Abortion limit....Rejected!

panther

panther

☆ V.I.P Member ☆
Tackler
Moves to lower the time limit on abortion from 24 weeks have been rejected by MPs at the end of a high-charged debate on controversial social legislation.


During the Commons debate, the proposer of a 20-week limit, former nurse Ms Dorries, told MPs how she had witnessed a "botched" termination while working on a ward.
"A little boy was aborted into a cardboard bed pan which was thrust into my arms," she said.
"As I stood and looked in that cardboard bed pan this little boy was gasping, through mucous and amniotic fluid for his breath and I stood with him in a sluice, in my arms in a bed pan, for seven minutes while he gasped for his breath and a botched abortion, which became a live birth, became a death seven minutes later.
"And I knew at that moment, while I stood with that little boy in my arms that one day I would have the opportunity to stand and defend babies like him, because what I thought we were committing that day was murder."

I for one am against abortions, but in the end its always the womens right to do whatever she wants.

At 24 weeks a baby has been known to survive.........so why did they have to reject lowering the limit to 20 weeks?

At 24 weeks a baby must feel pain, therefore doesnt that baby have the right, the human right to live?

I for one am totally disgusted, but there probably is a few people out there who disagree:(
 
good

the only thing lowering the limit would acheive would be more unwanted kids

sounds callous but if a woman is seeking an abortion its pretty clear the child isnt wanted


i know someone who had an abortion and because of bank holidays and actualy getting an appointment the abortion was actualy done just after the dead line that is currently in place

if they want to lower the limit they should make sure that there is a fast procedure in place to fast track those who want abortions get them in time
 
Last edited:
Before abortion was permitted by law, there were 'back street' abortionists who butchered women at ALL stages of pregnancy.
The present law will never be ideal, and will lead to some 'murders', but it is better than the lawless butchering we had before.
 
[email protected] said:
Before abortion was permitted by law, there were 'back street' abortionists who butchered women at ALL stages of pregnancy.
The present law will never be ideal, and will lead to some 'murders', but it is better than the lawless butchering we had before.
Click to expand...

just out of curiosity at what point do you consider the termination not murder
 
accyman said:
just out of curiosity at what point do you consider the termination not murder
Click to expand...

Most abortions result in the delivery of a dead embryo/child.
The ones which result in a live birth do happen (as the news article states)

I think that lowering the limit would result in resurrecting back street abortions.

The present 24 weeks is the 'lesser of two evils'

PS how do you feel about the morning after pill?
 
24 weeks is 6 months!
why does it take someone so long to decide to have one?
 
panther said:
24 weeks is 6 months!
why does it take someone so long to decide to have one?
Click to expand...

its not always the decsion to abort that is late but the nhs's sysyem that is slow

if a woman realises she is pregnant late on it can be murder getting a doctors appointment nevermind a hospital appointment in time
 
I see it like this:

There are two rooms. In one a 24 week old baby is surviving aided by science and not the mother who will grow up to lead a wonderful life.

In the other room is a 24 week baby, who could survive without its mothers aid, being destroyed.

In parliament many of the people against reducing the limit made it into an argument about pro life and pro choice. I think this is drasticly wrong. I believe in giving a woman the right to choose, but only up until a certain point. At the point where the child can survive without the aid of its mother, and can feel pain, I think it has its own right to survive.
 
I do agree with abortion at it is the mothers choice but shouldnt be left to that time that if the baby can survive then it should. Whatever happened to giving your child up for adoption??? Surely if you dont want that baby so much then consider those who are less fortunate and cannot have a child themselves. Would agree with lowering the limit but if that limit has passed then the mother should be talked towards adoption rather than murder
 
its always been a minefield this subject, whilst its infinately better than the backstreet job, agree with cyfr about a point where its a no-no, that point MUST be decided on by the medical profession IMHO. theres always a case fer em were the mothers life is in danger though, like i said - a Minefield.
 
accyman said:
sounds callous but if a woman is seeking an abortion its pretty clear the child isnt wanted
Click to expand...



WHAT A LOAD OF BOLLOX!!!

some women have no choice but to have a termination...
what happens if its life threatening?
what if the woman has been raped?


i am neither for nor against abortion

i think its upto the individual but what i do agree with is lowering the time where they can have an abortion, like panther said in the first post a baby can still be born alive at 20 weeks, i think they should take it to at least 18 weeks, my friends daughter had to deliver her baby at 23 weeks, unfortunately she was still born but all her features and everything where in place, if she hadnt of already been dead would she have lived from 23 weeks? who knows
 
Last edited:
Through no fault of my own, I have 3 children that were not planned, (and would not be without them), I am against abortion for any reason other than severe deformity or possible threat of life, and do not see abortion as a remedy for carelessness, either through lack of control or discipline.
 
flashytart said:
WHAT A LOAD OF BOLLOX!!!

some women have no choice but to have a termination...
what happens if its life threatening?
what if the woman has been raped?
Click to expand...

then the child isnt wanted then is duhhhh

oh and by the way if the woman has been raped it dosnt leave her with NO choice but to have an abortion she could still have the child and some rape victims actualy do so your argument has already been proven to be the pointless crap that it is on that score alone and also there are plenty of pro life nutters that would gladly see a rape victim be forced to keep a child rather than abort it

personaly i think a woman who is made pregnant through rape and wants an abortion should be put to the top of the waiting list so please the next time you feel like shouting your gob off think about what your shouting your gob off about first
 
Personally I don't agree with abortion but can see that at times they are neccessary. I think the time limit should be lowered but the decision has been made not to.
What really puzzles me is why in this day and age we have so many unwanted pregnancies. For goodness sake birth control is free, so why don't people use it?:confused: Before anybody has a go I know that sometimes birth control fails and that in the case of rape the woman might not have been using any. It just seems to me that some people are to lazy to go and get adequate protection:mad:
In the majority of cases a woman will know she is pregnant long before twenty four weeks and therefore the time limit won't matter because she will be sorted long before then!!!
 
Of course abortion should be considered as wrong, but only, if we lived in a perfect Society.

The people mainly caught short and pregnant are young girls that, if we all think back being heavily hormone driven have experimented and found it to be a costly mistake, what are their choices?

Force themselves and the bloke into marriage.

Become a single mother and an unwanted statistic.

Learn from their over-enthusiastic mistake, and be more careful in future.

Anyone of the above is not a good scenario, but change the law so that the, (possibly panicking girl, feeling alone and in a desperate state), goes to a back street abortionist, that has to be the worst choice to put any woman through.

I feel sure that any woman going through an induced termination, (a miscarriage I believe, is also classed as abortion, [search for a thread of Letties], a harsh choice of words!) would feel some regret but how much better is it that the girl goes somewhere that her welfare is made a priority?
 
Absolutely agree Less.

Would like to see a few statistics on this, have found some such as:-

88% of abortions in England and Wales were under 13 weeks.
Only 2% 23/24 weeks.
Scotland much higher for under 13 weeks.

These were 2005, sure if I googled more could find recent figures.

I suspect that the 2% were split into a few catagories, such as women who discovered they had some type of illness that could be life threatening if the pregnancy had proceeded/abnormal foetus, but some, I would think were young women who were too scared to admit to themselves that this is what was happening to them and tried to bury their heads in the sand before it became apparent. The two former assumptions would be my decision for keeping it at 24 weeks.

There have been quite a few cases of premature babies surviving this period, and the tales of the foetus being alive and then waiting until death occured are quite horrendous.

Think down to 22 weeks may have been sensible, apart from that, have not objection to abortion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top