Abortion limit....Rejected!

[katex]

You are correct Slinky .. apologise for pointing out young people. I got caught at age 39 .. merely because I had become over-confident. What at this age ? moi ? no way !!... well hek !.. pregnancy ?! .. not gonna' happen to me now is it... doh !

Even though, considered myself wise to all methods of birth control .. still 'appened.

[slinky]

Originally Posted by katex

You are correct Slinky .. apologise for pointing out young people. I got caught at age 39 .. merely because I had become over-confident. What at this age ? moi ? no way !!... well hek !.. pregnancy ?! .. not gonna' happen to me now is it... doh !

Even though, considered myself wise to all methods of birth control .. still 'appened.

I think the same had happened to my friend to be honest.

[Lilly]

Originally Posted by emamum23

i only had one scan and i know ty was already kicking when i had it.
if the abortion is because of severe disability then obviously it cant be done until after the scan.
does it depend on the hospital how many scans and at how many weeks?.

I had my first scan at 12 weeks at Accy Vic.

This was just to confirm that the baby was alive and to inform me how many I was carrying (just the one, thank goodness )

My second scan was at 20 weeks in Blackburn and it is at this scan that all the baby's measurements are taken and when any deformities can be noticed by the sonographer.

If the abortion limit was 20 or 22 weeks how do you deal with a situation where a woman is told at her 20 week scan that the baby is badly deformed/disabled? As has been mentioned, sometimes you may be 22 weeks pregnant by the time you have this scan so if you get bad news at the scan and are offered an abortion you will need time to think about it before you go ahead.

How would this work if the abortion limit was 20/22 weeks?

You wouldn't be able to have one, it would be too late and no-one has the right to tell someone that they have to keep a badly disabled child.

Some people will want to, others couldn't cope.

I think 24 weeks is the right limit but only in these circumstances.

I don't agree with late abortions just because the child has a cleft palate or other minor abnormality or because the mother has changed her mind and doesn't want a perfectly healthy baby.

[Margaret Pilkington]

If a pregnancy is found to be abnormal, then there is no legal age limit......termination of that pregnancy would be offered regardless of the gestational age.

[MUMMIBOO]

Originally Posted by West Ender

I am anti-abortion on principle but I will not get into a pro/con discussion here. The point at issue is the lowering of foetal age to 22 weeks and what worries me is the question of whether a foetus can feel pain. As a baby (note the different terminology when it's a wanted pregnancy) born at 24 weeks gestation can survive, with luck and good nursing, I assume it must be able to feel pain. The same child, while still in the womb, must also feel the same pain as its sensors are at a similar stage of development. Is it right to inflict pain on, not to say kill, a viable child?

There was a programme on lowering the abortion limits a while ago, in this programme a professor said he strongly believes a baby can feel pain in the womb as you can see the child grimace and smile and suck the thumb and swallow fluid. I agree with him how could a baby not feel pain if it has a functioning brain a heartbeat it could feel pain when born so why not at 24 weeks or earlier. When i lost my baby at 11 weeks pregnant and had to go into hospital, before i went in i was looking on the internet trying to find out more about what i was going to go through i found alot about abortion as what i had to go through was what would be the same procedure without a D&C and i was absolutly horrified by what i found, out how it was carried out at quite a small foetus upwards i cant go into detail of the picture and descriptions i saw but i was horrified and for this reason i would never bring myself to have this done! Also the same as slinky i found it very hard when i had lost a baby i wanted soo badly and there were people out there just throwing them away! (how could they were my thought) but in reality people do. i dont agree nor disagree just think that the time should be lowered so at least that baby wont feel the hugely painful procedure.

[Lilly]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

If a pregnancy is found to be abnormal, then there is no legal age limit......termination of that pregnancy would be offered regardless of the gestational age.

Aaaaah right. Thanks Margaret, I didn't know that.

So the 20/22 week limit, had it been brought in, wouldn't have made a difference to those who had abnormal pregnancies? They could have still had an abortion even if they were over that limit?

Were they just proposing a new limit for those having an abortion of healthy babies then?

[Sara]

I personally think the time limit should be lowered, except for medical reasons were the baby will not have a decent quality of life.

I read this yesterday in the Daily Mail, which is quite interesting. (Interesting isn't the right word but at the moment can't think of a word to describe what i really want to say.)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...life-odds.html

[Margaret Pilkington]

Yes, the lowering of the time limit was for the 'social' abortion.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Sara

I personally think the time limit should be lowered, except for medical reasons were the baby will not have a decent quality of life.

I read this yesterday in the Daily Mail, which is quite interesting. (Interesting isn't the right word but at the moment can't think of a word to describe what i really want to say.)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...life-odds.html

I saw this article too. In the vast majority of cases this baby would not have survived. The story noted in the Mail was in the USA....I'm not sure how they do things over there.
Paediatricians will not attempt resus on a baby whose eyelids are fused as this indicates a gestation of less then 22 weeks.
And before you all start giving me bad Karma......it is for a good reason that resus is not attempted......the chances of survival at this gestational age is very small....and suppose they took a baby like this into special care(even thought its chances were slim) and then a baby was born who DID have a chance of survival, but there was not intensive care cot available because the tiny baby had taken the last cot.

In my experience, the babies who were born before the legal age of viability were kept warm and cuddled by the parents until the inevitable happened.

[BERNADETTE]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Yes, the lowering of the time limit was for the 'social' abortion.

Even the terminology speaks volumes!!

[Margaret Pilkington]

It does Bernie, but it is unsafe to generalise....and some of the women I have cared for would have given anything not to be in that position.
We cannot judge what is going on in someone elses life...even if we think we would cope......sometimes (sad though it is)...it is for the woman, the only way out.

[West Ender]

I wouldn't have a problem with that except that if the foetus (we'll call it by the medical terminology) went to full term, was born and then the mother just left it to die in a kidney dish - she'd be charged with murder. I'm sorry I have tried, really I have, and I just can't see the difference.

Is it better for a woman to kill her baby, then grieve over the terrible decision she was "forced" to make, than to hand it over for adoption?

[Margaret Pilkington]

Westender, I can't give you a definitive answer to that.
Each individual case was different. No-one would ever force someone who didn't believe in the termination of a pregnancy, to have one.
I would never like to return to the days of women trying to procure a termination of pregnancy by unsafe means......and it is usually the poorer women who are the one who would suffer. Rich women have always been able to get such treatment at the hands of a sympatheitc gynaecologist(who was paid very well for the service).

[Margaret Pilkington]

And of course adoption would be preferable, but then the woman concerned would not be able to keep this situation to herself....everyone would be aware of her so called 'sin'.

[Margaret Pilkington]

In a perfect world only babies who were wanted would be born...but the world is not perfect, nor are the people who live in it.