New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Amended Abortion Bill
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Forum LockedAmended Abortion Bill

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>
Author
MissAngel View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 January 2008
Location: Rangiora
Points: 3322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MissAngel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Amended Abortion Bill
    Posted: 03 July 2010 at 5:47pm
Firstly - if you're going to come into the thread and go on about abortions being murder bla bla, please dont bother.

I just heard on the news that a labour MP wants the current abortion law changed to allow abortions to take place up to and after 24 weeks and went HAAAAANG on a minute, this doesnt sound good. So I went to Nzherald.co.nz and read the article myself.

Quote Mrs Chadwick's Abortion Reform Bill would take abortion out of the Crimes Act, making it solely a health matter and a choice for the patient, at least in the first part of pregnancy.

She said it would remove the requirement for patients to gain the prior approval of two "certifying consultants", encourage abortions to be performed earlier in pregnancy, and increase access to medical abortions.

Before 24 weeks' gestation, registered health practitioners could carry out an abortion at the patient's request. It would be regulated like any other medical procedure.


After 24 weeks, abortion would be permitted if a medical practitioner believed it was appropriate medically and with regard to the patient's "current and future physical, psychological and social circumstances".


Now, this I agree with. I dont think it should be part of the criminal act - women have the RIGHT to choose what is right with them of course. I also agree with the last part of the quote - mostly because of a friend of my mothers who discovered at the 20 week scan (which was done at 24 weeks due to travel issues) that their dear little baby was suffering from a condition that caused her to not form vital parts of her skull and other bones in the body. They of course couldnt terminate the pregnancy and knew that the baby wouldnt likely survive the birth, so they chose to have a DNR for her. The hospital ignored the DNR and now they have a terribly disabled child who will most likely die within the first year of her life (she's 6 weeks old). I think it's great that people will be able to make a better choice for the child if it's going to be severely disabled / will die at birth etc.

I also like that they want to regulate it like any other medical procedure so that women cant use it as a form of contraception - which they DO! Couldn't believe it when I heard that.

Anyway here's the link: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10656210

Will be interesting to hear other peoples thoughts.
Alex, Thomas and Lily
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
kebakat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Palmy North
Points: 10980
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kebakat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 July 2010 at 5:57pm
I'm mixed about it...

I don't really agree with later abortions just cause they don't want the child that late in pregnancy. Early abortions I have no issue with..

From my own point of view though having to get 2 people sign off an abortion on medical grounds is awful. Palmy isn't exactly a teeny town yet I couldn't get 2 doctors to sign off and say that Jared had severe spina bifida and that I could have an abortion. We had to fart ass around and wait and then travel to wellys to get the another doctor to sign off. Not only did it make me further along. Being made to wait in that situation is highly stressful. I don't see why a city of Palmys size couldn't have 2 docs sign it off. If it were one we wouldn't have had such a hard time.
Back to Top
High9 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 July 2009
Location: North Island
Points: 6750
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote High9 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 July 2010 at 7:35pm
Originally posted by kebakat kebakat wrote:

I'm mixed about it...

I don't really agree with later abortions just cause they don't want the child that late in pregnancy. Early abortions I have no issue with..


I am the same, imo though I think that abortion that late should only happen if there are serious problems with the baby... I guess it depends what risk the mother is at too... E.g is she likely to kill herself if made to continue with the pregnancy or not. (Hope that came out as I intended)... I think if it's a case of her having mixed feelings through out then deciding nope and seeing as she can have one that late she'll go through with it, then it shouldn't be allowed.

Early abortions I have no problem with either, as I've had one. TBH I found the whole process easy, but not quick. The doctor who confirmed my pregnancy was the one who suggested abortion to me as I was 17 - he didn't give me a change to consider being pregnant or anything just said it's a positive, you can have an abortion. Was a slow process, I had severe vomiting and weighing f**k all to begin with lost over 10% of my body weight. So from finding out to going through with it took almost a month. Being 17 I had no idea really what I was getting myself into either.

ETA: I agree women have the right as well, and it shouldn't be a crime, under the right circumstances imo.

Edited by Lil_Nic9
Back to Top
caliandjack View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 March 2007
Location: West Auckland
Points: 12487
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote caliandjack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 9:01am
Abortion late in pregnancy usually involves being induced, its not an easy procedure and can be pretty harrowing, I don't think its something anyone would undertake lightly.

Given the pathetic level of service in some of our DHBs getting 2 consenting signatures would be problematic. I agree with changing this rule and allowing the pregnant women and her GP/LMC to make the decision only.

I had an abortion in the UK and I didn't have to go through any of the hassles like you do here, apart from seeing a councellor once to confirm that I was of sound mind and ok to go ahead with the termination everything was done pretty quickly. I was getting on for 10 weeks so speed was necessary.

