Abortion, Religion | Abortion limit: Wise to put religion and politics aside

Today’s abortion limit of 12 weeks could be a thing of the past, if the governing parties get their way. But the move to move the border does not unexpectedly meet with massive opposition from some quarters.

Women must be able to have an abortion up to the 22nd week of pregnancy. This is what the equality and discrimination ombudsman believes in his consultation statement. Thus, he stands behind the conclusion of the National Organization in Norway (LO), the Women’s Movement’s abortion committee and the Human-Ethical Association (HEF).

The government-appointed abortion committee consisted of 13 people with a medical background. One of the things that the committee had to consider was an alternative to the current system of abortion boards, which is a board that assesses whether a woman should have an abortion after the 12th week of pregnancy.

In its report, the committee writes that some women who have met with the abortion board find the meeting burdensome and pointless.

In its conclusion, the Abortion Committee writes that the abortion board system seems alienating and lacks understanding:

“The women’s experiences with the abortion board system are characterized by the bias in power between themselves and the board. This bias limits the room for doubt and the possibility of a good and enlightening dialogue”.

It is thus based on the use of resources and the extra burden on the women who have to meet the abortion committee that the abortion committee proposes a new limit of 18 weeks.

But with the Easter holidays fresh in mind, we know that we should listen to experienced mountain people. Perhaps in such a difficult case as the abortion case, we should listen to experienced professionals. The members of the abortion committee have neither political nor religious interests.

The committee’s report is based on which arrangements are best for the women who undergo an abortion, weighed against a sensible use of society’s resources. And this is what must be central when the politicians take the debate into the Storting.

Associated with shame

The move has received sharp reactions on social media. Supporters of self-determined abortion point to women’s right to decide over their own bodies. Opponents point to the child’s right to live. There are two points of view which have been shown to be diametrically opposed to each other in the abortion debate.

At a time when several countries have restricted women’s access to abortion, such as the USA, Poland and Hungary, strong forces in Norway are proposing to increase the abortion limit from the current 12 weeks to 22 weeks. The government-appointed abortion committee proposed 18 weeks.

Abortion is a taboo right. “Although abortion is a common phenomenon, the woman seeking an abortion remains relatively invisible. There is therefore a lack of external frames of reference that enable women to recognize themselves in the many feelings and considerations they make in connection with an involuntary pregnancy and a subsequent abortion,” wrote Anneli Keri, doctor of medicine at Umeå University, in 2005.

Little has changed since then.

Having an abortion is associated with shame. It should not be talked about. Even female friends do not talk together about abortion, and many times the incident does not come to light until many years have passed. If it is mentioned at all.

While most debates in politics are about the welfare of the people affected, the abortion debate often boils down to morality. Having an abortion is immoral, claim the angriest critics. Some even go so far as to compare abortion with murder.

Struggling with anxiety and depression

Last year, 12,814 abortions were carried out in Norway. This is an increase of 6.7 per cent from the previous year. What is nevertheless worth noting is that the rise has occurred in all age groups, including among the oldest women. If moral arguments are to be used, we had close to 13,000 women who had an abortion as an easy form of contraception in 2023.

This is of course not true.

Many women struggle with anxiety and depression after an abortion, while others find the abortion a relief. However, several women state that it is difficult to tell about the relief, because those around them expect them to be broken down after the operation.

In other words, society at large has an expectation that getting pregnant should be associated with happiness and joy. Other emotions related to pregnancy have been taboo to talk about, because if women are not happy about being pregnant, how will the population increase?

Nevertheless, we must recognize that there are no simple reasons why women choose abortion. While some women state that they do not have the finances to have children, others state that they have had the children they want or that they feel too old to have children. Others state that the child’s father did not want children and that they did not want to take on the responsibility of raising a child alone.

There are about as many reasons for abortion as there are abortions. The most important thing, however, is that one understands that an abortion is something that women do not choose lightly. It shows all the surveys that have been carried out in the area.

Anneli Kero interviewed 58 women who had had an abortion. She concluded that one in five women who have had an abortion struggle with anxiety and bad feelings afterwards. Nevertheless, the dominant feeling was relief, and only one of the 58 women stated that she regretted it. This is supported by other research that has been carried out on the topic.

Wise to put religion and politics aside

When considering moving the limit on abortion, it is important to keep the debate away from religion and political power play. It is sad if we end up where people’s lives and health become pawns in the political arena. On the eve of 2023, the Labor Party invited an abortion settlement. I think that is a good starting point.

A settlement will prevent a painful and long-lasting debate where the argument becomes increasingly bitter, because we must remember that ultimately it is the women who have abortions who have to bear the charges on their backs.

Today, the parties are far apart. While the Socialist Left Party (SV) and Redt want to extend the limit to 22 weeks, the Labor Party, Venstre and MDG want to set it to 18 weeks. Høyre, Frp, Center Party and KrF will retain the current limit of 12 weeks.

There are many good reasons for expanding the current abortion limit.

Women with irregular periods may not discover they are pregnant until a couple of months have passed, and then there is little time to make one of the biggest decisions of their lives in two to three weeks.

Perhaps it is also the case that if women are given more time to think about the pregnancy, that more will choose to keep the child.

And perhaps it will not be as difficult for those who choose to have an abortion, that it happens before they have thought thoroughly about the matter. Those who absolutely do not want to have children are unlikely to wait many weeks anyway.

According to Vårt Land, the Equality and Discrimination Ombudsman believes that it will strengthen women’s rights if self-determined abortion is increased to 22 weeks.

But with right also comes responsibility, and it is a given that when women get to decide for themselves whether to remove a fetus at 22 weeks, they will feel less guilt and shame than they already do today, given that the debate about an extended limit has already hardened to?

Perhaps it might be wise to put religion and politics aside, and listen to professionals. In some cases, it pays to hurry slowly. The law on self-determined abortion in Norway was adopted in 1978, and experience from other countries has shown that this is a fragile right.

So perhaps it may, and especially in this case, be wise to listen to professionals and work together towards an agreed abortion limit. A long and painful debate will ultimately only create an even greater stigma for those women who choose to have an abortion.

It is possible to live as they did in the past