A woman hating idiot that is not familiar with UK law.
Vive La France!
- Thread starter noseall
- Start date
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 14,889
- Reaction score
- 2,252
- Country
Ahh so you are campaigning not to have doctors involved in assessing the person to see if:
1. the pregnancy is less than 24 weeks
2. that they understand the process, the side affects they will have
3. that they have thought it through with a clear mind, given that pregnancy changes a person's hormones etc etc.
Do you think the NHS are lying when they say "The decision to have an abortion is yours alone". Do you think they don't understand the law and are carrying out illegal abortions?
Clueless idiot who needs to research before getting upset.
1. the pregnancy is less than 24 weeks
2. that they understand the process, the side affects they will have
3. that they have thought it through with a clear mind, given that pregnancy changes a person's hormones etc etc.
Do you think the NHS are lying when they say "The decision to have an abortion is yours alone". Do you think they don't understand the law and are carrying out illegal abortions?
Clueless idiot who needs to research before getting upset.
I, nor anyone else is disputing that. And it's the same in France.
However, this still stands boyo.....
Here are the key restrictions regarding who can have an abortion in the United Kingdom:
- Age Restrictions:
- Under 16: If a person is under 16 years old, they can still access abortion services without parental consent. Healthcare professionals prioritize the young person’s best interests and confidentiality.
- 16 and 17: Individuals aged 16 and 17 can consent to their own medical treatment, including abortion, without parental involvement.
- Medical Assessment:
- Before an abortion, a medical assessment is conducted to determine the stage of pregnancy and the most suitable method.
- The assessment ensures that the person’s health and well-being are considered.
- Time Limits:
- Abortions can legally be carried out within the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
- Medical abortions (using medication) can be conducted up to 10 weeks into pregnancy.
- Surgical abortions can be performed up to 23 weeks and six days into a pregnancy.
- Grounds for Abortion:
- Abortion can take place if continuing the pregnancy would risk the person’s physical or mental health.
- Grounds also include risks to the health of existing children or if there is a substantial risk of severe physical or mental abnormalities in the unborn child.
- Two Doctors’ Approval:
- For legal abortions, two doctors must agree that the criteria for abortion are met.
- One doctor can approve in cases of emergency.
- Conscientious Objection:
- Healthcare professionals have the right to conscientiously object to participating in abortions.
- However, they must refer the person to another healthcare provider who can assist.
(backpeddling) Idiot.
“The decision to have an abortion is yours alone” is simply stating the law.
It does not mean a woman wanting abortion can do it without consultation.
Right wing nutters like Vinty claim abortion pills can be given over the counter or ordered from Amazon, that’s not true.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 14,889
- Reaction score
- 2,252
- Country
Make it as big as you like - You don't understand it. The doctors are required to authorise it because they have to assess if the abortion is likely to cause more harm than going term. That is not an approval to abort based on their beliefs, it is simply an assessment on the safety of the procedure. It is no different to them refusing to operate on a fatty because the anaesthetic will likely kill them.
Let me help you with some guidelines on the abortion act
What does the Abortion Act do?
The 1967 Abortion Act renders lawful activities that would otherwise constitute a crime under the Offences Against the Person Act (OAPA) 1861. The OAPA makes it a crime for a woman to 'procure a miscarriage', or for another person to help her do so.
The Abortion Act 1967 (as amended by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990) states that an abortion is legal if it is performed by a registered medical practitioner (a doctor), and that it is authorised by two doctors, acting in good faith, on one (or more) of the following grounds (with each needing to agree that at least one and the same ground is met):
(a) that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or
(b) that the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or
(c) that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated; or
(d) that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.
The 1967 Act does not apply to Northern Ireland, where the abortion law remains governed by the Bourne Decision, discussed below.
What does it mean for doctors to 'act in good faith'?
To show that an opinion has been formed 'in good faith' does not mean that authorising an abortion must be the 'right' course of action, simply that the doctor has not been dishonest or negligent in forming that opinion. What makes an abortion lawful is the doctor's opinion that there are lawful grounds for the procedure, rather than the fact that those grounds exist.
So, for example, if two doctors believe in good faith that abortion carries less risk to a woman's physical or mental health than carrying the pregnancy to term, this makes the abortion legal – even if, in the eventuality, it would have been safer to carry the pregnancy to term (for example, if the abortion resulted in death or injury). Similarly, if a woman states that she cannot afford to continue the pregnancy, the doctor is not obliged to check that she really is lacking in funds.
What does 'risk to health' mean?
These circumstances under which doctors can authorise an abortion include risk to a woman's physical or mental health, which, under Section 1(1)(a), is defined relative to the risk of giving birth.
Prior to 1967, it was already established in law, by the 1938 Bourne decision, that an abortion was legal if the doctor was 'of the opinion on reasonable grounds and with adequate knowledge of the probable consequences' that continuing the pregnancy would 'make the woman a physical or mental wreck'. This was significant because it confirmed that the grounds for a lawful abortion extended not merely to saving the woman from death but also to considering her mental and physical wellbeing.
The 1967 Abortion Act took the concept of wellbeing further, by indicating that an abortion was lawful if 'the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman' (emphasis added). In 2012, medical evidence is clear that, purely on a physical level, abortion carries less risk of maternal mortality and morbidity than does childbirth.
In terms of mental health impacts, authoritative reviews of the evidence in the USA and Britain are clear that aborting an unwanted pregnancy has no adverse psychological sequelae, compared to carrying that pregnancy to term.
Thus it could be argued that any abortion carried out under Section 1(1)(a) (the ground on which 98 per cent of abortions are carried out) would always be lawful, provided the authorising doctors were acting on the basis of a good faith reliance on this medical evidence base.
Is it legal to terminate a pregnancy because of a woman's social or financial circumstances?
Yes. This is provided by Section 1 (2) of the Abortion Act, which states that doctors may take account of the pregnant woman's actual or reasonably foreseeable environment when making a decision about the impact of the continuance of a pregnancy on a woman's health.
Here again, the law bestows upon doctors a gatekeeping role in terms of deciding who may have an abortion, but within that role provides for a great deal of latitude in making their decision. The law does not state that doctors 'must' take account of a woman's environment, but that they 'may' do so.
There is an implicit recognition that it is not always possible to separate the mental or physical health effects of abortion from a woman's wider social circumstances – such as her income, her housing situation, her support network. Doctors may take all this into account in determining whether to authorise an abortion.
Thus, it would be entirely reasonable for a doctor to decide that a woman who presents for an abortion saying that she cannot afford to continue the pregnancy can lawfully be provided with the abortion, as to refuse her might have relatively negative consequences for her health
Let me help you with some guidelines on the abortion act
What does the Abortion Act do?
The 1967 Abortion Act renders lawful activities that would otherwise constitute a crime under the Offences Against the Person Act (OAPA) 1861. The OAPA makes it a crime for a woman to 'procure a miscarriage', or for another person to help her do so.
The Abortion Act 1967 (as amended by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990) states that an abortion is legal if it is performed by a registered medical practitioner (a doctor), and that it is authorised by two doctors, acting in good faith, on one (or more) of the following grounds (with each needing to agree that at least one and the same ground is met):
(a) that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or
(b) that the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or
(c) that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated; or
(d) that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.
The 1967 Act does not apply to Northern Ireland, where the abortion law remains governed by the Bourne Decision, discussed below.
What does it mean for doctors to 'act in good faith'?
To show that an opinion has been formed 'in good faith' does not mean that authorising an abortion must be the 'right' course of action, simply that the doctor has not been dishonest or negligent in forming that opinion. What makes an abortion lawful is the doctor's opinion that there are lawful grounds for the procedure, rather than the fact that those grounds exist.
So, for example, if two doctors believe in good faith that abortion carries less risk to a woman's physical or mental health than carrying the pregnancy to term, this makes the abortion legal – even if, in the eventuality, it would have been safer to carry the pregnancy to term (for example, if the abortion resulted in death or injury). Similarly, if a woman states that she cannot afford to continue the pregnancy, the doctor is not obliged to check that she really is lacking in funds.
What does 'risk to health' mean?
These circumstances under which doctors can authorise an abortion include risk to a woman's physical or mental health, which, under Section 1(1)(a), is defined relative to the risk of giving birth.
Prior to 1967, it was already established in law, by the 1938 Bourne decision, that an abortion was legal if the doctor was 'of the opinion on reasonable grounds and with adequate knowledge of the probable consequences' that continuing the pregnancy would 'make the woman a physical or mental wreck'. This was significant because it confirmed that the grounds for a lawful abortion extended not merely to saving the woman from death but also to considering her mental and physical wellbeing.
The 1967 Abortion Act took the concept of wellbeing further, by indicating that an abortion was lawful if 'the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman' (emphasis added). In 2012, medical evidence is clear that, purely on a physical level, abortion carries less risk of maternal mortality and morbidity than does childbirth.
In terms of mental health impacts, authoritative reviews of the evidence in the USA and Britain are clear that aborting an unwanted pregnancy has no adverse psychological sequelae, compared to carrying that pregnancy to term.
Thus it could be argued that any abortion carried out under Section 1(1)(a) (the ground on which 98 per cent of abortions are carried out) would always be lawful, provided the authorising doctors were acting on the basis of a good faith reliance on this medical evidence base.
Is it legal to terminate a pregnancy because of a woman's social or financial circumstances?
Yes. This is provided by Section 1 (2) of the Abortion Act, which states that doctors may take account of the pregnant woman's actual or reasonably foreseeable environment when making a decision about the impact of the continuance of a pregnancy on a woman's health.
Here again, the law bestows upon doctors a gatekeeping role in terms of deciding who may have an abortion, but within that role provides for a great deal of latitude in making their decision. The law does not state that doctors 'must' take account of a woman's environment, but that they 'may' do so.
There is an implicit recognition that it is not always possible to separate the mental or physical health effects of abortion from a woman's wider social circumstances – such as her income, her housing situation, her support network. Doctors may take all this into account in determining whether to authorise an abortion.
Thus, it would be entirely reasonable for a doctor to decide that a woman who presents for an abortion saying that she cannot afford to continue the pregnancy can lawfully be provided with the abortion, as to refuse her might have relatively negative consequences for her health
Last edited:
You need to brush up on British law boyo. It changes nothing I wrote.
- Two Doctors’ Approval:
- For legal abortions, two doctors must agree that the criteria for abortion are met.
- One doctor can approve in cases of emergency.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 14,889
- Reaction score
- 2,252
- Country
They are not approving the decision they are approving the safety of the procedure and the duration of the pregnancy
"British Law".
Why do they have to do that?
Because they commit a criminal offence if they don't.
"British Law".
Why do they have to do that?
Because they commit a criminal offence if they don't.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 14,889
- Reaction score
- 2,252
- Country
Why the f*** would you want a woman to avoid having a consultation?
what if she is depressed, what is she is having a panic attack, what if she doesn't understand the pain and the process she will suffer, the risk of death?
Last edited:
This service is a safe and legal way to end a pregnancy at an early gestation without needing to attend a clinic for treatment.
bpas.org
The “abortion pill” is often touted as a magic wand for unwanted pregnancies. Now, just like ordering off Amazon, you can order the abortion pill online to be delivered directly to your house. Really, how harmful could two small pills be? No matter how simple the process might seem, the abortion pill, also known as RU-486, shouldn’t be taken lightly. Like all medical procedures, it can have serious side effects and it’s important that you’re fully informed before you click “checkout.”
Here are 6 reasons you should never order the abortion pill online...
hope rising.org
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 14,889
- Reaction score
- 2,252
- Country
US site, but yes taking the Pills can be fatal.
But the forum f**tards don't want doctors to be involved. where is Roy, I need his rolleyes...
But the forum f**tards don't want doctors to be involved. where is Roy, I need his rolleyes...
The American website gives reasons why the pills should not be taken - i edited the post to highlight a link to a British website which promotes abortion pills online. Vinty isn't wrong to say you can buy them online...just not from Amazon.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 14,889
- Reaction score
- 2,252
- Country
and of course most drugs can be procured illegally one way or another.
About that i would not know, for sure...
That proves what I said: you can’t buy abortion pills online or over the counter without consultation.
Vinty is wrong.
He didn’t say obtaining them illegally
Different argument
Vinty is wrong you can’t simply buy abortion pills over the counter or online.
Vinty is using false information to support his dishonest argument
Sponsored Links
