Donate SIGN UP

Abortion Poll on AB

Avatar Image
angel-cake | 12:02 Sun 30th Mar 2008 | Body & Soul
61 Answers
It is interesting that 33% have stated they would lower the limit to 12 weeks. I wonder how many who said this have had any direct experience of abortion.

Most pregnancies that are aborted before 12 weeks are due to unplanned and unwanted pregnancies. Going further down the line up to 24 weeks, it is often the result of discovering a severe abnormality in the foetus.

So basically, those 33% who voted that option are saying it is ok to abort an unplanned pregnancy because the baby is unwanted, but it's not ok for a couple, who have probably planned and much wanted the baby, to make a heartbreaking decision to have an abortion.

My opinion is that the abortion limit should stay at 24 weeks and a woman should be able make her own choice.
Gravatar

Answers

41 to 60 of 61rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by angel-cake. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
A difficult choice yes- but one, if they had any compassion should have been made wayyyyyy before that 24 week mark in my opinion. At 17weeks (ish) you can feel your baby's kicks, and to still carry on and have an abortion after that is beyond my comrehension.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
A man and a woman have a relationship that fails, they break up and later the lady finds out she is pregnant (as a result of failed contraception).
A short while after the man involved becomes permanently sterile (and unfortunately did not have the ability to have any sperm frozen prior to this unfortunate event).
The man has a supportive family and happens to be rich, he has always wanted children.
The woman is 23 weeks pregnant and wishes an abortion (given the above statements some of you believe that there is no need to justify a reason for a TOP so hypothetically we'll assume that the woman simply never wants children but would otherwise not be inconvencienced by carrying the baby to full term)
The lady is fit and well and there are no anomalies with the baby.

Does nobody believe that this is a rather unfortunate
...set of circumstances
- the woman has not been raped
- her mental status would hypothetically not be affected by giving birth
- her work/career and family circumstances would not be adversley affected
- her health would not be detrimented in any way
- the baby has no abnormality
- the baby will be cared for
Im not saying that there can never be a justification for TOP, I just believe that there should be one
-- answer removed --
Many of the points you make INVISIBLE are quite valid.
Have you considered the consequences for the young mother who has a TOP and later wants to have children but finds she is unable to conceive (this does happen).
Not to mention the emotional trauma that can ensue after a TOP (this also happens).
INVISIBLE one would certainly hope that the lady in question would hand over the baby to the father, but there is no legal requirement to do so.
Thankyou INVISIBLE for essentially getting to the part that really bothers me, most people (a big assumption but please forgive that) would agree that in the above scenario there is little if any justification for a TOP. However....they are still carried out.
Can anyone one here (excluding all other reasons discussed) give a an argument as to why a woman may choose to have a TOP, 'just because...'???
-- answer removed --
If a woman makes a decision to have an abortion she is making the decision for the baby as well. I think that is depriving the helpless of their rights.

There appears to be a second thing impled in this discussion - the rights of the strong (the mother) are greater than those of the weak (the child ).

Although this next thought appears a bit flippant, no doctor I know would deliberately make sure someone dies becase they are inconvenient or not very clever. Unfortunately that is how I see abortion , so think 24 weeks should not be an option.
I'd like to make it clear that I believe everyone is entitled to their views regardless of whether others agree or not.
There is another question for you to consider, the unborn child has no rights,
So:
Should a woman who fully intends to go to full term with the baby and is very happy about being pregnant be legally allowed to smoke and drink excess alcohol?
I ask purely out of interest because I believe such a law is unlikley to ever be passed as it would infer that the unborn child has rights and that would really cloud the water.
A woman at 32 weeks (and rememeber at 24 weeks an unborn child is 'viable' and perhaps even below that time) stabs herself in the womb resulting in the death of the unborn child, is that a crime?
You'll note that I'm steering well clear of the 12 week debate and using hypothetical scenarios simply top ease the debate, I also do not wish (or believe it possible) to change anyone's views I'm just very interested in them.
A woman is rushed hospital and has to have an emergency c-section and delivery of a 23 week baby...
...the baby survives albeit in an incubator in ICU
- the mother suffocates the baby
- is that a crime (only 23 weeks not 24)???
It would appear that a woman has a legal right to make a wrong decision
I do not possess a crystal ball, but I'm fairly certain that TOPs will be carried out for a very long time (there are many reasons why this would be the case) however I'd be willing to bet large sums of money that in the not too distant future the 'abortion limit' will be reduced from 24 weeks.
Only time will tell.

41 to 60 of 61rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Abortion Poll on AB

Answer Question >>

Related Questions