Reply to: Panorama - abortion

[Scoobos]

<on second thoughts> I can't touch this thread with a bargepole

[doodab]

I am horrified that anyone would describe the decision about aborting a child made by a couple is only the woman's decision. It is the couple's decision, its the couple's child. If you chose your man properly he will tell you that you have the final decision even though it will affect him deeply.

Ultimately it is the woman's decision, she has the final say. While a woman may take your opinion into consideration you can't make a woman abort a baby she wants or force her to carry an unwanted child to term.

All a man can do is support her in her choice, or not.

[formant]

I do think, however, there are rational grounds for arguing that if you want a free, equitable and prosperous society then abortion liberality is necessary evil. Perhaps that's what you meant.

Yeah, that's more what I was hinting at. It's not as simplistic as 'they're backwards because..' - it's about correlation, rather than causality.

[NotAllThere]

One could however argue that those countries where abortion is illegal are generally pretty backwards (societally and more often than not economically). That could be a hint towards what's 'right' in the bigger picture.

So long as you're not arguing they're societically backwards because they don't have liberal abortion laws...

And do you really think "I've got more money than you, therefore I'm more righteous" is really a route to go down?

I do think, however, there are rational grounds for arguing that if you want a free, equitable and prosperous society then abortion liberality is necessary evil. Perhaps that's what you meant.

[formant]

If you view that the right of the foetus not to be killed is more important than any apparent right of the mother to have an abortion, then you'll think that that is the right position.

If you view that the mother's right to have an abortion is more important than any apparent right of the foetus not to be killed, then you'll think that pro-choice is the right position.

It's not hard to see how someone might consider their position right, even if its different from yours. It doesn't make them irrational or wicked or uncaring.

As the two sides argue from different moral standpoints, they will never reach agreement. As will be evidenced by this thread reaching treble figures...

One could however argue that those countries where abortion is illegal are generally pretty backwards (societally and more often than not economically). That could be a hint towards what's 'right' in the bigger picture.

[NotAllThere]

...In that case, first and foremost, you'd hope to have fewer unwanted pregnancies to start with.

Duh! Yes. That was rather the point.

I fail to see how the right position can be anything other than pro-choice, outside of medical / psychiatric circumstances.

If you view that the right of the foetus not to be killed is more important than any apparent right of the mother to have an abortion, then you'll think that that is the right position.

If you view that the mother's right to have an abortion is more important than any apparent right of the foetus not to be killed, then you'll think that pro-choice is the right position.

It's not hard to see how someone might consider their position right, even if its different from yours. It doesn't make them irrational or wicked or uncaring.

As the two sides argue from different moral standpoints, they will never reach agreement. As will be evidenced by this thread reaching treble figures...

[formant]

Except that if you've had an abortion it's entirely a non-deal.

Not necessarily, considering that many women have an abortion after they've already had children, thereby probably protecting the quality of life of their existing offspring.

Banging on about the motivations, ideologies or hypocrisy of either side, or what they shouldn't or shouldn't be doing as well as advancing their cause, is entirely irrelevant to the basic issue of the desirability of de-facto abortion on demand in the UK (except NI).

I'm not on the side that wants to set us back half a century. I'd prefer honesty about the 'abortion on demand' situation and a change in the law towards allowing abortions for any reason rather than continuously bending the 'mental health' grounds within the existing legislation. Whatever the legal situation, women will continue to find ways to have an abortion if they want one.

If there was more support for people to keep their baby, then you'd have the whole issue of girls getting pregnant so they can have council flat rearing its head.

Sure, but it's not like that attitude isn't omnipresent already. It's simply the other side to 'abortion as a form of contraception'.

If UK culture was more like that in Switzeland where to get pregnant because you don't know how to use contraceptives is considered really really dumb - even by the Helvitic chav equivalents - then you'd have fewer abortions.

In that case, first and foremost, you'd hope to have fewer unwanted pregnancies to start with.

[NotAllThere]

What, 98% of women who abort have psychiatric conditions?

No. 98% do it to because two doctors agree their mental health is at risk.

[NotAllThere]

... Child welfare post-birth is a much bigger deal, with a much more direct link to this debate.

Except that if you've had an abortion it's entirely a non-deal. Anyway, you bought this massive non-sequitor up.

Banging on about the motivations, ideologies or hypocrisy of either side, or what they shouldn't or shouldn't be doing as well as advancing their cause, is entirely irrelevant to the basic issue of the desirability of de-facto abortion on demand in the UK (except NI).

If there was more support for people to keep their baby, then you'd have the whole issue of girls getting pregnant so they can have council flat rearing its head. If UK culture was more like that in Switzeland where to get pregnant because you don't know how to use contraceptives is considered really really dumb - even by the Helvitic chav equivalents - then you'd have fewer abortions.

Fertility matters: The secret of Switzerland

It seems to me that a high abortion rate in an abortion liberal country such as the UK, is indicative that women are failing to grasp control over their reproductive rights.

[Kryten]

Don't call him Suity, he gets upset when reminded of the past!

I am not sure where this 1 in 3 figure comes from, it does sound very high, maybe they meant 1 in 3 pregnancies end in an abortion, again which I think is a bit high.

I have always wanted kids, so when the Ex-MrsMac became pregnant unexpectedly (implant failure) it wasn't a consideration, but I know everyones circumstances are different so its impossible for one sweeping statement on an internet forum to cover it.

You should have yourself checked, seriously.

[sasguru]

Well, as 98% are psychiatric and the other 2% are medical, that's really not saying much.

What, 98% of women who abort have psychiatric conditions?

[NotAllThere]

She couldn't be a grandma at 32, unless one of them was having underage nookies. ooh mudskipper, you are a one

I stand corrected. 33 and a half.

I fail to see how the right position can be anything other than pro-choice, outside of medical / psychiatric circumstances.

Well, as 98% are psychiatric and the other 2% are medical, that's really not saying much.

[rob s]

I fail to see how the right position can be anything other than pro-choice, outside of medical / psychiatric circumstances.

[cailin maith]

How they calculated this number? It looks very high. Some women may have multiple abortions, and many are just tourists from countries where its illegal, could that affect this metric?

Like Ireland - I know a few girls who have come to England for abortions.

[mos]

1 in 3 is shocking

How they calculated this number? It looks very high. Some women may have multiple abortions, and many are just tourists from countries where its illegal, could that affect this metric?