09 May, 2008

European Abortion Limits

Just seen this on the comments from this article, in the context of my post on abortion, it seems interesting.

To put the discussion in some sort of context, here are the legal limits for abortion in European countries ...

Illegal -- Ireland, Malta

10 weeks - Poland, Slovenia

12 weeks -- Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Slovakia, Switzerland

13 weeks -- Netherlands

14 weeks -- Romania

16 weeks -- Portugal

18 weeks -- Sweden, Norway

20 weeks --

22 weeks -- Spain

24 weeks -- United Kingdom now

28 weeks - United Kingdom (1967-1990)


Android said...

I don't think there are any justifications for those over 12 weeks.

As for the article, those people have no sympathy from me. Have the baby and kill it yourself, and if you can't do it, what makes an abortion any different? Have it and give it away. Apparently, newborn babies get adopted very quickly.

P.s. Have you seen 'Juno'? :)

Miss Middle of Manchester said...

I've not seen Juno.

I might get it this weekend to further avoid PLR. (I'm screwed).

I think that the 'Junkie Mother' scenario is somewhat more difficult when you consider how absolutely awful state care for children is. If the baby is adopted - and I agree that babies are more likely to be adopted than any other age - then that's generally well and good, but state care homes are horrifically bad at bringing up children (and I'm talking Britain here, not even Rumanian orphanages).

I have far less sympathy for the junkie mother than I do for the woman who didn't know she was pregnant until too late. The women whose periods don't stop, who are on contraception or who thought they had already gone through the menopause. Because in all of those situations, it will take more time for them to know.

It's why I think 12 weeks is just a month too short, but around 16 is probably better.

Android said...

Foster care sucks everywhere, but at least those people have a chance to do something with their lives - it's not up to us to decide who dies when!

And about that woman who hadn't noticed... If she went with it that far, why couldn't she sacrifice a couple more months to give someone a life?

16 seems ok... but 28 is outrageous! Some women give (premature) birth at that stage!! :O

Miss Middle of Manchester said...

24 weeks is a little more than a 'couple of months'. but semantics aside, I think that any time limit drawn up does need to consider when a 'reasonable' woman would consider that she might be pregnant.

My concern is still that women using contraception (ie: trying to avoid a baby the sensible way) may take longer to realise pregnancy might be a possibility. 16 weeks in my view is therefore the minimum it should be. Aside from periods stopping, in the first few months, there are few signs of pregnancy except for a little putting on of weight - again, a symptom which can be explained by many forms of contraception.

If the limit is less than 16 weeks, I would suggest that when doctors prescribe the pill (or any other form of contraception) it becomes mandatory that women are given a home-pregnancy test, made aware of the risks and encouraged to use it each and every month.

I would broadly support any limit which lay between 16-24, depending on the nature of society. I guess, therefore, I would tend to opt for 20 weeks as the usual limit.