The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Cooling-off on abortion > Comments

Cooling-off on abortion : Comments

By Melinda Tankard Reist, published 27/10/2005

Melinda Tankard Reist supports changes to late-term abortion regulations in Victoria which allow for a cooling-off period.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All
The best way to make sure more abortions are late term abortions? Make it harder to get an abortion.
Giving women access to information and choices is fine, as long as that information is actually unbiased and offers all the alternatives, pushing any kind of personal ideological, moral or religious barrel is not helpful, and probably cruel.
But mandating, I repeat mandating, a "cooling off" period is patronising and insensitive. I remember 25 odd years ago when I had an unwanted pregnancy, all I wanted, all the way through my body, was not to be pregnant any more. To have some group of other people telling me I had to wait and "think" about my decision for a week or two more would have been beyond endurance. I knew perfectly well what I wanted to do, and I did it, without, sorry Melinda, a moments regret ever since. All I felt after the abortion was relief. Nobody wants to have an abortion, but sometimes they don't want to be pregnant more.
As I have pointed out on this site previously, I still do not regret my abortion. How could I? If I had that child, I wouldn't have had the two much wanted children I had later. It is important to realise that abortions may deny one child life, but they sometimes give other, later, much wanted children the chance that they never would have got otherwise. This is never taken into account.
Posted by enaj, Tuesday, 1 November 2005 5:19:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You are spot on enaj.
Anti abortion ideologues have no intention of condoning abortion. The notion of 'cooling off 'periods is precisely a stalling ploy.
On the other hand, pro choice supporters advocate 'choice'.........
The woman's choice, nobody elses.
Posted by maracas, Tuesday, 1 November 2005 6:24:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In a 'debate' as polarised as this, it would do us all well to remember that, as in any conflict, there is truth and bias in both 'sides', and the answer falls somewhere in between. However, we should not fall into the trap of believing that the 'side' we don't identify with has nothing at all to offer.
Posted by Tracy, Tuesday, 1 November 2005 10:31:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
An interesting judgement that sneaked under most peoples' radar was passed down by the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal in March this year.

It is the matter of: R v David John IBY [2005] NSWCCA 178 which involves the court reinterpreting the meaning of 'born alive' from the older rule that required the baby to breath of its own, to a baby breathing with artificial assistance, such as a respirator:

The key paragraphs being:

64 The context in which the rule arises for present consideration is a context in which the Appellant wishes to avoid criminal responsibility for manslaughter of a baby which was injured as a late term foetus, indeed was fully developed in perfect condition and within a week or two of actual birth. In the current state of medical technology and with the extremely low rate of stillbirths in the Australian community, the born alive rule, if it is to survive at all, should continue to be applied, as Ellis DCJ did, so that any sign of life after birth is sufficient. This happens to be consistent with the authorities.

65 It is also the approach which conforms best with contemporary conditions. It is now virtually certain that a newborn baby which shows any sign of life would have lived but for the conduct, said to constitute manslaughter or dangerous driving, inflicted on the baby late in the mother’s pregnancy.

The Judges did not apply the WHO definition:

“Live birth is the complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of a product of conception, irrespective of the duration of pregnancy, which, after such separation, breathes or shows any other evidence of life, such as beating of the heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, whether or not the umbilical cord has been cut or the placenta is attached; each product of such a birth is considered live born.”

The full judgement can be found at:

http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/scjudgments/2005nswcca.nsf/a16acdaf45f305714a256724003189f5/4d344cd3699e4c55ca256ff8007e5398?OpenDocument

One interpretation that is capable of being made is that a third trimester termination, where the child shows signs of life, can be considered manslaughter
Posted by Hamlet, Monday, 14 November 2005 3:58:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hamlet, making Rh486 available to women who want it will avoid the need for such terminations as you describe having to be performed so late.
Posted by maracas, Monday, 14 November 2005 4:17:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Melinda.

I agree with Kenny.

Get off your high horse and live your life as you see fit allowing others to do they same and make up their OWN minds.

We have read your comments> Thankyou.

Now the larger majority do not agree with you.

I respect your thoughts.

Do the same for others.

Its that simply

Butt Out unless its you
Posted by Wendy Lewthwaite, Monday, 31 July 2006 5:09:44 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy