Vive La France!

[denso13]

Is that the best you can do?

"Best" is subjective. That's for another thread.

 

[motorbiking]

Yes, I knew that.



I'm struggling to understand that bit. Sorry.



But this is the bit I was really interested in. What is the no minimum risk criteria that was brought in 1991? The wording in 1967 Act and the 1991 Act is the same, just laid out differently. They both say abortion is legal if:

right here you go its in section 5.

Original Act

Supplementary provisions.
(1)Nothing in this Act shall affect the provisions of the [1929 c. 34.] Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 (protecting the life of the viable foetus).

(2)For the purposes of the law relating to abortion, anything done with intent to procure the miscarriage of a woman is unlawfully done unless authorised by section 1 of this Act.

revised act

5 Supplementary provisions.
(1)No offence under the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 shall be committed by a registered medical practitioner who terminates a pregnancy in accordance with the provisions of this Act.]

(2)For the purposes of the law relating to abortion, anything done with intent to procure [F2a woman’s miscarriage (or, in the case of a woman carrying more than one foetus, her miscarriage of any foetus) is unlawfully done unless authorised by section 1 of this Act and, in the case of a woman carrying more than one foetus, anything done with intent to procure her miscarriage of any foetus is authorised by that section if–

(a)the ground for termination of the pregnancy specified in subsection (1)(d) of that section applies in relation to any foetus and the thing is done for the purpose of procuring the miscarriage of that foetus, or

(b)any of the other grounds for termination of the pregnancy specified in that section applies]

 

[JonathanM]

right here you go its in section 5.

So what are the "no minimum risk criteria" you mentioned which were brought in 1991? Are they in a different section? I don't understand that phrase, could you explain a bit more.

 

[motorbiking]

Sec 5 of the abortion act 1967 says that the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 is not amended. In the 1991 amendment this was changed.
Its worth noting that the 1929 act does not create a 28 week limit, but states that at 28 weeks it is a viable child, that is not to say that viability cannot be shown at an early time limit.



So the context is that to be safe, there needed to be good grounds that you were saving the life of the mother, irrelevant of the wording in sec 1. If for example the doctor made a mistake on the gestation assessment and aborted child was viable, you have a crime under the 1929 act and the protection from the offences against the person act are irrelevant.

1967 - in order to save the mother and risk needs to be less than giving birth
1991 - risk of abortion just needs to be less than risk of giving birth and some evidence that there would be harm to the mental health etc..

 

[denso13]

So the context is that to be safe

Ah, so you are reading context into the actual words of the law? Interesting...

 

[JonathanM]

1967 - in order to save the mother and risk needs to be less than giving birth
1991 - risk of abortion just needs to be less than risk of giving birth and some evidence that there would be harm to the mental health etc..

The original 1967 Act also says abortion is legal if there is risk to mental health etc.

that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, or of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated

 

[Odds]

those aren’t points related to the morality of abortion

And whilst they are points for discussion in regards to reducing the need for abortion, I think it’s fair to say horny teenagers have been horny since Adam and Eve and all the sex education in the world isn’t gonna change a thing.

Better birth control - better sex education - abstinence

They're three points made by Christians in maintaining options to avoid having an abortion in the first place - prevention being better than the cure.

 

[JonathanM]

Sec 5 of the abortion act 1967 says that the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 is not amended. In the 1991 amendment this was changed.
Its worth noting that the 1929 act does not create a 28 week limit, but states that at 28 weeks it is a viable child, that is not to say that viability cannot be shown at an early time limit.

So the context is that to be safe, there needed to be good grounds that you were saving the life of the mother, irrelevant of the wording in sec 1. If for example the doctor made a mistake on the gestation assessment and aborted child was viable, you have a crime under the 1929 act and the protection from the offences against the person act are irrelevant.

So, it looks like before the 1991 Act the time limit was less certain rather than a hard 28 weeks? That's quite a predicament for the doctor!

 

[noseall]

Ah, so you are reading context into the actual words of the law? Interesting...

That's not allowed, it has to be verbatim for MBK.

Anyone seen a HSA1 form in the Act?

Lol.

 

[noseall]

Is that the best you can do?

The Law says X and a report says Y, so the Law really means Y.

give your head a shake.

Certainly better than anything you have attempted at discrediting the fact doctors need to approve an abortion.

Read and weep boyo.

Requirement for two doctors' signatures

84. The Abortion Act 1967 requires that an abortion under ground A to E is certified by two doctors, who must each sign a Department of Health HSA 1 form to give notification that the abortion has been approved and on what grounds, and an HSA 4 form for information including patient details, the method of abortion and gestation time.

85. A range of explanations have been given for the introduction of the requirement for two doctors' signatures:

• to ensure that the provisions in the legislation were being observed ;[96]
• to protect women;[97]
• to protect doctors from breaking the law ;[98]
• to demonstrate the medico-legal concerns of Parliament, namely that the 1967 Act did not make abortion legal but conferred upon doctors a defence against illegality—the two doctors are expected to police each other; [99]
• to show the seriousness of the decision to terminate;

 

[noseall]

abstinence.

Sounds like a kind of torture.

 

[Odds]

'Abstinence makes the something-something harder'...i forget the exact quote.

 

[JonathanM]

Anyone seen a HSA1 form in the Act?

Here in the Regulations, at the back.

Regulation 3 covers it. It may shed light on things in general.

The Abortion Regulations 1991

These Regulations (which extend to England and Wales) are made under section 2 of the Abortion Act 1967, and replace the Abortion Regulations 1968 and the three sets of amending regulations. These Regulations make new provision to take account in particular of the amendments to the Abortion Act...

www.legislation.gov.uk

 

[Notch7]

They're three points made by Christians in maintaining options to avoid having an abortion in the first place - prevention being better than the cure.

The problem with a righteous stance is that it leads to a society where women being pregnant and having a child out of wedlock is frowned upon

Back in the fifties and sixties, single women getting pregnant were carted off to a refuse once the bump started to be visible, where they were hidden away from the family until after the birth. The woman was then forced to give up the child and it was taken away shortly after birth for adoption.

Some of those women have suffered a life of mental illness as a result, some have been unable to have stable relationships. It has destroyed lives. Where’s the moral goodness in that?

 

[Notch7]

Is that the best you can do?

The Law says X and a report says Y, so the Law really means Y.

give your head a shake.

You’ve not shown the law states signing the form is not approval, It’s just your opinion

Neither have you answered what happens if the doctors do not sign ( we all know what happens: no sign = no approval= no abortion)