Abortion under the spotlight in the European Court of Human Rights

curlzy

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20101216/tuk-abortion-laws-put-under-spotlight-e1cd776.html

I know this only relates to particular cases but I don't think it goes far enough. Personally I think it should be up to each individual and that society and the government should have no right to stop a woman getting an abortion, by refusal to provide the service. What do you think?

smk89

Abortions for some, miniature Irish flags for everyone else!

MrStuffins

This thread should be aborted... quickly!

orourkeda

curlzy wrote: »

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20101216/tuk-abortion-laws-put-under-spotlight-e1cd776.html

I know this only relates to particular cases but I don't think it goes far enough. Personally I think it should be up to each individual and that society and the government should have no right to stop a woman getting an abortion. What do you think?

Didnt we have a referendum on this issue?

The government didnt decide this it was decided by an electoral majority in Ireland.

By the way isnt killing an unborn a viloation of Human rights. Or is that different somehow?

Nodin

curlzy wrote: »

............. What do you think?

...that this thread will end badly.

prinz

curlzy wrote: »

Personally I think it should be up to each individual and that society and the government should have no right to stop a woman getting an abortion. What do you think?

Personally I disagree. Secondly I'd wonder what kind of women who has already had kids taken into care due to an 'inability to cope' (a) gets pregnant again and (b) develops the ability to take a case as far as the ECtHR in Strasbourg. Perhaps she should have put the same effort into looking after her offspring.

curlzy

orourkeda wrote: »

Didnt we have a referendum on this issue?

The government didnt decide this it was decided by an electoral majority in Ireland

That was held in 1983, I think times and people's opinions may have changed since then. There was another referendum more recently but that was just specifically relating to abortion where lack of one may cause endangerment to the life of the mother.

MrStuffins

orourkeda wrote: »

By the way isnt killing an unborn a viloation of Human rights. Or is that different somehow?

Resistence.... failing...... must... not..... respond........

prinz

orourkeda wrote: »

By the way isnt killing an unborn a viloation of Human rights. Or is that different somehow?

The doctor gives you your human rights along with a smack to kick-start you. :pac:

Nodin

orourkeda wrote: »

Didnt we have a referendum on this issue?

We did indeed. And - as far as I know - no government has enacted the relevant legislation allowing for abortion in the event the womans life is threatened, hence the current court case.

orourkeda

curlzy wrote: »

That was held in 1983, I think times and people's opinions may have changed since then. There was another referendum more recently but that was just specifically relating to abortion where lack of one may cause endangerment to the life of the mother.

It may have been 1983 and I understand times change but the insinuation made that the government is somehow calling the shots on this issue strictly speaking isn't true.

Is there a particular reason that they are not enacting current legislation?

baltimore sun

abortions for everyone....boo!
abortions for none..........boo!

cant win.

should be allowed though, but I'd fell sorry for nike and adidas, who buy their tracksuits if all the knacks were havin abortions?

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

Personally I disagree. Secondly I'd wonder what kind of women who has already had kids taken into care due to an 'inability to cope' (a) gets pregnant again and (b) develops the ability to take a case as far as the ECtHR in Strasbourg. Perhaps she should have put the same effort into looking after her offspring.

Good man, throw some muck at the woman. That'll cut to the core issues.

The fact is that theres a supreme court ruling declaring that abortion is permitted in limited circumstances, and no administration has had the balls to enact the correct legislation. As a result, we have yet another avoidable court case.

common sense brigade

Well I firmly believe that the baby has a right to life. If you don’t want to keep a baby there are plenty of loving couples out there dying to have children that cannot. I myself was born to a single mother in 1980, if abortion had been socially acceptable back then I may not have been here. Yes it is hard being pregnant for 9 months. I have a daughter myself. But why not put yourself out for nine months and give the baby a life through adoption if you do not want it. I agree in extreme medical cases were the mother’s life is endangered that abortion should be allowed. But it should not be allowed for women who find themselves inconveniently pregnant ‘and emotionally not able’ that is a cop out. Get up and get over it and if you cannot cope with a baby give another family a chance at happiness. My sister is currently undergoing fertility treatment for blocked tubes and the heartbreak she has endured for years trying to conceive breaks my heart. She would be a wonderful mother . I am a mother, when I held my baby in my arms the thought of anyone or anything harming her made me physically ill. I do not believe that the aborted baby does not feel the pain of dying. You can all dress it up how you like with medical jargon but can you all be sure that tiny baby slumbering in its mother’s womb does not feel the pain of being extracted .

orourkeda

Nodin wrote: »

We did indeed. And - as far as I know - no government has enacted the relevant legislation allowing for abortion in the event the womans life is threatened, hence the current court case.

The fact that a womans health may be at risk during childbirth is one issue.

What about women who fall pregnant through irresponsibility or carelessness. Would they be entitled to the same rights and where do we draw the line?

MrStuffins

baltimore sun wrote: »

should be allowed though, but I'd fell sorry for nike

I dunno, that "swoosh" looks like it would do a sweet job inside a "Nike Home Abortion Kit"

Cookie_Monster

baltimore sun wrote: »

should be allowed though, but I'd fell sorry for nike and adidas, who buy their tracksuits if all the knacks were havin abortions?

if they had any marketing sense they'd do a "bring your abortion receipt and get half price on adult track suits" offer.

Dravokivich

I've an old wire coat hanger here somewhere... form a cue you pregnant hussies!

Wazdakka

*Gets popsorn*

These threads are normally good for a laugh.
I like to imagine just how angry some people get about this topic.


In before Jackass

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

Good man, throw some muck at the woman. That'll cut to the core issues..

Did I say anything that wasn't in the article linked to? Should we ignore the fact that it's possible this woman is just a pawn?

Nodin

orourkeda wrote: »

The fact that a womans health may be at risk during childbirth is one issue
What about women who fall pregnant through irresponsibility or carelessness. Would they be entitled to the same rights and where do we draw the line?

Well as I am pro-choice, I don't actually see the need for a line.

orourkeda

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

if they had any marketing sense they'd do a "bring your abortion receipt and get half price on adult track suits" offer.

Or bring your baby and get two for the price of one

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

Did I say anything that wasn't in the article linked to? Should we ignore the fact that it's possible this woman is just a pawn?

So if I took a court case on behalf of the mentally disabled being abused in state funded homes, or on behalf of children in state institutions, they would be my 'pawns'?

smk89

Imagine the clinic names
birth + ctrl + z and foetus away would be good.

If all for infanticide but before we get abortion shouldn't make the morning after pill non prescription?

Nodin

Dravokivich wrote: »

I've an old wire coat hanger here somewhere... form a cue you pregnant hussies!

I'll open up next to you with a big step ladder, for the bungalow bound hanger-adverse.

orourkeda

Nodin wrote: »

Well as I am pro-choice, I don't actually see the need for a line.

Theres probably no real of knowing this but what would the ratio be between pregnancies that are likely to result in complications that may kill the mother and pregnancies that were caused that the mother just couldnt be arsed with.

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

So if I took a court case on behalf of the mentally disabled being abused in state funded homes, or on behalf of children in state institutions, they would be my 'pawns'?

Are you comparing an adult with the mentally disabled and children? Slight difference there.

orourkeda

Nodin wrote: »

So if I took a court case on behalf of the mentally disabled being abused in state funded homes, or on behalf of children in state institutions, they would be my 'pawns'?

Perhaps you should also take a court case of behalf of mother who got pregnant as a result of a drunken one night stand and is looking for an easy way out.

Nodin

orourkeda wrote: »

Theres probably no real of knowing this but what would the ratio be between pregnancies that are likely to result in complications that may kill the mother and pregnancies that were caused that the mother just couldnt be arsed with.

Fuck knows, tbh. Women who admit to not being arsed would be rarer than langers on cows....

orourkeda

orourkeda wrote: »

The fact that a womans health may be at risk during childbirth is one issue.

What about women who fall pregnant through irresponsibility or carelessness. Would they be entitled to the same rights and where do we draw the line?

Yeah, perfect candidates for motherhood.

Perhaps you should also take a court case of behalf of mother who got pregnant as a result of a drunken one night stand and is looking for an easy way out.

That's right, punish those irresponsible women by making them have a child.

orourkeda

Nodin wrote: »

Fuck knows, tbh. Women who admit to not being arsed would be rarer than langers on cows....

Women dont have regrets about getting pregnant in your world.

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

Fuck knows, tbh. Women who admit to not being arsed would be rarer than langers on cows....

The numbers of women procuring a second or further abortion in the UK these days would suggest otherwise.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article6335880.ece

46 women on their eighth or more abortion....

curlzy

I'm pro-choice myself but I think it's very interesting to hear other people views on the subject. I think alot of people that may be pro-choice don't bother speaking out because it hasn't touched on their life whereas alot of people that are pro-life do speak out even though it's never touched their lives, I'm wondering if alot of pro-lifers come from a religious frame of mind. It would be interesting to know.

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

Are you comparing an adult with the mentally disabled and children? Slight difference there.

Did it occur to you that a woman "unable to cope" could well have mental issues of one type or another, or is that too much of a stretch...?

orourkeda wrote:

Perhaps you should also take a court case of behalf of mother who got pregnant as a result of a drunken one night stand and is looking for an easy way out. .

Why is it that the lowest common denominator comes out so early in these threads? The classic stereotype of the 'drunken hussy' eager to kill the product of her wanton behaviour....

Why is it abortion is seen as an "easy way out"? Where did this notion come from?

curlzy

prinz wrote: »

The numbers of women procuring a second or further abortion in the UK these days would suggest otherwise.

Link? Stats? Genuinely interested.

orourkeda

bluewolf wrote: »

That's right, punish those irresponsible women by making them have a child.

Or punish the child for the mistakes of its mother?

Sisko

Its a bit embarrassing as a modern country women still don't have a choice.

I think its only a matter of time though as things progress.

Remember it wasn't even that long ago when divorce was illegal.

omahaid

bluewolf wrote: »

That's right, punish those irresponsible women by making them have a child.

The opposite is true too - don't punish the child because of what the mother did.

Nodin

orourkeda wrote: »

Women dont have regrets about getting pregnant in your world.

regrets about being pregnant =/= "couldn't be arsed"

prinz wrote:

The numbers of women procuring a second or further abortion in the UK these days would suggest otherwise.

And that automatically translates to "couldn't be arsed"? I think not.

omahaid

omahaid wrote: »

The opposite is true too - don't punish the child because of what the mother did.

By making it grow up with a mother who feels she can't cope or get thrown out for adoption? Yeah, totally agree

smk89

curlzy wrote: »

I'm pro-choice myself but I think it's very interesting to hear other people views on the subject. I think alot of people that may be pro-choice don't bother speaking out because it hasn't touched on their life whereas alot of people that are pro-life do speak out even though it's never touched their lives, I'm wondering if alot of pro-lifers come from a religious frame of mind. It would be interesting to know.

Considering most people using this forum are male, <25 and agnostic/atheist they may not represent the country as a whole. Personally I have a cup of tea in one hand and am waiting for the inevitable comparison to nazies to begin.

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

Did it occur to you that a woman "unable to cope" could well have mental issues of one type or another, or is that too much of a stretch...?

They just decided to leave that piece of information out of it did they?

curlzy wrote: »

Link? Stats? Genuinely interested.

As above. I can why a woman may find herself in a position where a pregnancy would not be desirable. I could understand a woman in such a scenario having an abortion. I cannot understand the same woman having multiple abortions. While it is good to see the numbers falling, it is deeply worrying that there seems to be a significant number of women/people who see abortion as something to be done over and over..

Fratton Fred

Good to see a bit of good old fashioned sexism.

Mistakes of the mother ffs, unless I am out of touch, it does in fact take two people to make a baby.

MrStuffins

GARCON!!!!!

MORE POPCORN OVER HERE!!!!

orourkeda

Nodin wrote: »

Did it occur to you that a woman "unable to cope" could well have mental issues of one type or another, or is that too much of a stretch...?



Why is it that the lowest common denominator comes out so early in these threads? The classic stereotype of the 'drunken hussy' eager to kill the product of her wanton behaviour....

Why is it abortion is seen as an "easy way out"? Where did this notion come from?

Simply put a woman who cant cope with pregnancy shouldnt get pregnant. God knows theres enough help out there for women to avoid pregnancy and taking responsibility for her own sex life is surely the way to go.

You're a person throwing around hypothetical situations to suit your argument as well. Why are you putting down situations that don't suit you. Only a fool would suggest that pregnancies dont occur in less than ideal circumstances. It's called an easy way out because they cant handle the results of their irresponsible behaviour and try and remove the consequences of their actions.

Nodin

orourkeda wrote: »

Or punish the child for the mistakes of its mother?

"mistakes of its Parents" . It - or so I'm informed - takes two to conceive a child. One of them, astounding as you may find it, is required to be male. I realise this interrupts the narrative of the 'wanton hussy' who must be reigned in, but I didn't invent the process.

prinz

prinz wrote: »

As above. I can why a woman may find herself in a position where a pregnancy would not be desirable. I could understand a woman in such a scenario having an abortion. I cannot understand the same woman having multiple abortions.

In my ideal world, sex education including contraceptives would be much more comprehensive in schools so that this whole issue shouldn't have to come up, or at least as little as possible.
Only way to get anywhere in this whole debate.

curlzy

orourkeda wrote: »

Or punish the child for the mistakes of its mother?

A foetus isn't a child, a foetus is a foetus IMO.

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

And that automatically translates to "couldn't be arsed"? I think not.

So these women just accidentally, and completely beyond their control, fell pregnant 4, 5, 6, 7....8.... times?

omahaid

bluewolf wrote: »

By making it grow up with a mother who feels she can't cope or get thrown out for adoption? Yeah, totally agree

How can you know how a "hypothetical" mother will feel? Is adoption so bad in your opinion?

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

"mistakes of its Parents" . It - or so I'm informed - takes two to conceive a child. One of them, astounding as you may find it, is required to be male. I realise this interrupts the narrative of the 'wanton hussy' who must be reigned in, but I didn't invent the process.

Presumably then, if abortion were to be fully available you would give the male party and equal say in whether or not a abortion should be carried out?