Debrah N.
Senior Member
- Location
- Alberta, Canada
The answer is 'as little as possible'.
Safe zones outside abortion clinics come into effect in England and Wales today
- Thread starter hollydolly
- Start date
Debrah N.
Senior Member
- Location
- Alberta, Canada
Yes, the credible source is Journal of American Medical Association and based on a study of 520,000 reported rapes. 65,000 pregnancies over 14 states. 64K women and girls became pregnant due to rape in states with abortion bans, study estimatesIs there a credible source for those statistics?
If I recall correctly there was a recent thread about historical anecdotes about invasion, kidnapping and rape. I later thought maybe we're all descendants of rapists.
Texas topped the list with 45% of the reported rapes, and 91% of those women came from states that had NO EXCEPTIONS. The researchers used data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the FBI to create their estimates.
If there are no legal and safe terminations available what will happen is a return to the old days of illegal backyard abortions - safe for nobody
Why is it worse now than in the 1940's????????? Before my sister was born in 1945, my mother suffered three miscarriages. For each, she told me, she was given what was called a 'legal' abortion to help her. A D&C.
What the hell is going on and how can women stand other women being KILLED? I repeat, what the hell is going on?
What the hell is going on and how can women stand other women being KILLED? I repeat, what the hell is going on?
That seemed like a weird number so I looked at the JAMA article it's based on. Here's one of the comments on the article
Number of Estimated Rape-related Pregnancies is Absurd and Obviously Totally Incorrect.
Christina Land, Biomed & Statistics | n/a
Let's say for instance, we go by the figure of 450,000 estimated rapes of females per year.
Let's assume that 80% of these rapes are of women of childbearing age. That leaves 360,000.
According to CDC.gov, 64.9% of women of childbearing age use hormonal contraceptives, leaving 35.1% not using, or 126,360 of these victims.
Women on average are fertile for 3 days out of an average 28 day menstrual cycle. So 10% of the time, or 12,636 women.
Couples trying for a baby take on average at least a year to succeed. So let's call that a 9% chance of a pregnancy each month, so approximately 1137.
The estimated number of rape-related pregnancies per year, based on your estimate of 450,000 rapes of women per year, is much closer to 1,000 than 65,000.
This reminds me of the "campus rape crisis" of a few years ago, which was largely made up.
I'm pro-choice by the way, although I would like to see a 20 or 24 week term limit.
The FBI charts about 135,000 rapes per year. The JAMA article says there are 450,000 rapes per year in just the 14 states that ban abortion. Someone is smoking something.Is there a credible source for those statistics?
If I recall correctly there was a recent thread about historical anecdotes about invasion, kidnapping and rape. I later thought maybe we're all descendants of rapists.
hollydolly
SF VIP
- Location
- London England
The cut off term limit in England and Scotland has always been 23 weeks and 6 days Max...
I'm very pro women's choice when it comes to pregnancy and their wish to give birth or not... but I have to say I was taken aback just now after reading that more than 200,000 abortions are carried out in just England and Wales every year. and 14,000 in Scotland
That's absolutely astonishing, this is a country where birth control is free, so that's an incredible amount of Abortions IMO... In 2023 there was 23 million women in the whole of the UK.. take half of those as child bearing age.. then take yet another 2 million off for Scotland and Northern ireland . that leaves around 12-14 million women of child bearing age......in England and Wales... so 200,000 abortions every year.. is mind blowing...One wonders if people are just not using Birth control !!
The most common reason cited under the ICD-10 classification system for around 98% of all abortions is "risk to woman's mental health."
I'm very pro women's choice when it comes to pregnancy and their wish to give birth or not... but I have to say I was taken aback just now after reading that more than 200,000 abortions are carried out in just England and Wales every year. and 14,000 in Scotland
That's absolutely astonishing, this is a country where birth control is free, so that's an incredible amount of Abortions IMO... In 2023 there was 23 million women in the whole of the UK.. take half of those as child bearing age.. then take yet another 2 million off for Scotland and Northern ireland . that leaves around 12-14 million women of child bearing age......in England and Wales... so 200,000 abortions every year.. is mind blowing...One wonders if people are just not using Birth control !!
The most common reason cited under the ICD-10 classification system for around 98% of all abortions is "risk to woman's mental health."
Last edited:
Debrah N.
Senior Member
- Location
- Alberta, Canada
Probably lots of teenagers and young women aren't using birth control (that dreadful ole 'it'll never happen to me' syndrome or just not thinking about it until it's too late issue). Then I'll bet there are a number of women who think that because they are breastfeeding current babies, 'it'll never happen to me' and they discover that's not a very safe method of birth control. I have a cousin who arrived because of that one. Then there are failed condoms, one missed birth control pill......
Trade
Well-known Member
I can see both sides too. There's the right side where a woman has the right to choose what to do with her body. And then there's the wrong side where some frickin politician gets to chose.
dilettante
Well-known Member
- Location
- Michigan
It isn't her body, it's the unborn child's body we are talking about.
Without the woman's body, there'd be no unborn child's body.
Trade
Well-known Member
"You are ignoring content by this member"
Last edited:
It is her body - Obviously the foetus cannot survive without the woman's body - probably why most countries have a cut off point where termination is way before viability outside the woman's body.
Here in Australia it is 12 weeks with exceptions up to, I think, 20 weeks, for severe foetal deformity or high maternal medical risk.
Teacher Terry
Well-known Member
The pro-life people are very interested in saving a fetus. As soon as it’s born and a poor person needs help to support their babies they are scum and should be punished. It’s a double standard that I find disgusting.
Michael Z
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern Wisconsin
Well I guess I would just be praying outside the safe zone then. I don’t think that little bit of extra distance will be a problem for God.
Sadly this thread about UK legislation has taken on a Stateside context and shifted to a discussion about human reproductive issues.
That's because we Americans are nuts right now. Please try to forgive us.
These arbitrary term limits on abortion only make sense for a healthy mother and a healthy fetus. From what I've heard about this, many abortions are done for reasons that are decidedly not frivolous. What about the baby who will die of some horrible disease within a few days after birth? What about the mother who will die if the pregnancy continues? Not to mention the young teenager who was a victim of incest, but was too scared to turn her uncle in until it's past the term limit? If she is beyond the cut-off date for abortion, does society just turn its back on her?
Yes, I agree, there should be no specified number of weeks. Late term abortions are rare and complicated and tragedies for the parents. There are also birth defects that may not be detectable until late in the 2nd or even into the 3rd trimester.
I don't think anyone should be forced to use their body as a life support system for someone else.
HermitHogan
Senior Member
- Location
- 3rd Stone from the Sun
Maybe we need to vote on abortion rights.
If you vote to ban abortion, you'll have to pay more in taxes to pay for the mother's prenatal care, living expenses for the first year of the child, childcare once the mother can go back to work, and all the rest of the expenses the mother wouldn't otherwise have if she wasn't forced to have the child.
You'll also need to pay more in taxes to cover incarceration of the unwanted child since it's mostly poor people and those who were abused growing up who commit crimes. There's also the cost of mental health care and treatment.
If you vote to ban abortion, you'll have to pay more in taxes to pay for the mother's prenatal care, living expenses for the first year of the child, childcare once the mother can go back to work, and all the rest of the expenses the mother wouldn't otherwise have if she wasn't forced to have the child.
You'll also need to pay more in taxes to cover incarceration of the unwanted child since it's mostly poor people and those who were abused growing up who commit crimes. There's also the cost of mental health care and treatment.
I think they should also be forced to be used to supply kidneys and pieces of liver to actual people who are laying in a hospital dying awaiting a transplant. And if they live in a state where even the life of the mother is not sufficient, if they vote for that they should be available to have their heart transplanted to someone who needs one. Let's make it fair!
Whilst I am pro choice, I believe there should be limits.
It can be done later, only in cases of severe foetal deformity or severe maternal medical risk..
What's your limit?