It is very hard for logic to override emotion once a foetus looks sufficiently like a baby. I know I'd struggle with it. Doubly so if you believe in the concept of a soul as that means you attach special importance to the moment an egg and sperm merge (or implant or thereabouts). That makes conversations around abortion very complex.
 

Sweet Square

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
23,377
Location
The Zone
I think I am very clear. Assuming you are male. Neither you nor I should have any say on what a woman wants to do with her body. An unborn fetus is still part of her body. It's her choice.
You don’t really think a woman can terminate a pregnancy the day before she is due to give birth ?

Cut off dates for abortions are here for a reason.
 

Moby

Dick
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
51,358
Location
Barcelona, Catalunya
Hardly surprising that the thread has gone from discussing the actual issue of banning abortion for majority of the realistic scenarios that lie within the early stages of pregnancy to focussing on the miniscule percentage of scenarios where any parent ask for abortion at a really stage as an argument to deny the basic rights of making a choice at the right time to those majority of women.
 

Eriku

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
16,123
Location
Oslo, Norway
Everybody saying "the man should also have a say" - how is that meant to work? 50-50 then off to a neutral party to settle it? The woman is and should be the majority stakeholder in her own body, and in the end what she says should go. Wtf would the alternative be?
 

arnie_ni

Full Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
15,093
Woman should simply have fulls rights to her body and the right to terminate her fetus at any stage of pregnancy until the day it is out of the womb.

It's her choice to keep or eliminate and she shouldn't be needing to 'justify it' due to rape or health implications. Period.

America is a joke. It's bad enough, that late term abortions need to be still justified across the world.
See that's to far, I don't think you'll find many in here agree with that.

A general cut off point based on science is required hut individual cases can be reviewed again based on science.
 
Last edited:

2 man midfield

Last Man Standing finalist 2021/22
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
45,667
Location
?
I think I am very clear. Assuming you are male. Neither you nor I should have any say on what a woman wants to do with her body. An unborn fetus is still part of her body. It's her choice.
So even if a baby is 2 weeks late, as long as it’s still inside her body she has the right to terminate it? Even though it’s older than 99.9% of actual newborns?
 

africanspur

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
9,081
Supports
Tottenham Hotspur
Everybody saying "the man should also have a say" - how is that meant to work? 50-50 then off to a neutral party to settle it? The woman is and should be the majority stakeholder in her own body, and in the end what she says should go. Wtf would the alternative be?
Despite being heavily Pro choice, I find attitudes like this a little frustrating and I don't think reflects real life.

It also depends on what context we're talking about. Is it a one night stand? Is it a 25 year long relationship and marriage?

The very final decision on abortion would of course rest with my wife. Just as (with a question asked above), a vasectomy would be for me. I'm not going to slip her crushed abortion pills if she doesn't want to abort and I'm not going to force her to keep it if she is vehemently against carrying through the pregnancy.

But if there were to be another pregnancy, we would talk about it. We would come to a decision together, just like we did when deciding to have kids, buying a house, holiday destinations, buying a car, even what we're getting for shopping that week.

Of course either of us could make the above decisions unilaterally if we wanted to. In reality though, most people in couples don't and talk through big decisions and come to an outcome together.

I appreciate the context in which the phrase has come up and it's response to the other side but I don't think it really reflects reality in terms of how most couples actually work.
 

africanspur

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
9,081
Supports
Tottenham Hotspur
Woman should simply have fulls rights to her body and the right to terminate her fetus at any stage of pregnancy until the day it is out of the womb.

It's her choice to keep or eliminate and she shouldn't be needing to 'justify it' due to rape or health implications. Period.

America is a joke. It's bad enough, that late term abortions need to be still justified across the world.
This is of course a nonsensical view and again not rooted in reality. Do you even understand what aborting a baby at term would involve?

The bit about law and medicine afterwards is interesting as well. Legally in the UK (and kn all countries I've worked in and I imagine most countries) you can't 'demand' a medical procedure. This thing about bodily autonomy does have a limit. You can't walk into a hospital and demand a ct scan of your head or an angiogram or endoscopy. That's not how it works.

Similarly, you don't have the 'right' to walk into a hospital, 36 weeks pregnant, with no imminent medical emergencies and demand that the baby be aborted.

I can't believe this even has to be spelt out.
 

Moby

Dick
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
51,358
Location
Barcelona, Catalunya
The very final decision on abortion would of course rest with my wife. Just as (with a question asked above), a vasectomy would be for me. I'm not going to slip her crushed abortion pills if she doesn't want to abort and I'm not going to force her to keep it if she is vehemently against carrying through the pregnancy.
This is what people are talking about. Not sure why some men in here have come in with the defense of 'will no one even talk to us!'. yeah sure, but if the woman has decided to abort after any discussion, that's that.
 

Peter van der Gea

Likes Pineapple on well done Steak
Joined
Feb 17, 2018
Messages
3,657
Until a baby, a man is just a man. You only become a father, and a parent, after a baby is born. Before that a foetus is part of the pregnant person's body and is solely under their jurisdiction.
 

Eriku

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
16,123
Location
Oslo, Norway
Despite being heavily Pro choice, I find attitudes like this a little frustrating and I don't think reflects real life.

It also depends on what context we're talking about. Is it a one night stand? Is it a 25 year long relationship and marriage?

The very final decision on abortion would of course rest with my wife. Just as (with a question asked above), a vasectomy would be for me. I'm not going to slip her crushed abortion pills if she doesn't want to abort and I'm not going to force her to keep it if she is vehemently against carrying through the pregnancy.

But if there were to be another pregnancy, we would talk about it. We would come to a decision together, just like we did when deciding to have kids, buying a house, holiday destinations, buying a car, even what we're getting for shopping that week.

Of course either of us could make the above decisions unilaterally if we wanted to. In reality though, most people in couples don't and talk through big decisions and come to an outcome together.

I appreciate the context in which the phrase has come up and it's response to the other side but I don't think it really reflects reality in terms of how most couples actually work.
Not sure why you find that a frustrating attitude? We both agree that ultimately the woman will have the deciding vote. Being included in the conversation is one thing, but in the end there’s one party that should have the final say. No contradiction there.
 
Last edited: