Woman jailed for illegal abortion at 34 weeks. Thoughts?

"They also serve who only stand and wait" (or something like that).

Some women do not understand that, although a man can never experience the physical trauma and extreme pain of labour and childbirth (as an aside, I think women often have higher pain thresholds than men - just the though of having an episiotomy stitching post delivery like I saw my wife endure let alone the actual incision during the birthing to prevent tearing makes me feel physically ill) we do suffer in a different way . I experienced the 'pain' and frustration as most of us do when someone we love is in extreme pain of being totally helpless to do anything about it. Once over it is a joyous occasion (in our case after a long labour of around 15 hours) and every single person even those who go through this daily in the delivery room, like me, was in tears. Prior to that, the final hour before my daughter was born was one of the worst moments of my life. The more you love someone the more helpless and useless you feel in those situations.

 

Hypothetical and going off on a tangent here IMO. How often in first and even third World countries (except in times of War or famine) do babies die due starvation? Even in Victorian time and before, wet nurses required some form of payment. Are you saying any society would simply allow babies to starve simply mother could not afford to feed them without intervention?

 

I think she can see that - the point is that the baby once born poses no health risk to the mother. Giving birth is dangerous and often results in life-long effects. I think that's the point JamDrop is making - that there is a clear difference in aborting an unborn child and killing a born child in that if you prevent abortion you are effectively forcing significant health risks upon the mother.

 

Yes, that first paragraph is exactly what I was saying. I’m not sure what my stance is on it myself but I think that is the key argument.

The breastfeeding bit I wish I’d had more time to think about (I was due to start work and had to just quickly type and post) as I suspect Tekky is right and someone probably could get into trouble for not breastfeeding the baby if physically able but chose not to (and presuming there was no other alternative way to get the baby food) but I don’t actually know if it has ever happened before and if there is a precedent. What about if someone else who was able to produce breast milk found themselves in that situation with someone else’s baby. Would they be expected to feed it, would they maybe actually get into trouble for feeding it if they passed on an infection?

 

Thank you! I don’t even agree that she should have done it, I’m just pointing out that there clearly is a difference between abortion and killing the baby once born. Not for the baby obviously but there definitely is for the woman. Not just the birthing bit but the final 6 weeks or so of her pregnancy that could throw up all sorts of dangers (or 16 weeks for all other women after the 24 weeks date has passed). I can understand Tekky saying touch sh*t for the woman, the baby’s life takes priority, but I can’t understand his insistence that the difference doesn’t actually exist for the mother. It should, to me, be considered as a mitigating factor when sentencing is given compared to the murder of a baby that has been born.

 

Accusations of misogyny in this thread (of which I have posted numerous times as I feel very strongly about this issue) are wrong. I have followed the thread and cannot find any posts that have not been critical of the person to whom it relates because of her actions and attitude.

[/QUOTE]You seem to imply that ALL posts were critical - that is wrong - read your second sentence carefully.
Some posts were very critical (misogynistic?) most weren't.[/QUOTE]

Nope' I have read it carefully and still don't get it unless you are implying me using the pronoun "her" is somehow misogynistic. If so you are either very strange, on a wind up or simply wrong. As others have pointed out, the person is a woman (since she is a mother) so referencing 'she', or 'her' is correct,. Furthermore the comments are all about her actions not about her as a woman. You are in a minority of one on this 'misgogynist' track within this thread as far as I can tell .

Let it go.

 

Let us be clear -there is No "clear difference" between killing a baby at a late stage of development whilst still in the womb or newly born for the child involved

There are obvious risks to a women during pregnancy but by third trimester given modern medicine and monitoring etc. However, I cannot see that that in any way, mitigates ending the life of -I re-iterate- a viable healthy unborn baby .

I took exception because JD seems to think it does. However, she has still not addressed it, i.e. that killing a baby is somehow justified because of those risks. Ultimately termination so late on either by caesarian section or a stillborne induced birth still carries risks with the added element of having killed a baby so how does that negate my point?

 

Of course I can’t possibly know first hand what it feels like to be pregnant or to be having a difficult pregnancy. But you are right about the assumptions some are making and I can very much sympathise with the two scenarios you shared from your life.

I experienced the first of those things (and something similar to the second though I don’t think her life was in immediate danger in the second pregnancy). When Rhys was born he was hurried away and didn’t cry for what seemed an eternity - it was a difficult labour which lasted all of 52 hours and in the end he was pulled out with forceps after we’d hastily agreed it might damage his eyes as they feared he wasn’t going to make it if they didn’t get him out, and he was too low for a section at that point. I was in there in full greens with the team of three midwives/nurses, two doctors and an anaesthetist on standby in case she needed to have an emergency section, after being in a birthing suite for two whole days and nights before that.

