General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Should the time limit for terminations be reduced?

Page 2 + 1 of 4

  1. «
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. »
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Roxanne

Roxanne Report 20 May 2008 14:20

loopy lou,
me too,at 20 weeks,and yes,the baby is formed.

Roxanne

Roxanne Report 20 May 2008 14:17

personally I would like see it reduced even more than 20 weeks,but its a start.

McAnne's Gahan-Crazy

McAnne's Gahan-Crazy Report 20 May 2008 14:17

Yes - it's very easy to say women should be more careful if they don't want children etc

but let's face it - accidents happen!! no method of contraception is 100% safe ........ as has been well documented.

AnninGlos

AnninGlos Report 20 May 2008 14:14

My opinion is that it should be reduced to 20 weeks, unless there is a subsequent health risk to the Mother.

Ann
Glos

X Lairy- Fairy

X Lairy- Fairy Report 20 May 2008 14:12

I think in this day and age there shouldn't be so many unwanted pregnancies .(if you dont know your having a baby by 20 weeks your not likey to know till its born)
not only should people be worried about getting pregnant by not practicing safe sex they have more chance of catching STD
Rosex

MarionfromScotland

MarionfromScotland Report 20 May 2008 13:49

I heard today they are now saying that at 18 weeks...they feel pain.

Marion

Kay????

Kay???? Report 20 May 2008 13:48


I think for most that have never seen a 12---20 week old fetus.....just how incrediblely formed they are,,would I think belive ***a self wanted *** termantion should be carried at an earlier stage than 24 weeks,,

Those for medical or moral ones carry a totally load of issues and shouldnt be linked,,with a self want one,,,,,,,,

Nanna Gaynor  (June nr Preston's Daughter)

Nanna Gaynor (June nr Preston's Daughter) Report 20 May 2008 13:46

I think it should be reduced...
I think the idea of abortion is horrendous anyway but we don't live in a rosy perfect world do we? Not everything happens for the best.
I think though that 18-20 weeks has got to be better then 24 weeks, my friend had her baby at 23 weeks and although she spent her first few weeks in an incubator, she is now a happy, lively and beautiful little girl.
Another thing I always think about is whether or not the baby / foetus feels pain... and my instincts always tell me that it must...
Another reason for the limit to be reduced drastically.

TinaElizabeth

TinaElizabeth Report 20 May 2008 13:32

I miscarried my first baby at 25 weeks, this was 24 years ago. Medical advances were just being made but my little girl didn't survive the birth.
In the other room there was a a lady who for her own reasons was having a termination at 27 weeks (the cut off was 28 weeks then) That baby breathed, but they had to leave it to die as that is what the lady wanted, to terminate the pregnancy.
The lady was under anesthetic so wouldn't have known.

Off course its not any ones fault that i miscarried my daughter and its not the ladies fault for choosing a termination it was her choice to make.
However if it was to happen now she might well have lived and i would have a certificate of birth / death.
I might well have got a lot more support if it wasn't for the upper limit of the abortion limit, as for the medical staff when i fell pregnant the next year it was wrote on my notes as a spontaneous abortion, those words hurt but it was the correct medical term for my miscarriage at the time. Or so i was told.

It should be lower 20 weeks is more than enough time.

ஐ+*¨^¨*+e+*¨^¨*+ஐ Mildred Honkinbottom

ஐ+*¨^¨*+e+*¨^¨*+ஐ Mildred Honkinbottom Report 20 May 2008 13:31

20 weeks limit for those who just dont want the child.

24 weeks for medical reasons,.

MarionfromScotland

MarionfromScotland Report 20 May 2008 13:20

Yes it should be reduced, I would say to even less that the 20 wk,unless there are special reasons for it.

'Most' would know if they were pregnant well before that.
I am not against abortions, but it is not a form of conrtraception either,besides you can get more than a baby if your not carefull.


I'm with Val...Bob they should be more carefull.

Marion

valinkent

valinkent Report 20 May 2008 13:10

Simple answer yes it should be reduced, there will always be special circumstances that it has to be carried out later for medical reasons.

Bob .....if a woman doesn't want a baby they should make sure they take precautions not use abortion as a birth control.

Val

PinkDiana

PinkDiana Report 20 May 2008 12:57

I will add that I think the limit should be 20 weeks not 12

Diana
xx

PinkDiana

PinkDiana Report 20 May 2008 12:52

I agree with every woman having a choice but surely reducing it to a more realistic timescale is essential!!!

If babies can survive outside the womb from 22 weeks then terminations at 24 weeks is just awful unless there is a real MEDICAL reason.

And I agree as to education regarding contraception. There are 5 year ones nowadays!!

TaniaNZ

TaniaNZ Report 20 May 2008 12:51

The reality is that very few abortions are performed after 18 weeks except for in cases of abnormality when they can be done at any time.
I am not in favour of a law change as there are always going to be women in need of a late termination and the last thing we need is to go back to the days of women terminating themselves in the process.
There are many checks and balances in place and anyone who imagines it is really easy to get a late post 12 week abortion need to think again because it is not.
I hope they leave things as they are

McAnne's Gahan-Crazy

McAnne's Gahan-Crazy Report 20 May 2008 12:37

I agree with Bob - whatever the limit it's the woman's decision.

I also agree with the points Kate makes about some women not being aware that they are pregnant straight away - and not having enough time to make a rational decision when they do find out.

For instance - I had a scare a couple of years ago (edited - NOT thru unprotected sex!!) - went 72 days without a show and even upto the seconds before i rang the GP surgery for my results - I still hadn't been able to make a decision one way or the other as to what I would do if it were positive ............ which it wasn't btw

Kathlyn

Kathlyn Report 20 May 2008 12:34

20 weeks should be the limit other than:-

cases of rape/severe abnormalities in the feotus/ metal or physical problems for the mother.

With birth control being so good these days, perhaps teaching young people to say, quite loudly...NO...that is the most effective birth control method ever divised.

BrianW

BrianW Report 20 May 2008 12:13

IMHO 24 weeks is too late and too close to the limit of viability.

20 weeks would be more suitable with exceptions for GENUINE medical circumstances.

The "A" word (adoption) seems to have been excluded from calculations, although I believe that there is a high unsatisfied demand (and we are importing babies to meet it) and that local authorities have targets set which encourages them to remove children from genuine parents on the slightest pretence to pass on to childless couples.

sealyham

sealyham Report 20 May 2008 12:09

yes unless drs advice for special reasons
a lot of babies can survive now with the right help
my cousins babies came very early and were very small and have turned out wonderful the girl was away doing duke of edinburghs awards this weekend

Muffyxx

Muffyxx Report 20 May 2008 12:01

As long as tests on the NHS for abnormalities are completed well before the deadline then yes I'd be in favour of a reduction.

My mums friend's daughter had to have a termination as the prognosis was very bad for the baby.....he had at least 3 different types of syndrome and wouldn't have lived beyond a few hours had she gone full term. Sadly her tests were only returned and confirmed at week 23. I believe it would've been wrong to take the option away from her in that instance xx