Hello there,

I'm curious to know if those who are pro-choice feel the same way and as strong in your opinion on the abortion issue ,if an abortion is performed during the second or third trimester.

I know some pro-lifers are willing to make exceptions under circumstances such as rape, incest or if the pregnancy presents a threat to the mother's life, others feel that an abortion should not be performed under any circumstances at all. Are there exceptions for pro-choicers in certain cases as well?

My personal feeling is that I support abortion if it is performed prior to viability (as defined by the fetus having a greater than 50% likelihood of living), and that they should be legal after the fetus becomes viable IF there is a major medical issue involved that was not previously discovered, either for the fetus or the mother. After viability, I think that attempts should be made to save the fetus (whether through inducing early labor or some other means), but that if it comes down to choosing between the fetus and the mother, the mother should have the right to choose herself.

I am pro-choice, but I believe that you should be able to figure out in the first trimester what your choice is. I feel that beyond that is unnecessary except in cases of mother in danger. Partial-birth abortion makes me sick. And I feel that using abortion as birth control is abuse, as well. I think better education would help the situation as a whole. But then, if education happened BEFORE the pregnancy perhaps we wouldn't have so many problems.

Tricky one, in the uk abortion is only legal up to 24 weeks for 'social reasons' which I think is quite right as you should have made your mind up by then.

If the mothers life is in danger or there is a catastrophic disability discovered in the laste stages of a pregnancy then I feel that abortion should still be a choice for the woman. Hmm but then if the mothers life is in dangers why cant they perform a c-section? That would be my choice if I were in that situation.

I know that some people dont get the pre-natal care that they should , so there is always a chance that something like anecephalic disorder isnt picked up, I dont know what I would do in that situation, but I think that the right to end the pregnancy should still be available.

Nina x

I agree with Laurend completly. Donna

My personal feeling is that I support abortion if it is performed prior to viability (as defined by the fetus having a greater than 50% likelihood of living), and that they should be legal after the fetus becomes viable IF there is a major medical issue involved that was not previously discovered, either for the fetus or the mother. After viability, I think that attempts should be made to save the fetus (whether through inducing early labor or some other means), but that if it comes down to choosing between the fetus and the mother, the mother should have the right to choose herself.

This is how I feel, as well.

My personal feeling is that I support abortion if it is performed prior to viability (as defined by the fetus having a greater than 50% likelihood of living), and that they should be legal after the fetus becomes viable IF there is a major medical issue involved that was not previously discovered, either for the fetus or the mother. After viability, I think that attempts should be made to save the fetus (whether through inducing early labor or some other means), but that if it comes down to choosing between the fetus and the mother, the mother should have the right to choose herself.

Yup, ditto!

My personal feeling is that I support abortion if it is performed prior to viability (as defined by the fetus having a greater than 50% likelihood of living), and that they should be legal after the fetus becomes viable IF there is a major medical issue involved that was not previously discovered, either for the fetus or the mother. After viability, I think that attempts should be made to save the fetus (whether through inducing early labor or some other means), but that if it comes down to choosing between the fetus and the mother, the mother should have the right to choose herself.

Yup - my baby sis had an abortion after the doc said that she or the baby would die. I would vote for my sister to live every time.

I voted for the first option but only with the greatest reluctance and only after thinking long and hard about this issue. You see, I do feel that women who find themselves pregnant and don't wish to be should take action long before the third trimester. And I also believe that once the foetus can live outside the uterus, the ethics of termination are entirely changed. The woman who has permitted her pregnancy to progress to this point has already made her decision to go ahead and have the child by reason of her inaction. She should not be permitted to casually trash what is by now a viable human life.

The sole situation under which I can imagine a third trimester abortion taking place would be when the foetus is so horribly damaged by birth defects that its birth would only result in dreadful financial and emotional strains on the family.

Naturally I have always maintained that the rights of the mother trump that of the foetus; should there ever be a question at any point during the pregnancy of saving the life of only the mum or the foetus/baby, I believe that the right to keep on living must go to the mother.

