Currently in the UK, 20 weeks is the limit, but up to 24 is allowed in extreme cases. Surely these limits are too high?
2007-02-20 00:39:31 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Pregnancy
News today:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1411793.ece
2007-02-20 00:53:34 · update #1
News today:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1411793.ece
chelebeee - there is a shortage of babies for adoption, so there is no problem in UK. My brother has 3 adopted children.
I am not a religious nut, but abortion is too freely used IMHO, not to mention the costs involved. Whatever was wrong with contraception (see I'm not religious - or at least not catholic!!)
2007-02-20 00:57:05 · update #2
Stat from TV last night - 2000 abortions in UK every year between 20 and 24 weeks
Anotehr stat - 1% of babies survived at 22 weeks (in 1995 - must be higher now), 17% survive @23 weeks - an age still legal for abortion!
2007-02-20 20:08:15 · update #3
i agree with you, i fell that at 20 wks its a baby, it should never be allowed at that late stage. its horrible to think that this is happening. if it really needs to happen then i should really be alot lower, i think no more than 12/14 wks. when i was pregnant with my 3rd baby i felt her moving at 16wk, how could anybody do that beyond that. it really makes we feel sick. i do know that sometimes it needs to be done but not as freely as it is now.
2007-02-23 21:21:56 · answer #1 · answered by claire 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Abortion is only allowed up to 24 weeks when serious problems with the baby are found. So that baby wouldn't have survived anyway.
I don't believe that anyone had an abortion at 24 weeks without very good reason.
I think the issue should be - shouldn't the age at which a birth is still considered a miscarriage be changed? If that baby had died, it would have not received a birth or death certificate. The mother would be entitled to no maternity leave. How are women supposed to grieve for their babies that have died when the baby they gave birth to that might have lived is labelled a miscarriage?
2007-02-20 02:45:24 · answer #2 · answered by Ricecakes 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Holy S***! I live in the US, and the limit in most states here is 12 weeks! I totally agree that 20-24 weeks is WAY too late! I'm against it anyway, but by 20 weeks, movement can be felt, most of the time from the outside as well as the inside. I don't understand how a woman could kill her baby once she's felt it's movements. It's just wrong. If those women didn't want to be mommies, they should give them up for adoption or make sure it doesn't happen in the first place! And what's an extreme case, anyway? She still has morning sickness & doesn't like it? It's extremely rare that pregnancy is an actual health risk for the mother, and by the beginning of the second trimester (18 weeks), she usually starts feeling great; no more morning sickness, fatigue isn't as bad, but not uncomfortably huge yet...I just don't get why someone would WANT an abortion in the first place...
2007-02-20 00:54:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Well I am pro choice, and a mother, and I do agree that it is too high. But having said that, I do believe that it is very unlikely for an abortion to carried out after 16weeks, most centres won't do it after this point, and there has to be a very very (ie life threatening) good reason why they would carry one out this late.
Personally ( and I am PRO CHOICE, so I agree that women have the right o choose) I think if you haven't at least been to see a doctor about a termination by 12 weeks then they should say tough luck, except in extreme cases.
Surely by three months you knwo whether you want the child? And if you haven't noticed by then (again there are cases where I will be wrong here) then you obviously pay zero attention to your sexual health and contreception and maybe having a baby will make you do just that.
I do think at up to eight or nine weeks it's not too much of a problem, but after that I really don't like the thought of it, but then I guess no woman does.
2007-02-20 00:54:52 · answer #4 · answered by CHARISMA 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Sidneymum - this has come from this article:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/19022007/323/world-s-most-premature-baby-thriving-miami-hospital-says.html.
I agree in principle that if you are going to abort, it needs to be done sooner rather than later, but there are always cases which will arise when a late abortion is, in my opinion, acceptable. You often get very young girls not admitting to being pregnant through fear, until it's really quite late on, and while yes, I have the utmost respect for the life of a child, I have a little more respect for the life of a child that has already been born...ie the pregnant 12 year old rape victim. It's a moral minefield, and one which requires decisions made on individual cases rather than a blanket rule.
2007-02-20 00:54:19 · answer #5 · answered by f0xymoron 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It may have survived, but how much medical care and at what cost to the child. They won't know for a very long time what kind of mental problems the baby is going to have as it grows up.
Abortions are legal in a lot of areas until 24 weeks.
(USA - My husbands - best friends - druggie ex-wife had one at 24 weeks a few years ago she waited that long because she was too busy spending money on drugs and couldn't afford it. She was in no danger and the baby was fine developmentally, but surely addicted to crack at that point)
I do think that is too high. I think 16 weeks should be the maximum. Unless something significant happens after that. If you don't want the baby, you should abort well before the 16 weeks and most serious problems are found by then too.
2007-02-20 00:45:45 · answer #6 · answered by ? 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
I hate to tell you this, but in the United States abortion is legal until the birth of the baby- Partial birth abortion. Even if a baby could not survive outside the womb yet, that does not make it ok to abort it. A developing baby is still a baby. The baby's heart starts to beat at 3 weeks after conception- a known fact. Just because baby's are not developed enough to survive does not make them not a baby- and ok to abort. What if a child was born with a defect- would it be ok to kill it- of course not- that would be murder. So just because a baby is not developed enough to live outside the womb does not give us the right to abort it .
2007-02-20 02:43:22 · answer #7 · answered by AdoreHim 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sure the baby survived (and it is a miracle for the loving parents)but she ONLY survived after constant medical care and attention in an icubator with drugs to help her lungs develop etc. etc.. Without the medical aid and care the baby would not have survived. Also in many premature births the risk of conditions like cerebal palsey are extremely high. So, no I would say it's not time to reduce the time limit on abortion, for the vast majority of women it is an agonising decision to make and it shouldn't be made any more difficult.
2007-02-20 00:52:38 · answer #8 · answered by Flossie 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Yes, yes, yes!! I'm not totally against abortion but i think the limit is way to high. 12 weeks should be the absolute maximum in my opinion.. Unless there is something medically wrong.. I can not believe that our health system would still perform a termination past a time the fetus becomes viable.. Sick i say!!
2007-02-20 01:36:23 · answer #9 · answered by Charlie m 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Woah! Judging by these answers you've hit a controversial one here! But for what it's worth, although I'm totally pro-abortion (the woman's right to choose and all that) I absolutely agree that the abortion time limit should be reduced.
2007-02-20 00:49:10 · answer #10 · answered by Away With The Fairies 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