Should Early Gender Id Be Available?

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45497454
I agree with Labour on this. In fact I don't know why anyone would not want to wait until the child is born to see what sex it is. I enjoyed the uncertainty with mine, we had boys and girls names ready etc, I stood ready with the decoration materials for the room etc.

[webbo3]

For whatever reason ^??

[Rockrose]

If course I am not saying that!!

[AuntLydia]

Actually you are saying that. Because you believe in choice you can't cherry pick and decide which choice is acceptable and which is not. You believe that a woman should be able to choose to have her baby aborted , you can't then add on your own caveats as to the appropriateness of those choices.

[Rockrose]

Actually I am not so please do not say I am

[AuntLydia]

Actually you are. You are making a stand for choice therefore you must support a woman's right to choose even if you don't agree with that choice. This is exactly what you were accusing me of, judging a woman because of her choice ( to abort). I made it clear to you I was not judging the woman but the Law allowing her to do it. You are standing up for the Law but judging the woman on her reason for an abortion.

[-Talbot-]

How sad is it that people will use the result of these tests for nefarious reason.
What is wrong with these people?

[AuntLydia]

It is a shame that the tests may not be available to loving parents who just want to know which colour to paint the nursery. Its always the same, a few horrible people spoil things for the rest.

[Prudie]

Needing to know what colour to paint the nursery is nefarious

[kvalidir]

Simply not wanting a baby and opting for abortion is not a reason, and the law acknowledges that though.

[AuntLydia]

kvaladir not necessarily true. You have to give a reason only when using NHS and you can easily say it will cause you great mental stress to have the baby. Privately you can have an abortion up to 24 weeks for whatever reason you like.

[-Talbot-]

Having an abortion because the child is a girl is as low as you can can get...and imo is indefensible.

[kvalidir]

I understood the reasons had to be the same though. Granted when you pay you are likely to get the result you wish for, but I thought the caveat that it had to be to the detriment of the mother in some way still applied privately.

[Ellipsis]

The law is the law whether you are NHS or private. The law is as follows:

---------------------------------
(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a person shall not be guilty of an offence under the law relating to abortion when a pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner if two registered medical practitioners are of the opinion, formed in good faith —
(a)that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or
(b)that the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or
(c)that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated; or
(d)that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.
---------------------------------

[AuntLydia]

kvaladir, if the mother is 'stressed' 'anxious' or 'depressed' then that is classed as to the detriment of the mother. By default if you end up with an unplanned pregnancy you are bound to be stressed.

"Subject to the provisions of this section, a person shall not be guilty of an offence under the law relating to abortion when a pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner if two registered medical practitioners are of the opinion, formed in good faith -

(a) that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or
(b) that the termination of the pregnancy is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or
(c) that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated
(d) that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.

[AuntLydia]

snap!

[kvalidir]

Well yes but that's the same privately or via the NHS. That was my point.

[Ellipsis]

Yep, mine too. :) (But realistically it's probably easier to get two registered medical practitioners if you're paying, just like it's easier to get a prompt appointment if you're paying ...)

If the letter of the law was applied, there would be no danger of abortion on the grounds of sex of the foetus. However, as the law is widely abused on the basis of injury to the mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children, then there is a danger.

This has come up on AB before. It's an interesting clash of ethical/moral principles, bringing a sharp focus on Pro-Choice vs Pro-Life if you restrict the arguments to this one scenario.

[LadyCG]

I paid to have a gender reveal scan. I think the lady doing the scan took a flying guess but he turned out to be a boy afterall.

There's no way I could have waited until the birth.

[-Talbot-]

I was quite happy to wait with all my children, what will be will be.

The people getting rid because of the sex are sick people.

They need educating, educating, educating.

[snags]

''There's no way I could have waited until the birth''

Can I ask why? Our second is due in 5 weeks. We couldn't think of a strong enough reason 'to know' - same with our first. Nice to get a surprise.