July 10, 2004
TONY THE TORY FILES:
Blair hints at abortion rethink (BBC, 7/07/04)
The prime minister was asked on Wednesday about calls for the 24-week time limit for terminations for "social" reasons to be halved. [...]He told MPs at prime minister's questions: "I have not had an opportunity myself to study in detail the evidence that has been provided.
"But I am sure that if the situation does change then it would be advisable for us to have another look at the whole question.
"If the scientific evidence has shifted then it is obviously sensible for us to take that into account.
"If we have proposals to put before the House we will put them."
In America he'd not just be a Republican but a conservative Republican.
MORE:
We need to rethink my abortion law: But moves to limit late terminations will never satisfy the 'pro-life' lobby (David Steel, July 6, 2004, The Guardian)
I wasn't paying a lot of attention back then, but I've long been confused about abortion law in the aftermath of Roe v. Wade. As I recall Roe made a big deal about "trimesters," and said abortion couldn't be restricted in the first three months, but could be in the second and third. Or something like that. Fast-forward some years, and suddenly everyone is arguing whether partial birth abortions in the eighth month are legal. What happened to the whole trimester thing?
Posted by: PapayaSF at July 10, 2004 10:19 PMActually, this quesiton is rolling around the blogosphere at the moment. Stuart Buck and some Volokh conspirators are tossing it around (I think).
The short explanation is that, on the same day it decided Roe, the Supreme Court also decided Doe v. Bolton. Doe says that the constitution requires the law to allow an abortion if the health of the mother requires one, regardless of the stage of gestation. It does not except mental health. "Mental health" quickly became happiness, broadly defined.
Posted by: David Cohen at July 11, 2004 9:10 AM