Late Term Abortion Options | INFJ Forum

Late Term Abortion Options

Flavus Aquila

Flavus Aquila

Finding My Place in the Sun
Banned
Mar 14, 2009
10,032
5,724
1,102
Australia
MBTI
INTJ - A
Enneagram
10000
This is not about the ethics of abortion itself.

...

If a woman has the right over her own body, does she also have the right to life/death decisions over a viable fetus/baby?

If she wants a late term abortion (to end the pregnancy and vacate her uterus), does it matter if the fetus is extracted intact/alive?
(The usual option to take the baby home, or adopt it out would apply).

Edit:
Anonymous Replies
If anyone wants to express an opinion anonymously, you can privately message me with the text, and I'll post it. (I won't allude to the opinion as being connected with you anywhere on the forum in any way, nor will I comment/reply to the pm... just cut and paste).
 
Last edited:
Here's a good example:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Milktoast Bandit
hush said:
This is interesting. What do you think, Flavus Aquila? What are your views on this?
Click to expand...
I think it's a lot easier to prevent the acquisition of rights, than to have to deal with them. (Dealing with a pouch of tissue is a lot less complicated than dealing with a baby).

Nevertheless, I think it's better to be generous with granting rights, than hesitant/sparing... and I think it's a good thing for a viable fetus/baby to reach its own potential... so I think it would be a good thing for abortions to leave the fetus/baby complete/whole. This doesn't seem to contradict the option to end the pregnancy, so it's win-win imo.
(With some extra hassels, but with some good stuff as well).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gaze
So staying out of this thread. Nothing good can come of this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Misty and j654dgj7
Flavus Aquila said:
Go on and post, but try to stick to the topic as per the OP.
Click to expand...
Oh no. Politics gets brutal...but this is the type of stuff where people will hunt you down and murder you.
Nothing good will come.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImaginaryBloke and j654dgj7
Eventhorizon said:
Oh no. Politics gets brutal...but this is the type of stuff where people will hunt you down and murder you.
Nothing good will come.
Click to expand...
If you can't give a non-politicised perspective, perhaps it's better to give the topic a wide berth.
 
If anyone wants to express an opinion anonymously, you can privately message me with the text, and I'll post it. (I won't allude to the opinion as being connected with you anywhere on the forum in any way).

I'll edit this into the OP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gaze
Flavus Aquila said:
That's a US specific political type article. I'd prefer not to get into politics... just the topic itself.
Click to expand...
Did you read it? Because it explains what is considered a late term abortion and why it is performed. It's not a common thing. If the fetus is viable and closer to 40 weeks, they are induced and delivered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Milktoast Bandit and Free
acd said:
Did you read it? Because it explains what is considered a late term abortion and why it is performed. It's not a common thing. If the fetus is viable and closer to 40 weeks, they are induced and delivered.
Click to expand...
That's the US practice. Did read it.
Lethal abortion is not permitted in Australia after 28 weeks... I'm not sure about induced labor. Europe, Asia, and Africa have diverse laws... but this isn't about the laws. It's about the options.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gaze
Flavus Aquila said:
That's the US practice. Did read it.
Lethal abortion is not permitted in Australia after 28 weeks... I'm not sure about induced labor. Europe, Asia, and Africa have diverse laws... but this isn't about the laws. It's about the options.
Click to expand...
So the option is to induce the fetus once they have reached viability, and the baby then stays in an NICU until it can be adopted--if it survives. Is that your suggestion?

Most of the time, women don't abort later in pregnancy because they don't want the baby-- they do it for health reasons or because an ultrasound revealed a condition not compatible with life.... in the US, most states ban abortion when the fetus reached viability, though not all states agree on which week it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gaze and Flavus Aquila
Good point.

If the fetus could live independently of the mother, then it should.

But at that stage, surely the fetus is a baby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flavus Aquila, Bellosome and Gaze
I think you'd have to travel far and wide to find a single person who agrees to late term abortion unless there's a significant health risk. Even in Canada where it's legal, the vast majority of abortions are early term.

What I'd like to see is more talk and less stigma over adoption. Surely there should be more promotion of an option that a) doesn't destroy a potential (or actual depending on your outlook) human being, and b) doesn't force the birth mother into a life-long commitment. Surely it's a win-win?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flavus Aquila, acd and Gaze
88chaz88 said:
I think you'd have to travel far and wide to find a single person who agrees to late term abortion unless there's a significant health risk. Even in Canada where it's legal, the vast majority of abortions are early term.

What I'd like to see is more talk and less stigma over adoption. Surely there should be more promotion of an option that a) doesn't destroy a potential (or actual depending on your outlook) human being, and b) doesn't force the birth mother into a life-long commitment. Surely it's a win-win?
Click to expand...
The whole subject/topic is so fraught politically. Late term abortions are a subject of debate here.... because they are basically illegal.

Linking the subject of adoption as an alternative option to late abortion is likely to get one torn to pieces. It is seen as a position contrary to women's rights over their bodies.

I'm uncomfortable with the premise that rights over one's body preclude/exclude/nullify the rights of a fetus/child, when the accommodation of both is not contradictory, or constraining. Nevertheless, people here want "partial birth" abortions available as an option. (Some sort of partial removal of a late fetus, with a vacuum catheter being inserted into the fetus' skull, while its head is still in the uterus). I can't understand why this is preferable to just pulling the child clear, and then adopting it out.

As you say, adoption may be an option which needs to be worked on both in terms of removing legal hurdles and socio-psychological ones. (Without promoting child abandonment at the same time).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back