He eventually cried, probably wasn’t as long time wise as it felt like, but I burst into tears too. I’d been sat what felt like an eternity thinking my son, who we’d named in advance, moved house for, changed cars, decorated, bought endless things in preparation for, who had been referred to as part of the family for future plans for months, had been stillborn. The relief at hearing his first sound brought a rush of emotion that I’ll never deny or seek excuse for. Though I’m not someone who tries to bottle emotions anyway.

It turned out the issue was that he was face up rather than down, and was stuck in the birth canal as his nose had wedged at the top of the Mrs’ cervix. She’d pushed out about three full bunches of grapes worth of haemorrhoids she’d strained that hard - but as it turned out she was never going to be able to push him out, as much as the medical team (and I at the time based on their words) seemed to insist she wasn’t pushing hard enough. He was just completely stuck. Any longer and he might not have made it, or at least completely unscathed.

Thankfully the forceps left no lasting damage - he just had a scratch on his cheek for a couple of weeks. There were only two rather than the usual three blood vessels in the umbilical cord too, though that had been picked up in a scan and hadn’t caused any issue in the end but had been cause for concern and extra monitoring/scans, and meant our subsequent two pregnancies were very heavily scrutinised. Donna suffered hyperemesis gravidarum, made famous by princess Kate, particularly badly in the first pregnancy, being sick daily from early doors until after the due date. It only stopped when her belly dropped. Also had severe sickness for longer than you’d normally expect for the other two, as well as preeclampsia and gestational diabetes in the last pregnancy.

I don’t profess to have suffered as much as her or like her. But I lived those experiences with her, and she says herself that rhys’ actual birth was much more traumatic for me as she was completely out of it and doesn’t really remember the last stage when we’d been hastily shifted to a theatre.

 

It probably was seen in mitigation by the judge given the crime carried a possible life sentence, murdering a child that had been born would definitely attract a life sentence - and she has been sentenced to 28 months and will serve half of that.

I’d imagine the sentence was reduced heavily in mitigation given those numbers.

 

It sounds horrendous and is for all concerned. Having a child is one of the most stressful and amazing things, it is such a mix of emotions. Luckily we both came out of it ok it sounds but I really feel for those who don't.

 

TT

I'll spell it put for you ...

what you said - quote - ''I ....cannot find any posts that have NOT been critical.......''

so what you are saying is you found all posts to be 'critical' - you are wrong, some were some were not!

 

Well the Current home secretary who was previously the head of the Crown Prosecution service is a woman, so, she's not a man and she's pretty much in charge of what's law and what isn't.

 

The mitigation is that she has been sentenced to 14 months, instead of a mandatory life sentence. Sadly there's an example today where that's the likely outcome.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-65906435

 

Sorry, I was saying that I agree it should be, not that it hadn’t been.

 

Apart from the fact that I have, of course. You just refuse to listen. I’ve said that I don’t agree with what she did but was making the point that there is a difference between what happened and the scenario you keep giving for the woman involved (though not for the baby) and that there is no other instance in existence where someone is forced to undergo something medically for the benefit of someone else.

 

We are coming at it from a different angle. I have never said that both scenarios are the same for the woman. My entire focus is and has been throughout on the unborn/born baby that in both scenarios is killed. You are focussed on the woman's situation..fair enough.

I also dispute your opinion that it is a 'forced medical procedure'. For all mammals, and other species, procreating and giving birth is an entirely natural process. No species, other than humans though, go through the process with 'medical interventions' and for tens of thousands of years neither did we. Many women still have babies without involvement of doctors and nurses or hospitals. I am not saying that is a good thing but it is a fact. Obviously, modern medical care is not only safer and reduces risks to mother and baby but also helps to a lesser extent the pain caused by natural childbirth through epidurals/gas and air etc. as well as the psychological help at a stressful time knowing there are experts on hand to assist.

We clearly disagree but to say I "refuse to listen" is 'pot calling kettle' We disagree plain and simple. I will leave it there.

 

you clearly have a problem in actually focusing and responding to the points other posters make in their messages.

 

As di you as you take any post that even happens to dare to mention a race, religion, disability, gender or anyone else that you think needs the great and holy defender red taff and instantly accuse the poster of discrimination and yet you can pretty much never back it up with any facts except for in this case 'posts were critical if a woman ergo it MUST be misogyny' and 'meb should leave women to women' and utterly ******* stupid idea really.

You are insistent that posts in this thread are misogynistic so grow some balls and actually state which ones and why because frankly a lot of people are sick to the back teeth of you throwing out harmful allegations with **** all behind them.

I'm sorry if that offends but I assure you it's not based on your nationality, sexuality, gender, age, physical or mental condition or anything else that you can latch onto to use. It's based on your words and allegations on this bbs

 

Can't help but feel that everyone is going around in circles now?