Should we allow termination up to birth?

This seems to have gone under the radar for a while until the past few days. Royal College of Midwives issued a statement in February supporting the campaign of BPAS (British Pregnancy Advisory Service) to decriminalising abortion and calling the current time limit of 24 weeks to be scrapped. It is also calling for the procedure to be regulated at the discretion of doctors. Why the doctors again? Do they really know best?

Of course, women's right is important. However, the general consensus is that once the foetus is compatible to a life outside womb (generally agreed to be 24 weeks), he/she has a right to live. It is for this reason that a current limit of 24 weeks is applied. Terminations beyond 24 weeks should be for the baby's benefits rather than the mother's. For example, if a baby is going to suffer immeasurable pain or distress once it is born, termination can be allowed as this is to reduce the suffering of the baby. If a mother's life is in danger, the law also allows termination but as I have argued previously, this is rarely necessary and in most cases, the woman or the family will rather have the baby delivered and get support from the neonatal unit.

If we allow terminations up to the time of birth, it implies that the woman has absolute right over the baby's life and hence, should we also allow infanticides? How can it be right that when a baby is born at 39 weeks old will be granted the right to life immediately after birth and he or she does not have any right just minutes ago while in the mother's womb?

RCM also made a mistake by not consulting members on this issue before making such an important statement. In addition, the role of RCM should be to support its members in their work and help them to support women through their pregnancies and make sure babies are delivered safely. This campaign goes against all these and politicises the organization. Of course it does not help when the chairman of RCM is also on the board of trustees of BPAS. Whatever the ethical persuasion of the chairman, she should not let this affect the policy of RCM, just as if the chairman of RCM happened to be pro-life, he or she would not be allowed to change the policy without consultation of its members. I am glad that after going under the radar for 3 months, it has come out in the press and there is currently a petition against it.