This is usually followed up with “so I believe that the abortion ‘time limit’ should be reduced”.
This argument usually comes about because the speaker has been told about or has seen foetuses ‘able to live outside the womb’ at an earlier stage than the current abortion limit. Talking about ‘premature baby survival rates’ is irrelevant for two reasons:
Firstly, a very large number of babies born between 21 and 24 weeks aren’t still alive at the age of six (see British Medical Journal). Babies born before 21 weeks generally do not survive at all. The concept of ‘viability’ is flawed in itself (see below) but most of all, it is inaccurate. Think not just of the fact that foetuses born that early don’t generally survive, but that those who do survive often spend their short lives suffering.
Secondly, and the real crux of the issue: what has viability got to do with it? What about when babies can survive at 20 weeks? 16? 12? 4? Are we going to reduce the ‘limit’ every time new steps are made in medical science, until all women are forced to carry and birth every single foetus they carry? Why should abortion be banned simply because a foetus might be able to survive outside the womb? That’s putting the potential life of a creature that may or may not survive, above and ahead of a woman who is definitely alive and living.
A third counter-argument deals with those who want the limit to be reduced; they usually choose the arbitrary duration of twenty weeks (to begin with).
Thing is, the abortion “cut off limit” as it stands isn’t real. Abortions can already be performed after that limit (currently 24 weeks here in the UK) if the life of the mother or the foetus is in danger. The limit as it stands isn’t really a limit but a guideline. So actually, reducing it to say, 20 weeks, would NOT reduce the number of abortions occurring. The vast majority (almost all) of abortions that occur between 20 and 24 weeks’ gestation, happen because the life of the mother or the foetus is in danger.
Do you see where I’m going with this? Reducing the limit to 20 weeks wouldn’t reduce the number of abortions because, being for the reasons stated above, they’d still be allowed past the limit.
Personally I believe abortion should be legal, free, safe and accessible right up to ‘term’. Obviously I don’t think an abortion at nearly nine months’ gestation is the ideal, but any woman leaving it that late is going to have a damn good reason for wanting to abort. I also believe abortions that late would be exceedingly rare; abortion is not a fun procedure, and the later it gets the more painful and distressing it can potentially become, so the vast majority of women do it as soon as they possibly can.
People who state that they think the abortion time limit should be reduced are, whether intentionally or unintentionally, working with the anti-choicers. This argument is usually nothing more than an attempt to chip away at reproductive freedom little by little. Once they get what they want – a reduction to 20 or 22 weeks – then they’ll go further. They’ll want it reduced to 16 weeks, and then twelve, and then eight, until abortion is completely illegal. I personally did not find out I was pregnant with my son until he’d been ‘cooking’ for about eight weeks. It’s terrifying to think that the limit could eventually be set to be so early that the majority of women don’t find out they’re pregnant until it has passed.
The earlier the abortion limit gets, the riskier it is for women. In the past, when we did not have legal abortion rights, that didn’t mean that abortions didn’t happen – they did. They happened in hotel rooms and back alleys with screwdrivers and coat hangers and caused untold pain, suffering and even death of women who were in such a desperate situation that they were willing to go to backstreet abortion providers to gain a service that could so easily have been given in a safe, sterile environment. As the abortion limit goes down, women won’t think “Whoops, past the limit, better have this baby.” They’ll go back to those backstreet abortion providers and put themselves in great danger of severe infection, injury or death.
If you’re pro-choice, challenge people when you hear this particular argument. Ask them what happens as viability gets earlier and earlier. Ask them what relevance viability has when it’s the life of a real live woman we’re talking about. Ask them if they realise that reducing the limit won’t reduce the number of abortions, and ask them what they think desperate women will do if the limit is pushed lower and lower. And if you’re anti-choice, think about these things yourself. It’s not just the potential life of a foetus we’re thinking about, it’s the real lives of women who are in terrifying situations doing what they have to do to survive.