I guess this means that there are two extremely particular circumstances under which I would support a final trimester abortion.

Very well said, Green. I agree wholeheartedly.

Lauren, you did a great job of summing my thoughts up as well.

Abortions have always been legal when the life of the mother is at risk. All mainstream pro-life groups accept that. However, with today's resources and technology, the need to abort a baby to save the mother rarely, if ever, happens.

Very well said, Green. I agree wholeheartedly.

Lauren, you did a great job of summing my thoughts up as well.

Thanks, girlfriend. When it comes to this business of third term abortions there I must admit that I would like to see access to this option blocked except from those who fall in those special situations, the ones which I have described in a previous post. The trouble with this is that the state will, by blocking all those careless women, the ones who wish to claim the right to a last minute change of mind, also produce a hedge of legal obstacles when it concerns those women who do a) find themselves facing the birth of a child/soul/creature - call it what you want - a baby which demands deep pockets and promises little in return or find themselves in the medical situation, a rare one in the medically proficient western countries, where there is the ugly choice between saving the life of the ma or the kiddy.

Though I find the idea of third trimester abortions to be deeply repellent, I am afraid that if we enact stringent rules regarding this we may well find that those women who really do need last minute abortions will inevitably find themselves sliding between the beaurocratic cracks. I also suspect that statistically speaking there will be very, very few women who will opt to seek abortions during that final trimester, women who will employ the argument of oops my bad, I have changed my mind, eh.

This is why I have voted for option A, eh. I am not comfortable with this. Any and all issues which have to do with these questions of parenting, sexual activities and parental attitudes, the fertilization of an egg, all of these issues are awfully complicated.

My personal feeling is that I support abortion if it is performed prior to viability (as defined by the fetus having a greater than 50% likelihood of living), and that they should be legal after the fetus becomes viable IF there is a major medical issue involved that was not previously discovered, either for the fetus or the mother. After viability, I think that attempts should be made to save the fetus (whether through inducing early labor or some other means), but that if it comes down to choosing between the fetus and the mother, the mother should have the right to choose herself.

I will say upfront I am pro life, but trying to put that aside, I am curious how you derive a 50% chance as the measuring stick. I truely am not being sarcstic, just trying to understand. If it has a 1%, 10%, 25%, etc chance of living, would that not be viable as well?

I will say upfront I am pro life, but trying to put that aside, I am curious how you derive a 50% chance as the measuring stick. I truely am not being sarcstic, just trying to understand. If it has a 1%, 10%, 25%, etc chance of living, would that not be viable as well?

To me, "viable" means that it's got a greater chance of living than dying. Hence, 50%.

To me, "viable" means that it's got a greater chance of living than dying. Hence, 50%.

ok, that just seems like an odd defense to me. I can even understand the the argument about life beginning at conception. I personally feel it does, but understand it is my beliefs and religious teachings that lead me to believe that. I can certainly see how those that don't share my religious beliefs would not believe in life at conception. I do have an issue if the fetus has any chance of life outside the womb to be disposed of. Who are we to play God and say a baby only has a 1 in 4 chance to survive, so they don't get the chance.

Edit to add:

I am having surgery in several weeks. I would hope if something goes bad and I have a 40% chance to survive, my wife doesn't pull the plug because I am not "viable" :smile:

"I do have an issue if the fetus has any chance of life outside the womb to be disposed of. Who are we to play God and say a baby only has a 1 in 4 chance to survive, so they don't get the chance."

I agree. However, the difference between us, is I am pro-choice. I have stated in another thread, though, that once the fetus is biologically capable of living outside the womb, the choice is now taken from the mother, except in cases of danger to the mother.

I consider conception as the "potential for life" not as life itself. If not, then I am a murderer, as my wife and I had multiple embryos created for IVF, and not all of those were allowed to grow. Of course, not all of the embryos that were implanted grew either, so I guess they weren't part of the "plan" either...oops gone into TMI land again. :frown:

Met another mother who had two embryos implanted, and both split, and she had two sets of identical twins...talk about getting your money's worth!!