5 ms·

In the UK, certainly England (not sure if different in Northern Ireland), by law abortion is not 'on demand' and carrying one out as such (on demand without mee

In the UK, certainly England (not sure if different in Northern Ireland), by law abortion is not 'on demand' and carrying one out as such (on demand without meeting legal criteria) is technically a criminal offense, though in practice this does not seem to be really enforced. I believe that the law states that abortion can be carried out for specific "health or social reasons". Edit, legal framework: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Kingdom So it seems in general they are using a 'fudge' by invoking risk to "mother's mental health" but again legally there is no "on demand" abortion in the UK. Edit 2: I find it odd that people seem to be displeased by a statement of, I think, important facts. If anything, people in favour of "on demand" abortion should lobby for a law change in the UK because at it stands a woman can legally be denied an abortion and a doctor carrying an abortion can be charged with a criminal offense (in a country that prides itself of having the "rule of law".) I invite you to Google about decriminalisation of abortion in the UK to see that this is an active issue because, indeed it is not currently decriminalised.

mbg721 4y ago
- mytailorisrich 4y ago
  > Why is anybody happy with "de facto"? If something should be a legal right, enshrine it specifically in law. Exactly. At the moment everyone is effectively turning a blind eye to the law. If there is a concensus that abortion should be available on demand then the law should be amended to that effect. The UK is not on par with other European countries where "on demand" does exist in law, which is what I wanted to point out.
  - swores 4y ago
    It's not turning a blind eye, it's accurately interpreting that forcing a woman to give birth when she wants an abortion will be detrimental to her mental health, thus making her abortion legal. Sure it could have stronger wording in law, but it's not causing any problems as it current is. But you've misunderstood it from your first comment, where you wrongly said it is a "criminal offence" when done here in England which is just entirely wrong.
    - mytailorisrich 4y ago
      > But you've misunderstood it from your first comment, where you wrongly said it is a "criminal offence" when done here in England which is just entirely wrong. No, I never wrote that that abortion was always a criminal offence. I wrote: Abortion is not on demand and any abortion that does not satisfy the legal criteria can thus be a criminal offence. It is no more than a statement of fact. This the law. "Mental health" is a very fuzzy term and it is not enough to say it to make so. It's just that at the moment no-one wants to create trouble on this and are indeed turning a blind eye by taking the approach you mention. But if for some reason authorities want to create trouble then they could just use the law as it stands as well. And indeed there are calls to decriminalise abortion because it isn't in law.
    - mbg721 4y ago
      - otikik 4y ago
        Maybe “disorder” is not the exact right word to use. Still, there should be a distinction in our words between “a regular, wanted pregnancy” and “a pregnancy which came as a consequence of a rape”, for example.
        mbg721 4y ago
        Those are few and far between; grasping at straws to get the outcome that we want is closer to the truth.
  - mbg721 4y ago
    I think the thing that really makes conservatives "conservative" is dogged insistence on adhering to the letter of the law.
- di4na 4y ago
  because noone is happy, and the law is a negotiation between a large body of people and different part of society. This please noone but also allows sufficient slack for the differences to not explode into unrest. This is a working compromise that for now is relatively stable on the social contract of that law. It will probably not stay that way, as the component of society evolve. We can hope for a different compromise ofc, but it is important to realise that the law is a compromise on a social contract, not something that exist in a vacuum
- namdnay 4y ago
  > If something should be a legal right, enshrine it specifically in law I mean couldn't you turn that around? Normally things are legal by default, not illegal. Wouldn't the onus be on the law to explicitly make abortion illegal?
  - mbg721 4y ago
    How awfully libertarian of you to say so,
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
metadat 4y ago
If this is true, TFA is presenting false / incorrect information. They listed "Great Britain" as "available on-demand except for fetal abnormalities or mental health issues". Edit: Thank you to all the child comments below for the clarifications.
- swores 4y ago
  The law allows for abortions due to "risk of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family (up to a term limit of 24 weeks of gestation)" And to quote this (correct) wikipedia entry: "The third ground [the one I quoted above in this comment] is typically interpreted liberally with regards to mental health to create a de facto state of abortion on demand, and nearly all abortions—98% in 2019 and 2020—are performed to protect the woman's mental health". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Kingdom Maybe it would be better to legally enshrine it as "on demand", but every woman I know in England who either has had an abortion or thought about the possibility of maybe needing one, currently considers it to be on demand.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- allturtles 4y ago
  There's no need to speculate, this is all very clearly addressed in TFA: > Technically, abortion is never available on-demand in Great Britain. (Northern Ireland is a bit different from England/Scotland/Wales.) However, the law allows abortions up to 24 weeks if there is a “grave risk to the mental health” of the woman and nowadays abortion providers—who make the determination—almost always view the fact that a woman wants an abortion as proof that such a risk exists. Thus, abortion is de-facto available on demand for 24 weeks.
NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
Did you read down to the third paragraph of the article you're citing? The third ground is typically interpreted liberally with regards to mental health to create a de facto state of abortion on demand, and nearly all abortions—98% in 2019 and 2020—are performed to protect the woman's mental health.
- mytailorisrich 4y ago
  I have commented on this and I maintain what I wrote. This is a topic periodically raised by health professional because, again, this is using the law at the limit and it would be much preferable to amend the law to make it on demand to protect everyone.
  - allturtles 4y ago
    Okay, but the whole point of the article is to address the nuances around the realities of abortion access. It's not an advocacy piece, and it's not specifically about UK law.
judofyr 4y ago
This is already covered in the article: > Technically, abortion is never available on-demand in Great Britain. (Northern Ireland is a bit different from England/Scotland/Wales.) However, the law allows abortions up to 24 weeks if there is a “grave risk to the mental health” of the woman and nowadays abortion providers—who make the determination—almost always view the fact that a woman wants an abortion as proof that such a risk exists. Thus, abortion is de-facto available on demand for 24 weeks.
phphphphp 4y ago
but “mental health” (i.e: well-being) is the reason someone would choose an abortion. If (hypothetically) water is legal to drink as long as you’re thirsty, is it a fudge to say “anybody is allowed to drink water”? You are thirsty by virtue of wanting to drink water, just like you want an abortion due to your well-being.
- bee_rider 4y ago
  It would be weird to have a law that says "drinking water is illegal unless you are thirsty or want to drink water for some other reason," right?
  - zaroth 4y ago
    Unless the act of drinking water was this hyper-politicized thing that required basically splitting the atom to try to please all your electoral interests. And so the end result is a law which negates itself, which might well have been the entire point? I have no idea if the drafters of the law actually intended it to nullify itself.
astura 4y ago
>I find it odd that people seem to be displeased by a statement of important facts The article mentions this and goes into more details. I'm not sure what else your comment adds other than to be snarky and downplay the seriousness of the topic by using scare quotes.

mbg721 4y ago

mytailorisrich 4y ago
> Why is anybody happy with "de facto"? If something should be a legal right, enshrine it specifically in law. Exactly. At the moment everyone is effectively turning a blind eye to the law. If there is a concensus that abortion should be available on demand then the law should be amended to that effect. The UK is not on par with other European countries where "on demand" does exist in law, which is what I wanted to point out.
- swores 4y ago
  It's not turning a blind eye, it's accurately interpreting that forcing a woman to give birth when she wants an abortion will be detrimental to her mental health, thus making her abortion legal. Sure it could have stronger wording in law, but it's not causing any problems as it current is. But you've misunderstood it from your first comment, where you wrongly said it is a "criminal offence" when done here in England which is just entirely wrong.
  - mytailorisrich 4y ago
    > But you've misunderstood it from your first comment, where you wrongly said it is a "criminal offence" when done here in England which is just entirely wrong. No, I never wrote that that abortion was always a criminal offence. I wrote: Abortion is not on demand and any abortion that does not satisfy the legal criteria can thus be a criminal offence. It is no more than a statement of fact. This the law. "Mental health" is a very fuzzy term and it is not enough to say it to make so. It's just that at the moment no-one wants to create trouble on this and are indeed turning a blind eye by taking the approach you mention. But if for some reason authorities want to create trouble then they could just use the law as it stands as well. And indeed there are calls to decriminalise abortion because it isn't in law.
  - mbg721 4y ago
    - otikik 4y ago
      Maybe “disorder” is not the exact right word to use. Still, there should be a distinction in our words between “a regular, wanted pregnancy” and “a pregnancy which came as a consequence of a rape”, for example.
      - mbg721 4y ago
        Those are few and far between; grasping at straws to get the outcome that we want is closer to the truth.
- mbg721 4y ago
  I think the thing that really makes conservatives "conservative" is dogged insistence on adhering to the letter of the law.
di4na 4y ago
because noone is happy, and the law is a negotiation between a large body of people and different part of society. This please noone but also allows sufficient slack for the differences to not explode into unrest. This is a working compromise that for now is relatively stable on the social contract of that law. It will probably not stay that way, as the component of society evolve. We can hope for a different compromise ofc, but it is important to realise that the law is a compromise on a social contract, not something that exist in a vacuum
namdnay 4y ago
> If something should be a legal right, enshrine it specifically in law I mean couldn't you turn that around? Normally things are legal by default, not illegal. Wouldn't the onus be on the law to explicitly make abortion illegal?
- mbg721 4y ago
  How awfully libertarian of you to say so,
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

