V1302 - Abortion (amendment) bill 2017 Watch

Poll: Should this bill be passed into law?
As many are of the opinion, Aye (10)
22.22%
On the contrary, No (23)
51.11%
Abstain (12)
26.67%
This discussion is closed.
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
V1302 - Abortion (amendment) bill 2017, JoecPhillips MP




A
BILL TO
Amend the abortion act based on modern day viability


BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

1-Amendments
(1) In Section 1(1) of the Abortion Act 1967 replace twenty-fourth with twenty-first


2- Citation and commencement
(1) This Act extends to the United Kingdom.
(2) The provisions of this Act come into force on Royal Assent
(3) This Act may be referred to as the Abortion (Amendment) Act 2017

Notes:
The Abortion limit is 24 weeks based on viability however this was set in 1990 and science and technology has advanced since then with children born at 21 weeks surviving http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...e-parents.html

This bill moves the limit to the point of viability.

Legislation

0
meenu89
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
I really do not know about this, so I am abstaining.
0
username456717
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
I'd prefer a judgement to be passed by medical professionals to justify this reduction.
PetrosAC
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
(Original post by notneb)
I'd prefer a judgement to be passed by medical professionals to justify this reduction.
Hear Hear. Therefore I'll be voting Nay
0
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by notneb)
I'd prefer a judgement to be passed by medical professionals to justify this reduction.
(Original post by PetrosAC)
Hear Hear. Therefore I'll be voting Nay
The justification is in the notes babies can survive independently, as shown in the case above that baby was way below the limit and survived
0
Lumos_
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
The date of viability will keep reducing as medical practices improve, this is a slippery slope.
0
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
(Original post by Lumos_)
The date of viability will keep reducing as medical practices improve, this is a slippery slope.
It’s not a slippery slope this is what the original bill was designed to do
0
Lumos_
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
(Original post by joecphillips)
It’s not a slippery slope this is what the original bill was designed to do
Makes it even more slippery when you keep reducing it
0
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by Lumos_)
Makes it even more slippery when you keep reducing it
When the whole purpose of it was that viability would be the cut off date using the viability as a cut off date is ensuring it is fit for purpose not a slippery slope
0
Saunders16
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by Lumos_)
The date of viability will keep reducing as medical practices improve, this is a slippery slope.
It cannot be a slippery slope if you believe that abortion is wrong after the point of viability.
0
cranbrook_aspie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
Order!

The Ayes to the right, 10.
The Noes to the left, 23.
Abstentions, 12.

I think the Noes have it! The Noes have it! Unlock!!
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How old were you when you first saw porn?

I've never seen it (182)
22.52%
Before I was 12 (280)
34.65%
13 (132)
16.34%
14 (98)
12.13%
15 (53)
6.56%
16 (29)
3.59%
17 (9)
1.11%
18 (8)
0.99%
Between the ages of 19 - 25 (12)
1.49%
Over 25 (5)
0.62%

Watched Threads

View All