[/url]

Angel June 2012
Back to Top
freckle View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 December 2008
Points: 4773
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote freckle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 12:04pm
decided to delete...

Edited by freckle
mum to 3 lovely girls :D
Back to Top
High9 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 July 2009
Location: North Island
Points: 6750
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote High9 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 12:19pm
I am still haunted by mine and I was 11 weeks when it happened.
I found it easy to get to doctors to consent, guess it was my age ? And also had to see a counselor.

You have a good point about not undergoing it without good reason, although I am sure there would be someone out there who may not have a good reason.
Back to Top
caliandjack View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 March 2007
Location: West Auckland
Points: 12487
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote caliandjack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 12:30pm
My only reason for having an abortion when I did was cause I didn't want the baby. It wasn't anything to do with age at all. I was 25. I guess for me the whole experience wasn't difficult at all, and probably why I've had no problems since.

Seems the NZ model creates more problems than it solves.

[/url]

Angel June 2012
Back to Top
freckle View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 December 2008
Points: 4773
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote freckle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 12:32pm

It is tricky though isn't it... I mean what someone else may consider a very valid reason may not seem like a good reason at all to someone else... I guess it's a matter of the impact on the patients life... Once a fetus is viable (unless it is the type of situation Missangel mentioned) I do have issues with termination ... I mean there is always adoption if the woman is not in the situation to raise the child.



Edited by freckle
mum to 3 lovely girls :D
Back to Top
Raspberryjam View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 November 2007
Location: north shore
Points: 4066
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Raspberryjam Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 12:45pm
We were offered termination at 20 weeks, and while it wasnt our choice, I would support a bill that encouraged the option later in a pregnancy due to medical reasons without the drama, my concern would be on the base of the sex of the baby. I expect these situations would hopefully be few and far between but what a thought.
It definately should not be a criminal offence, and Im sure the ethical reasons for late pregnancy abortion would far out weigh the 'irresponsible choices'
I remember the panic when I chose to terminate 'in time' after finding out rather late in the piece that I was pregnant under circumstances that werent going to be good for anyone involved, I wasnt a baby , It would be a horrible situation for an unsupported young woman to be in

I actually commented on the yahoo discussion about it, which I dont often do, but I once watched a programme where a little girl asked her Mummy what the word 'f**k' meant - the mums response was a very nasty word for a very beautiful thing - I believe if we put more effort into teaching our children about the reasons people choose to have sex we could make a dent in the very high stats for teenage abortion. I certainly wish someone had taken the time to chat to me about the emotional side of sex as a youngin and I hope I can instill some of that knowledge in my children
http://lilypie.com]
http://lilypie.com]
http://lilypie.com]
Back to Top
kiwi2 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 29 July 2008
Points: 658
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kiwi2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 8:01pm
This is a touchy subject. I think that the first trimester rule should stay. With the exception of the baby/mother having a legitimate medical reason to terminate. In cases like this I think that the easier and quicker the better.

I think you brought up an interesting point raspberry on the abortion after finding out the sex of the child. It would be unfortunate to have gender selection thru abortion.

Back to Top
LJsmum View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 June 2007
Location: Auckland
Points: 845
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LJsmum Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 8:17pm


I knew someone a long time ago who did have more than one abortion and used them as birth control it was awful and sad and should not be allowed to happen. She was preggies 3 or 4 times close together as well. Don't agree with it at all.
I don't agree with abortion.Mainly because of my values, beliefs, faith and how long it took us to have our babies.

My concern is if this bill goes ahead what is the cut off? 25 weeks
30 weeks e.t.c?? the baby is vaible and should be put up for adoption, rather than aborted.
Back to Top
freckle View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 December 2008
Points: 4773
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote freckle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 8:31pm
Originally posted by kiwi2 kiwi2 wrote:

This is a touchy subject. I think that the first trimester rule should stay. With the exception of the baby/mother having a legitimate medical reason to terminate. In cases like this I think that the easier and quicker the better.



There is no first tri rule... you can abort during the second trimester up to 20 weeks with the same requirements as the first trimester.... i.e. consent from two Drs... the only difference being it must take place in a hospital. I think the aim of this is to allow termination beyond this point...
mum to 3 lovely girls :D
Back to Top
Raspberryjam View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 November 2007
Location: north shore
Points: 4066
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Raspberryjam Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 8:40pm
Originally posted by yummymummy2 yummymummy2 wrote:



My concern is if this bill goes ahead what is the cut off? 25 weeks
30 weeks e.t.c?? the baby is vaible and should be put up for adoption, rather than aborted.


agree entirley - where and who draws the line once viability is possible - it opens a huge can of worms thats for sure
Obviously those who have found conception difficult will have very strong feelings, for absolute due reason
but also if this is not extended do those who would otherwise have not been able terminate without medical reason find themselves with children that are unwanted, seen as a burden or mistreated because of the sudden rush of love they feel when that little baby is in their arms and they cant give them to worthy adoptive parents.
Surely this too creates an ethical dilema in the mental health of both parents and unborn children, which in my opinion is also just as important as simply been given the chance to exist
I sure wouldnt like to be the person ticking the box to say yay or nay
http://lilypie.com]
http://lilypie.com]
http://lilypie.com]
Back to Top
lizzle View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: New Zealand
Points: 8346
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lizzle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 9:37pm
Many other countries offer terminations in the second trimester - i was offered one with Taine at 16 weeks (due my appalling japanese).

was reading something about forgoing the counselling, but making all terminations have to have had a scan first....that might have been the Family First guy tho.

I am for the one person sign off, but againest the second trimester unless medical. I have to admit being shocked Stacey at your treatment, I would've thought given Jared's prognosis, getting an abortion would not have been difficult at all.
Back to Top
High9 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 July 2009
Location: North Island
Points: 6750
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote High9 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 July 2010 at 9:50pm
That is true about a cut off, but depends on circumstances e.g health concerns for mum or bubs (serious).
Back to Top
Kazper View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 November 2008
Points: 3847
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kazper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 July 2010 at 1:54pm
Hmm very touchy subject.

I think the first Trimester rule should remain the same, with the exception that it should be medical or for reasons of the mother having physcological issues. It is too easy.

Also I fumbled upon an abortion video on youtube of after first trimester and up till then I had never really been bothered by abortions, but after seeing what some people do (mostly in America) I broke down and it has haunted me since. The techniques used (also used in this country) is not pain free for the baby, but is for the mother.

I think for medical reasons then yes of course give the option, but its crossing a humane line when it starts becoming a decision solely on whether you want it or not after 13 weeks. What is so wrong with adoption. The baby will be loved and mother can go on living her life how she pleases. I don't understand why some people would prefer a dead baby over one in a loving family.





Back to Top
kiwi2 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 29 July 2008
Points: 658
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kiwi2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 July 2010 at 6:25pm


Originally posted by freckle freckle wrote:

Originally posted by kiwi2 kiwi2 wrote:

This is a touchy subject. I think that the first trimester rule should stay. With the exception of the baby/mother having a legitimate medical reason to terminate. In cases like this I think that the easier and quicker the better.



There is no first tri rule... you can abort during the second trimester up to 20 weeks with the same requirements as the first trimester.... i.e. consent from two Drs... the only difference being it must take place in a hospital. I think the aim of this is to allow termination beyond this point...


I didn't know that. I think the earlier the better. I definately don't think it should be after this point and not sure how I feel about it even being up to this point seeing as I always thought it was up to 12 weeks.
Back to Top
Kazper View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 November 2008
Points: 3847
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kazper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 July 2010 at 8:38pm
Wow I didn't actually realise that it was allowed after 12 weeks to. I remember having a conversation to my MW about this and she said she would not allow anyone after 12 weeks to go ahead with one and that her and the physicians in our area are very very strict on this type of thing.





Back to Top
fairy1 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 12 October 2009
Location: Wellington
Points: 1207
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fairy1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 July 2010 at 8:44pm
I think the proposed bill is good but there does need to be set a cut off point. It is saying that it would be for medical and physiological reasons and as long as this is regulated then it should be good. People shouldnt be able to abort the baby at a late stage just because they dont want it or for gender selection and I think (and hope) medical professionals would be good as judging this.

For those saying that adoption is better than abortion I think it comes down to the person carrying the baby as to what they think. The person may not be able to cope emotionally or physiologically with the effects of a carrying a baby and it would be in their (and babies) best interest to abort the baby.
Back to Top
emz View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 25 November 2006
Location: Christchurch
Points: 5321
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote emz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 July 2010 at 9:22pm
Originally posted by Raspberryjam Raspberryjam wrote:


I actually commented on the yahoo discussion about it, which I dont often do, but I once watched a programme where a little girl asked her Mummy what the word 'f**k' meant - the mums response was a very nasty word for a very beautiful thing - I believe if we put more effort into teaching our children about the reasons people choose to have sex we could make a dent in the very high stats for teenage abortion. I certainly wish someone had taken the time to chat to me about the emotional side of sex as a youngin and I hope I can instill some of that knowledge in my children


Well said chick- this is one of the latest pushes in sexuality education in primary school - teaching kids about themselves, other, relationships, conflict resolution and compromises. Early intervention has a ripple effect for teen and adult years.

As for the bill, I have mixed feelings. I think it would have to be very clear cut about how to weed out the people who wish to abort for reasons such as gender, while still allowing cases where mothers really feel they can't look after a baby to go through. I honestly don't know how they would achieve that well.

And Stacey - I'm appalled at how much you had to go through to get your abortion
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.05
Copyright ©2001-2022 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.859 seconds.