metadat 4y ago

If this is true, TFA is presenting false / incorrect information. They listed "Great Britain" as "available on-demand except for fetal abnormalities or mental health issues". Edit: Thank you to all the child comments below for the clarifications.

swores 4y ago
The law allows for abortions due to "risk of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family (up to a term limit of 24 weeks of gestation)" And to quote this (correct) wikipedia entry: "The third ground [the one I quoted above in this comment] is typically interpreted liberally with regards to mental health to create a de facto state of abortion on demand, and nearly all abortions—98% in 2019 and 2020—are performed to protect the woman's mental health". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Kingdom Maybe it would be better to legally enshrine it as "on demand", but every woman I know in England who either has had an abortion or thought about the possibility of maybe needing one, currently considers it to be on demand.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
allturtles 4y ago
There's no need to speculate, this is all very clearly addressed in TFA: > Technically, abortion is never available on-demand in Great Britain. (Northern Ireland is a bit different from England/Scotland/Wales.) However, the law allows abortions up to 24 weeks if there is a “grave risk to the mental health” of the woman and nowadays abortion providers—who make the determination—almost always view the fact that a woman wants an abortion as proof that such a risk exists. Thus, abortion is de-facto available on demand for 24 weeks.

NovemberWhiskey 4y ago

Did you read down to the third paragraph of the article you're citing? The third ground is typically interpreted liberally with regards to mental health to create a de facto state of abortion on demand, and nearly all abortions—98% in 2019 and 2020—are performed to protect the woman's mental health.

mytailorisrich 4y ago
I have commented on this and I maintain what I wrote. This is a topic periodically raised by health professional because, again, this is using the law at the limit and it would be much preferable to amend the law to make it on demand to protect everyone.
- allturtles 4y ago
  Okay, but the whole point of the article is to address the nuances around the realities of abortion access. It's not an advocacy piece, and it's not specifically about UK law.

judofyr 4y ago

This is already covered in the article: > Technically, abortion is never available on-demand in Great Britain. (Northern Ireland is a bit different from England/Scotland/Wales.) However, the law allows abortions up to 24 weeks if there is a “grave risk to the mental health” of the woman and nowadays abortion providers—who make the determination—almost always view the fact that a woman wants an abortion as proof that such a risk exists. Thus, abortion is de-facto available on demand for 24 weeks.

phphphphp 4y ago

but “mental health” (i.e: well-being) is the reason someone would choose an abortion. If (hypothetically) water is legal to drink as long as you’re thirsty, is it a fudge to say “anybody is allowed to drink water”? You are thirsty by virtue of wanting to drink water, just like you want an abortion due to your well-being.

bee_rider 4y ago
It would be weird to have a law that says "drinking water is illegal unless you are thirsty or want to drink water for some other reason," right?
- zaroth 4y ago
  Unless the act of drinking water was this hyper-politicized thing that required basically splitting the atom to try to please all your electoral interests. And so the end result is a law which negates itself, which might well have been the entire point? I have no idea if the drafters of the law actually intended it to nullify itself.

astura 4y ago

>I find it odd that people seem to be displeased by a statement of important facts The article mentions this and goes into more details. I'm not sure what else your comment adds other than to be snarky and downplay the seriousness of the topic by using scare quotes.