Woman sentenced to prison for abortion.

Penfold101 said:
First few years you mean.
Click to expand...

More like decades... have you met most teenagers? :p

I assume the poster I was replying to meant "aware" in general, rather than self aware, but I thought it was well known that babies are conscious and aware of stimuli whilst in the womb - hence why they react to sounds and touch.

If they did actually mean "self-aware", then yeah, it's a year or 2 before they start to realise that "they" are a "thing". Either way the post I replied to was nonsense :cry:
 
Last edited:
Haggisman said:
Going by that logic, they probably still aren't "self-aware" for the first few weeks after being born either ;)
Click to expand...
I reckon we should up it to 8 years, should be long enough to work out if it’s decent one to keep or not.

Was appalled, not at her being jailed but the outcry against it. The law is there for a reason, to protect unborn children, if it was a case she had done this under the limit but with drugs gotten unofficially or something or she wasn’t of fit mind it would have been a different story but that doesn’t look to be the case. A 34 week baby would almost certainly have survived an early birth.
 
Jokester said:
I reckon we should up it to 18 years, should be long enough to work out if it’s decent one to keep or not.
Click to expand...

Absolutely!

Jokester said:
A 34 week baby would almost certainly have survived an early birth.
Click to expand...

Our eldest was born at 35 weeks and needed no additional help after the birth, his younger brother at 26 weeks, and spent quite a while in NICU, but is happy and healthy and had his 3rd birthday in April/will be 3 next month, so yeah, without a doubt.
 
Wasn't it 36 weeks? 35 36 doesn't really make much difference, at that age they are fully developed and ready to be born.

The only difference here is that she had to give birth to a baby she just terminated.

She had options, adoption being the obvious one, she didn't need to do this.
 
I am pro choice, but at this level of development (ie likely a perfectly viable baby outside of the womb), she should have given it up for adoption.

If there was a proper medical reason for doing so at this number of weeks that risked either mother or baby i think that is fine. In this instance, it would appear that was not the case and that she just wanted rid of it.

I think the laws in this country are just about right when it comes to abortion.
 
Last edited:
There’s some missing context here that the woman hid the pregnancy as she moved in with her estranged ex partner whilst pregnant with another man’s child. The desire to terminate was so that she didn’t break her fragile home relationship.

My stance, I’m pro-choice. But the laws dictates a cut off period, and that must be adhered to. As for why would you jail her - as always this sets a precedent. If you don’t punish those that do, others will be unchallenged.
 
Also, today I become aware of Pro-Choice extremism. I was fully aware of extreme Pro-Life views, but never seen a view of “it’s only a baby if given birth to” stance. I feel yucky.
 
Roar87 said:
This woman murdered a viable baby and should be in prison for child destruction. Period. The fact she'll only do 14 months in prison is a disgrace.
Click to expand...

Exactly - I cringe when anti-abortion campaigners refer to abortion as "murder", but in this case I'm struggling to see this as anything else. :(
 
MoNkeE said:
Also, today I become aware of Pro-Choice extremism. I was fully aware of extreme Pro-Life views, but never seen a view of “it’s only a baby if given birth to” stance. I feel yucky.
Click to expand...
A common theme of modern identity politics. If you're not 100% with us then you're 100% against us.
The extreme pro lifers are just as bad as the extreme pro choicers.
I remember when you could be a centrist and moderate, without being vilified
 
Penfold101 said:
Citation needed instead of you slapping a label on every single woman worldwide.
I've had a promiscuous lifestyle and have loose morals - are you putting me in the same box of disgust from your high horse?
Click to expand...
Are you also a woman, though?
I get the impression from his wording that this judgement only applies to women...

Pawnless Endgame said:
Shame on the person who reported this mother.
Click to expand...
No-one reported her.
"On 11 May 2020, having taken the abortion pills, an emergency call was made at 18:39 BST saying she was in labour.
The baby was born not breathing during the phonecall and was confirmed dead about 45 minutes later".
BBC News

It would already have been recorded once the emergency services operator answered the phone, and anything involving a newborn would have been followed up regardless.
 
Nasher said:
The law is the law and it seems like she knew what she was doing. That is quite a light sentence considering what the max is.
Click to expand...

We knew straight away both times when my other half was pregnant. It is not really difficult when 6 weeks go by and you do not have a period. To wait another 24 weeks is just reckless, selfish and stupid.

It is also not really hard to stop getting pregnant. We have used zero contraception in our 13 year relationship. It is quite simple what you need to do when you want a baby or not. Porn stars manage just fine!
 
ttaskmaster said:
Are you also a woman, though?
I get the impression from his wording that this judgement only applies to women...
Click to expand...

I am not - I'm just intrigued as to whether he would judge me the same as he does women for doing the same thing, or if those with vaginas are held to different standards...
 
Penfold101 said:
Rather that than 250,000 unwanted kids either being put into the adoption system or having parents who don't want them in the first place.
Click to expand...

I think @robgmun was expressing a preference for 90% of those to have not gotten themselves pregnant in the first place rather than those pregnancies being carried to term and put up for adoption etc.

As in it's surely better to have had say 25,000 abortions instead because more people were better able to access and use contraception properly. Abortions should be legal but rare etc.

I'm not sure if those figures include things like the morning after pill though.

godinman said:
Looking past the absolutely horrific idea of a baby being killed the day before it is due to be born, unless they stick a hand blender up there, the woman has still got to get the baby out somehow, how do you think this is going to happen?
Click to expand...

I do wonder if he's perhaps not thought it through as I asked @explicit4u the same thing and he doesn't seem to have an answer.

MoNkeE said:
Also, today I become aware of Pro-Choice extremism. I was fully aware of extreme Pro-Life views, but never seen a view of “it’s only a baby if given birth to” stance. I feel yucky.
Click to expand...

I don't really get that stance either.

I also think perhaps 24 weeks is pushing it a bit even. We do have exceptions re: medical stuff, there was a case not too long ago trying to stop the exemption from the limit for disabilities etc.. like a baby with downs can be terminated after 24 weeks.

There are some horrific and rare medical issues where I do think that can be appropriate, can't remember the condition but there was one where the baby is born in immense pain, skin all burned etc.. and pretty much guaranteed to not survive long at all. I do wonder if infanticide is perhaps justified in such a case, if we're prepared to abort in a case like that when it's in the womb then why not a few days later when it's outside, I guess doctors can/do practice a form of that anyway when they remove oxygen/turn off life support etc..
 
Before being sentenced she posted a FB message saying something like no one has the right to judge you.
Clearly she's completely unrepentant and thinks that in some situations women should be allowed to destroy a nearly full-term baby.
Unbelievable
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom