This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
Should abortions be free?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Anonymous
In 2015, 98% of abortions were funded by the NHS. 38% of them were to women who had already had one or more abortions. Repeat abortions costs £1m a week.
Just 2% were carried out under the grounds that the child would be seriously handicapped.
It is estimated that each abortion costs £680. This figure rises if terminations occur in the 2nd trimester.
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/05may/Pages/repeat-abortion-termination-statistics.aspx
Should the taxpayer continue to fund other people's mistakes?
Are women using abortion as a contraceptive? Should there be tighter restrictions?
Just 2% were carried out under the grounds that the child would be seriously handicapped.
It is estimated that each abortion costs £680. This figure rises if terminations occur in the 2nd trimester.
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/05may/Pages/repeat-abortion-termination-statistics.aspx
Should the taxpayer continue to fund other people's mistakes?
Are women using abortion as a contraceptive? Should there be tighter restrictions?
I imagine that forcing a child on a woman would drive them crazy; it should always be a yes without question.
Original post by Tiger Rag
eh? No, I'd rather not bring a disabled child into the world. Is there anything seriously wrong with that?
Your message to disabled children is it's better not to exist than to be disabled.
If you ask any disabled child whether they'd rather be alive or aborted in the womb - what do you think they'd say?
SS
Methods of contraception aren't 100% effective, some people aren't properly educated, some people get raped, some people think they can't have children (health problems)...
Abortion should be free. If I accidentally got pregnant, I wouldn't want the additional worry of having to try to find the funds to abort the baby. A lot more people would have children and have trouble raising them, it could cause all types of mental health issues.
Abortion should be free. If I accidentally got pregnant, I wouldn't want the additional worry of having to try to find the funds to abort the baby. A lot more people would have children and have trouble raising them, it could cause all types of mental health issues.
Original post by Josb
I said lung cancer for smokers...
Should we pay the treatment of people that have caused road accidents?
Should we pay the treatment of people that have caused road accidents?
Did you know that people who haven't touched a cigarette in their lives can still get cancer? It's unlikely but it still happens
Yes because again, road accidents are not 99.9% preventable like getting pregnant is
Yes, the should because it's the cheaper option in the long run!
Child benefits or child care if the children go into foster care would be far more expensive than the abortion! It's the better option! I guess if people had to pay they may be more careful but you can't garentee that and the situation may end up way worse with more unwanted children is bad situations where the parents aren't able to bring them up in a suitable environment and there would probably be a huge strain and foster care as more unwanted children are in the system! Especially with an already increasing population and overcrowding, it's the best option that they are free!
Child benefits or child care if the children go into foster care would be far more expensive than the abortion! It's the better option! I guess if people had to pay they may be more careful but you can't garentee that and the situation may end up way worse with more unwanted children is bad situations where the parents aren't able to bring them up in a suitable environment and there would probably be a huge strain and foster care as more unwanted children are in the system! Especially with an already increasing population and overcrowding, it's the best option that they are free!
OMG? Seriously? So youd rather the child be supported untill 18+ by the taxpayer? Women (And MEN) make mistakes. Abortion is nearly always the last option. Its stressfull enough without asking them to pay for it.
Original post by Joshuamarv
OMG? Seriously? So youd rather the child be supported untill 18+ by the taxpayer? Women (And MEN) make mistakes. Abortion is nearly always the last option. Its stressfull enough without asking them to pay for it.
No, I'd rather people take some responsibility for themselves and actually use contraception
With perfect usage, condoms are still only 98% effective. Should those 2% of people who's contraception fails be punished? And surely, the burden of paying for the abortion is much more likely to fall on the woman, and the man will pay nothing in many cases. Stupid idea. This isn't America.
Original post by Anonymous
In 2015, 98% of abortions were funded by the NHS. 38% of them were to women who had already had one or more abortions. Repeat abortions costs £1m a week.
Just 2% were carried out under the grounds that the child would be seriously handicapped.
It is estimated that each abortion costs £680. This figure rises if terminations occur in the 2nd trimester.
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/05may/Pages/repeat-abortion-termination-statistics.aspx
Should the taxpayer continue to fund other people's mistakes?
Are women using abortion as a contraceptive? Should there be tighter restrictions?
Just 2% were carried out under the grounds that the child would be seriously handicapped.
It is estimated that each abortion costs £680. This figure rises if terminations occur in the 2nd trimester.
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/05may/Pages/repeat-abortion-termination-statistics.aspx
Should the taxpayer continue to fund other people's mistakes?
Are women using abortion as a contraceptive? Should there be tighter restrictions?
Yes definitely, I think what many people don't realise is the fact that actually allowing the child to go into care (if the woman was unable to look after the child adequately) would cost a hell of a lot more than an abortion. In my opinion it is completely the womans choice, and there are many reasons why women opt to abort, which some are too small minded to understand. For example, if a woman gets pregnant and knows she is not in a financial situation adequate enough to bring up a child, she won't also be able to afford an abortion if it was to be non-funded by the NHS. If abortion was made to be privatised, and people would have to pay for their own, it would be very extortionate and would probably cause an increase in 'back alley abortions' which are very dangerous for the women. At the end of the day, if a woman wants to have an abortion, she will have one, whether she carries it out herself in a back street or if it is done by a professional - personally I'd rather it'd be done by a professional who can ensure the safest, and best procedure with as little risks as possible.
Making people pay for abortions will not do this. People have unprotected sex (aside from rape etc scenarios) because they think "it won't happen to me" - they already know pregnancy is a possibility but ignore that, and it's very unlikely that a remote "threat" of having to fork out for an abortion will change that behaviour. Certainly it won't change the behaviour of enough people to offset the massively increased costs of antenatal care, childbirth and then child benefits/care for all the children forced into existence.
I said "Lung cancer for smokers". It means that people who get lung cancer without smoking would still be covered.
Whilst the percentage of women unwillingly becoming pregnant (0.01%) seems insignifiant, it still means thousands of women every year.
Stopping funding abortions will also mean that the most vulnerable women, mostly teenagers, rape victims, forced prostitutes, etc., will be the most impacted. I don't think that preventing teenage girls from getting abortion because they made a mistake is the way to go. We should on the contrary try to reduce teenage pregnancies as much as possible. The "burden" of abortion on the NHS is limited compared to cancer, or the cost put on social structures by unwanted children, as they are much less likely to have a successful life.
Whilst the percentage of women unwillingly becoming pregnant (0.01%) seems insignifiant, it still means thousands of women every year.
Stopping funding abortions will also mean that the most vulnerable women, mostly teenagers, rape victims, forced prostitutes, etc., will be the most impacted. I don't think that preventing teenage girls from getting abortion because they made a mistake is the way to go. We should on the contrary try to reduce teenage pregnancies as much as possible. The "burden" of abortion on the NHS is limited compared to cancer, or the cost put on social structures by unwanted children, as they are much less likely to have a successful life.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Anonymous
With perfect usage, condoms are still only 98% effective. Should those 2% of people who's contraception fails be punished? And surely, the burden of paying for the abortion is much more likely to fall on the woman, and the man will pay nothing in many cases. Stupid idea. This isn't America.
As I said in a earlier post, those whose contraception fails should be eligible for free abortion as long as evidence can be supplied
You want them to bring the broken condom in a plastic Baggie or something??? Kind of vile of you ask me...
Original post by Josb
I said "Lung cancer for smokers". It means that people who get lung cancer without smoking would still be covered.
Whilst the percentage of women unwillingly becoming pregnant (0.01%) seems insignifiant, it still means thousands of women every year.
Stopping funding abortions will also mean that the most vulnerable women, mostly teenagers, rape victims, forced prostitutes, etc., will be the most impacted. I don't think that preventing teenage girls from getting abortion because they made a mistake is the way to go. We should on the contrary try to reduce teenage pregnancies as much as possible. The "burden" of abortion on the NHS is limited compared to cancer, or the cost put on social structures by unwanted children, as they are much less likely to have a successful life.
Whilst the percentage of women unwillingly becoming pregnant (0.01%) seems insignifiant, it still means thousands of women every year.
Stopping funding abortions will also mean that the most vulnerable women, mostly teenagers, rape victims, forced prostitutes, etc., will be the most impacted. I don't think that preventing teenage girls from getting abortion because they made a mistake is the way to go. We should on the contrary try to reduce teenage pregnancies as much as possible. The "burden" of abortion on the NHS is limited compared to cancer, or the cost put on social structures by unwanted children, as they are much less likely to have a successful life.
I'm not answering the same question 3 times. You've already had my answer
I already said that rape victims would be covered. Teenagers aren't children, they know what they're doing, They shouldn't even be having sex until they're at least 16 in any case. Cancer is non preventable, it's caused by a random cell mutation that you don't have any power over. Conceiving is something you have 100% control over.
Original post by Helenia
Making people pay for abortions will not do this. People have unprotected sex (aside from rape etc scenarios) because they think "it won't happen to me" - they already know pregnancy is a possibility but ignore that, and it's very unlikely that a remote "threat" of having to fork out for an abortion will change that behaviour. Certainly it won't change the behaviour of enough people to offset the massively increased costs of antenatal care, childbirth and then child benefits/care for all the children forced into existence.
Okay I understand that you are a pediatrician so I will bow to your superior knowledge in this case. In your opinion what would be the best way to reduce unwanted pregnancies? Education doesn't seem to be working
I'm not a paediatrician, I'm an anaesthetist, but this is more about knowing human behaviour than medicine.
Education and widespread availability of contraception is working - Britain's teen pregnancy rate is falling consistently: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35761826 and the abortion rate is about steady, though with changing demographics (more older women having them now than previously).
Education and widespread availability of contraception is working - Britain's teen pregnancy rate is falling consistently: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35761826 and the abortion rate is about steady, though with changing demographics (more older women having them now than previously).
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Helenia
I'm not a paediatrician, I'm an anaesthetist, but this is more about knowing human behaviour than medicine.
Education and widespread availability of contraception is working - Britain's teen pregnancy rate is falling consistently: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35761826 and the abortion rate is about steady, though with changing demographics (more older women having them now than previously).
Education and widespread availability of contraception is working - Britain's teen pregnancy rate is falling consistently: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35761826 and the abortion rate is about steady, though with changing demographics (more older women having them now than previously).
My bad, your profile says you are a 'baby doctor'
In that case I recant my previous statement
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
