Suzie, the woman in Darwin had her pregnancy terminated in order to be able to continue a career in the defence forces. The defence forces have had, for some time, fairly strict rules about its member's mental health. As long ago as 1995 a friend who was in the Army Reserve, but working more or less full time with the Reserve, told me that if anyone was detected to have psychiatric illness (or major pyschological problems) they would be discharged.

If the woman had such major psych problems her career was at risk anyway. Perhaps this woman 'slipped through the cracks' and thought that she could obtain a second trimester termination on the grounds of psychiatric risk / psychological problems. Perhaps her problem was an obsession with her career, I don't know. But I do know that she should have sought termination very much earlier than when she did.

The Dr Sood case was more interesting, that foetus was born alive, at 23 weeks, in 2002 and was pronounced dead after 4 hours. That pregnant woman should also have sought a termination a lot earlier, like 4 months earlier when she thought she may have been pregnant.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/doctor-guilty-of-illegal-abortion/2006/08/23/1156012590847.html

Regarding adoption: it is actively discouraged these days in comparison to 30 years ago (when it was probably encouraged too much).

Dougthebear <"That pregnant woman should also have sought a termination a lot earlier, like 4 months earlier when she thought she may have been pregnant."

No arguments from me that late term abortions should be only allowed as a last resort, either for the mothers health or for very disabled babies. The doctor obviously thought it necessary. Who are we to interfere?

Neither of us can assume we know the whole story behind any woman or couples decision to abort her baby. Who is to say she did not develop a wish to suicide from extreme hormone imbalance late in her pregnancy?
There are dedicated areas in mental health facilities to deal with women who suffer like this. Sometimes abortion is the only answer.

Would you be ok with her killing both herself and her unborn child rather than allowing abortion? Two deaths instead of one?

Again, I say it is no one else's business than the parents and their doctor.

Suze

Sweet little statements about the need to "include the father in her decision" mean little if the mother retains the final say in important decisions in the relationship. Using language that equates attempting to change her mind to forcing her to doing things is similarly unhealthy.

When I spoke of compromise, I was speaking in general terms about decisions. I believe that all of all important decisions should be joint decisions with an equal balance of power.

I agree that it is hard to find a compromise in a situation where one person is strongly in favour of an abortion and the other is strongly in favour of continuing the pregnancy. However, I suspect that most of the mothers who consider abortion have an element of indecision. It is only fair that they value the opinion of the father.

This should not bring any emotions at all to anyone, after all she was just exercising her right to chose, a right defended by many, and a right she just chose to exercise more often than many others.

No problem here:

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/wellbeing/abortion-addict-the-woman-who-terminated-15-pregnancies-in-17-years-20091015-gy46.html

First paragraphs of the article:

A woman has admitted to being an "abortion addict", likening her 15 terminations in 17 years to the actions of "a druggie".

American Irene Vilar said she "unconsciously" forgot to take her birth control pills in rebellion against her husband, who didn't want children, and then had abortions so he wouldn't leave her.

Her website is at:

http://www.irenevilar.com/

Just exercising her right to chose.

Yes dougthebear, a truly awful example of a terrible way to practice birth control- multiple abortions.

She was putting her life in danger having so many operations, and yes was also terminating planned pregnancies.

You managed to find yet another obscure, extreme example of abortion.
The bulk of women do not act like this.

Obviously she is acting out against her husband who would not let her have children.
She must have had a psychiatric disorder to act this way and not leave the man instead. Hubby must be sick as well to condone this behaviour by continuing having unprotected sex with her.
If only he wore a condom, all those abortions would have been unnecessary.

I would have left him after he made me have the first abortion.

Suzie

Most husbands who are told by their wives that they are on the pill, like this woman was, would not wear a condom: why would they?

There are indications that her husband was not aware of at least some of the abortions, but that she got pregnant voluntarily and procured the terminations because of some desire to keep the husband: she describes herself as 'forgetting' to take the pill. She is right when she describes herself as an addict - it almost sounds like a form of Munchausens - the other factor is that this woman is one of the few to admit to multiple terminations - and I agree that there are VERY few woman who would be as extreme as this case. But as I said pro-choice implies pro-choice: even if the choices made are not what some people may consider to be good choices.

I agree that criminalisation will not stop terminations.

But I am also aware that whilst we only hear of a few of the extreme examples of anything, these are but the tip of the iceburg. This case was extreme - but I wonder how many similar, if less extreme cases there are out there?