Something of a trade off here then

Two factors led to the public becoming receptive to abortion law reform. Firstly, abortion became the leading cause of maternal deaths in the decade before the 1967 act was passed, with between 50 and 60 women each year dying of unsafe abortion.

To solve which 200,000 abortions are carried out each year.

Having had a look around it appears that DoH tells us that only one death (of the mother that is, obviously) was recorded in 2015 as having been caused by procuring an abortion. I’d sorta doubt that, I’d expect the death rate from near any medical procedure to be higher than that. But still, take it as being true.

Something of a trade off between 59 and 200,000, isn’t there?

7 thoughts on “Something of a trade off here then”

  1. For starters, I think we should rewrite the law on abortion and call it abortion on demand and that it’s allowed for women’s lifestyle.

    I’d still support it, but I think it would be right to remove the charade of this being about women’s health.

  2. Naming and shaming the whores should put a stop to much of the ‘lifestyle’ abortions.

    Something like post to their Facebook newsfeed stating that they shagged X without protection while under the influence of cheap Processco and then had an abortion as is their ‘right’ to do with their own body.

  3. As I asked in the earlier thread, are we allowed to ask what the background on the users is? And particulalrly in comparison to before 1967.

    The narrative tells us that pre-1967 it was poor working-class drudges being seen to by their “Aunt Vera” between shifts at the cotton mill. The Daily Mail narrative is that today those people go out of their way to have their babies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *