Should the law on abortion be changed?

It shouldn’t change. I think it’s reasonable as it is. There are plenty of childless couples that would love to adopt and give the babies a good and loving home. Maybe there should be more clinics offering support and advice to the Mums. Those advanced and healthy babies should be given rights too.

Yes because the present law requires medical approval. It should simply be a woman's choice.

The current law is as follows:
abortionrights.org.uk/the-current-situation-in-the-uk/

I see no reason to change it.

I agree with Rishi Sunak and Gillycats.

I don't think it should change but I do think the sentence should not be a custodial one for breaking that law.

At 24 weeks gestation many babies have been born and survived and thrived. They are human beings, not just lumps of inanimate flesh and blood. I think the rules are fine.

No need to change the law, stop internet prescriptions for abortion pills.

Sorry, but for me late abortion unless there is a serious medical condition is an absolute No, No. First three months (just) ok, but later than that, I can't agree with. I know it's a matter of choice and point of view and I accept that.

I agree with grantanow. We need a right to abortion, within term limits, which I think are currently correct.

It isn’t simply a woman’s right to choose. Plenty of time to change one’s mind before 32 - 34 weeks. I had my eldest son at 32 weeks. Aborting a baby at that stage is appalling. The law is ok as it is although I think it should be less than 24 weeks.

I'm not for or against the current time limits, I think there are arguments for both sides. However we must always bear in mind that while safe legal abortion is available some women will have safe legal abortions. Equally when only unsafe, illegal abortions are available some women will have unsafe, illegal abortions. It was ever thus. I'd prefer that every woman who wants an abortion had access to a safe one and not be driven by desperation to the unsafe version. For that reason I'd certainly make at least very early abortion available on demand with no need to satisfy two doctors.

Grantanow

Yes because the present law requires medical approval. It should simply be a woman's choice.

I agree. It's always going to be an emotive subject, but women should have autonomy over their own bodies.

Blondiescot

Grantanow

Yes because the present law requires medical approval. It should simply be a woman's choice.

I agree. It's always going to be an emotive subject, but women should have autonomy over their own bodies.

That means you think being able to kill a baby up to 40 weeks is ok then? Or not?
It’s not just a woman’s body there is another body in there, a baby.

Jaberwok

Sorry, but for me late abortion unless there is a serious medical condition is an absolute No, No. First three months (just) ok, but later than that, I can't agree with. I know it's a matter of choice and point of view and I accept that.

I agree, I would like to see the time reduced to 12 weeks for an abortion unless there are real and serious reasons for it to be any longer.

I agree with tickingbird. I also agree with Oreo about the time reduced to 12 weeks. The idea of someone aborting a live baby at 24 weeks (unless something seriously wrong with it) makes me feel sick.

I'd just like to point out that not every woman has regular menstrual cycles and many wouldn't even suspect pregnancy until almost 12 weeks. For a while between babies my menstrual cycle went to a regular 5 week cycle. I enjoyed the longer gaps and could easily have not noticed a missed period. Some women experience very irregular cycles that often involve missed periods not attributable to pregnancy.

What constitutes 'seriously wrong' and who decides? Why should these babies have less rights than their perfect counterparts? Some people knowingly continue with a pregnancy that will produce a baby with Down Syndrome, others choose to use their legal right to abort the affected foetus. Same condition, different outcomes. It's a minefield, and there's rarely one correct answer.

I see no reason to change the law. These days a pregnancy test is available on every high street and give immediate results.

I feel that the present law goes far enough in protecting the rights of the unborn child. It isn't as simple as "a woman's right to choose", as there is another life to consider.. a life which becomes increasingly viable after the current 24 week limit. Yes, there may be medical reasons for intervention and termination after that stage, but I don't consider that qualifies to be described as "an abortion," which the Britannica defines as " the expulsion of a foetus from the uterus before it has reached the stage of viability". So let's be clear what we're talking about here. Beyond 24 weeks it is the termination of the life of a baby, more accurately described as legally and medically authorised infanticide. I would never be comfortable if that decision ever became nothing more than a lifestyle choice, or if "a woman's right to choose" ever became an over-riding and unchallengeable justification for late termination. Yes, women most certainly should have autonomy over their own bodies, but once that 24 week milestone is past, the current law quite rightly reflects that there is more than simply the "host" body to consider in terms of the right to life. I don't see any compelling reason to change that.

If I'm honest I agree Damdee. Surely three months is long enough for an unwanted pregnancy to be reversed, but 24 weeks? Oh No, unless there are serious medical reasons.

I agree Jaberwok. Even if your cycle is irregular you have reason enough to suspect pregnancy within three months and, if you are so inclined, act accordingly without delay.

No -and as someone who worked with premature babies -many of them surviving and thriving when born at 28 weeks onwards even 30 years ago the idea of such a late abortion sickens me.I am not anti abortion. But at least a dozen European countries have far lower cut off points so I absolutely see no reason to lower ours.

I agree Oreo,Damdee and Jaberwork 12 weeks in the absence of extenuating circumstances.

My twins were born at 28wks gestation over 40years ago and survived. I do personally think legal abortion dates need to be reduced but is dependent on clinical recommendations and pregnant women having access easily to medical teams.

I see no reason to amend/change the dates, although the sooner it’s done the better. A medical termination in advanced pregnancy is an awful decision, certainly never taken lightly.
I was interested in Davina’s programme about contraception that she said 1 in 4 pregnancies results in termination.