When is it ok to have an abortion?

[Guest makapaka]

 

4 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

Yes, as I said they get assurance from the guidelines.

 

Nope  I said I wasn't qualified on the medical matters.

 

Not strange

So what is the problem - what do you want to happen that’s different to what’s happening now?

[WiseOwl182 10]

5 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

Desperate or what?

 

Very desperate. Desperate to avoid answering any question.

 

A woman carries a baby for 8 months and 30 days and then decides she doesn't want it any more. Should she be able to abort it?  Yes or no will suffice.

[SnailyBoy 10]

10 minutes ago, makapaka said:

 

So what is the problem - what do you want to happen that’s different to what’s happening now?

I didn't say there was a problem. A look at the stats of late term abortions will tell you that, they very rarely happen.

 

Women obviously feel the options are freely available. 

 

837 in England (2014)

 

15 were 20 weeks or over.

 

Northern Ireland however, there's a problem.

Edited June 13, 2019 by SnailyBoy

[Guest makapaka]

3 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

I didn't say there was a problem. A look at the stats of late term abortions will tell you that, they very rarely happen.

 

837 in England (2014)

 

15 were 20 weeks or over.

 

Northern Ireland however, there's a problem.

No - your problem with people disagreeing with the original post?

[SnailyBoy 10]

3 minutes ago, makapaka said:

No - your problem with people disagreeing with the original post?

I don't have a problem with people disagreeing. It's up to them to try and justify their reasoning.

[Cyclone 10]

6 hours ago, SnailyBoy said:

Ok, lets look at post 1, bearing in mind the basis of the post was a from a third party who can't respond.

 

Do you think there should be limitations on a woman's right to choose what happens to her body?

I think that you're trying to trick me into taking a position that I haven't expressed.

 

Personally I'm interested in post #85 and whether that poster believes that they should be able to have an elective abortion at 8+ months of pregnancy.

5 hours ago, SnailyBoy said:

The argument is female bodily autonomy and should there be limitations on that.

 

My argument isn't daft, that would be yours, and it's predicated on that terminating a pregnancy (at 8months and 31 days )will result in the  death of the baby, therefore female bodily autonomy should be limited.

 

What do you think happens to women who have to late terminations due to a danger to their own health or carrying a foetus with  abnormalities that would adversely affect them after birth?

 

The 'mechanics' you're struggling to identify are already there, it happens all the time, it's called a C Section or induction, whichever happens to be best for the welfare of the woman concerned.  The problem you have is that it doesn't routinely result in the death of the baby, which doesn't fit with this frankly ridiculous hypothetical situation, that has no basis in reality, of a woman suddenly deciding on a whim that she wants to terminate her pregnancy at 9 months and walk away.

 

Look at the stats of terminations in late pregnancy and then come up with an argument that the state should limit the rights of women to choose what happens to their bodies.

 

 

The medical definition of abortion is that the foetus dies.  If it doesn't, that isn't an abortion, and at the late stage you're discussing, that's called having a baby, be it through inducing, naturally or caesarean.

You are trying to redefine the medical term abortion to include a situation where a live child is the result, you can't, that simply isn't what it means.

Edited June 13, 2019 by Cyclone

[WiseOwl182 10]

3 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

I don't have a problem with people disagreeing. It's up to them to try and justify their reasoning.

Do you agree or disagree with the scenario in the OP? Should a woman be able to choose to abort a healthy baby at near enough full term? 

[Cyclone 10]

3 hours ago, SnailyBoy said:

Where did I say that?

 

I'd be interested what you think the medical process would be for terminating a pregnancy within a few days of a due date.

 

Would it be different to what happens now?

 

You're trying to reframe the argument from aborting, which is in the topic and the opening post, to terminating, which you also wish to redefine as to include completing with the outcome of a successful birth, which it still doesn't mean.

[SnailyBoy 10]

1 minute ago, Cyclone said:

I think that you're trying to trick me into taking a position that I haven't expressed.

 

Personally I'm interested in post #85 and whether that poster believes that they should be able to have an elective abortion at 8+ months of pregnancy.

No trick, just a question on bodily autonomy.

 

I can change it if you like.

 

Do you there should be no limitations on a woman's right to choose what happens to her body?

 

 

[Cyclone 10]

2 hours ago, SnailyBoy said:

You really are callous.

 

Are you really suggesting that's a solution for healthy women with viable pregnancies at term, what actually goes through your mind?

 

Come up with your scenario, I want to read it.

That scenario is precisely and entirely what this whole topic is about as described by the OP and then agreed with by post #85.

1 minute ago, SnailyBoy said:

No trick, just a question on bodily autonomy.

 

I can change it if you like.

 

Do you there should be no limitations on a woman's right to choose what happens to her body?

 

 

No, I think that the law as it stands is broadly correct.  And since I've answered your question, can you answer it as well?  Do YOU think that there should be NO limitations on a woman's right to choose what happens to her body?

[Guest makapaka]

2 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

I don't have a problem with people disagreeing. It's up to them to try and justify their reasoning.

But that’s been done.

 

The  original post said someone should be able to have an abortion at any point in the pregnancy regardless of the circumstances set out in the nhs guidelines- guidelines which you say you agree with. 

 

To justify the reasoning of the original post you would need to explain why those guidelines should be changed but you’ve said they shouldn’t be.

 

for women’s rights to be extended beyond the current rights in this scenario you’ve said you’re not qualified to argue and can’t put forward any reasons to justify it.

 

you’ve basically come out swinging on behalf of women’s rights and not really thought about it - and accused people of being like Donald trump in the process.

 

Any justification on the debate needs to come from you now - not others.

 

 

 

[Cyclone 10]

25 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

Desperate or what?

 

But this is precisely what the topic is about, you're attempting to reframe it for purposes unknown, whilst asking people lots of questions but not really volunteering much of an opinion of your own...