Awesome. I wish I could have written in - I've had two abortions and have never had a moment's regret about it - it wasn't even a difficult choice for me to make, it was just the right thing to do.

I am not ashamed either, and refuse to shut my mouth when other people opine that abortion is "murder' around me. I say: "Oh, well then I must be a serial killer, because I've had two and I have zero remorse."

Finally, a step in the right direction! Maybe, someday, American women too, will able to cry/mourn difficult choices without fear of judgement or condemnation and be comforted by their peers. Then you too, will have come out of the "dark ages" and entered the 21st Century.

Sylke: I say "difficult", with no disrespect ... it just depends on the stage, as for some, earlier measures being difficult to procure, means they are forced to seek solutions at more advanced stages.

I'm sure for a lot of women the choice is indeed a very difficult one. I can't wait for the day when the only people who rally around a woman making such a decision are there for support.

What makes it difficult is the judgment and stigma. That's why I love that Ms. did this. I signed, and am bracing for the crank calls and hate mail.

Sylke: We have that here, although these days it is not much needed, as most potential (ie not sure) pregnancies go the way of a period. But certainly no one would ever be ashamed to say that they were about to/had an abortion.

We have all sorts of figures for "abortion" rates bandied about, but the reality is no figures are kept because one just goes to the chemist and even the woman concerned wouldn't know if she was or wasn't. For them, children only by choice ergo wanted.

For later ones help is free and easily accessible ... actually we still have clinics here, but I am at a loss to understand why, maybe to relieve the burden from the hospital system. Don't know, but I do know my daughter's friends and younger don't wait long enough to find out.

When RU486 (the active drug has always been available) was up for transference from the Minister for Health to the TGA (FDA), many women parliamentarians told their story (dating back many years) and were comforted and consoled by male and female alike. Hence the bill was passed.

In effect nothing has changed, it didn't need to, just something that needed undoing, symbolic really ... one Minister/government has no right over peoples personal choices.

PS "many women parliamentarians told their story"

Actually, I do our men a disservice, as they told their stories too, and no less heart-wrenching. As many decisions were made together, that may sound strange, but it's kind of our norm.

You migth be interested in knowing that this petition is stringly reminiscent of the "Manifeste des 343" (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifeste_des_343) also called "Manifeste des 343 salopes" (The 343 strumpets' Manifesto) a text signed by leading intellectuals in France in 1971 where they declare that they aborted, thus exposing themselves to prosecution and possible jailtime.
This contributed to the later '75 "Veil Law" that authorised abortion.

Later some of them explained they signed it out of solidarity, even though they never had an abortion.

Anyway, sorry for this disgession. Keep up the good work, you're being read in France too!

On a related note, I'm still waiting for the EPT commercial that features a woman howling for joy and toasting with a shot of whiskey when she sees a negative sign on the test.

I signed it as well and I will admit that for just one wild second that fear that has been ingrained in my brain most of my life snuck up..."what if someone that knows me sees my name on it?" Instead I reminded myself that I don't have a reason to be ashamed of a decision that was my own as a women. I'm choosing to be proud that I signed it.

Pro-lifers can't stand it because this petition threatens their portrayal of women who've had abortions as emotional wrecks who abuse alcohol and can't move on with their lives. They can't fathom the idea that some women don't regret their decision to end a pregnancy

I signed it anonymously. There was a poster in one of the rooms at the clinic with a quote by Rebecca Walker. She had no regrets and women should not be ashamed. I'd never read anything like that so it was very powerful to me. So are these campaigns.

Abie, interesting bit about the proclamation of the 343 bitches. And if I'm not mistaken, abortion is "free on demand" in France, England, Canada, etc. WTF is wrong with the United States?

Indeed it is free as required.

" WTF is wrong with the United States?" ... I've been trying to point that out for ages. Nobody seems to believe me or comprehend that elsewhere, we really do it quite differently. I was so shocked when I happened upon this forum (sometime back), in total disbelief that such a "movement" as Feminism still existed ... it was like being transported back in time.

But Finally you are all standing up for your rights in the best way possible, in numbers and united. Keep it up, you can only grow stronger.

Interestingly, across the Tasman (New Zealand), their abortion laws are probably far more archaic than yours YET ... it is freely available (literally too).

So, yes America is way way behind, you gotta stop being so antagonistic and just expect these things as a right, no concessions, no bloody useless talk, not an inch. Get active get 100% of your people voting, start talking (listening) to one another instead of quoting this thing and that thing ... what matters is positive action now, and how you treat each other everyday.

And if I'm not mistaken, abortion is "free on demand" in France, England, Canada, etc. WTF is wrong with the United States?

Actually, the USA's has a fairly liberal abortion law (though Canada, where abortion is legal on demand at any stage, is even more liberal). Here's what Wikipedia says about the following countries' abortion laws:

In France, abortion after the 10th week is only legal if two doctors certify that the woman's health is in danger or that the fetus is handicapped.

In Germany, the Supreme Court ruled that legalizing abortion was unconstitutional, but it was okay to decriminalize abortion in the first 12 weeks subject to mandatory counseling and a waiting period.

In Britain, abortion is legal for reasons of medical necessity (including existing children's mental health) and fetal defects.

In Sweden, abortion on demand is available up until week 12, requires a special investigation to ensure the woman's health is not in danger through week 18, and is illegal except in special circumstances thereafter (in particular, it's always illegal after viability).

What these countries are better than the US at is providing access to abortion to low-income women. Even in Germany low-income women are allowed to abort on the state's dime.

Alon Levy, You fail to make the distinction between what exists at law and what exists in practice. Your abortion laws may very well be liberal, but they are circumvented by other laws.

In Australia we have very confusing laws, but we do have easy access free healthcare, abortion included. Quoting our laws would be unhelpful as, if you can decipher them ... you're a better "man" than I am, Gunga Din! And a full-bench to boot. Only once 25 years has the law been brought into play and this was rather to procect women from worst-case medical practice, not to victimise them.

So don't kid yourself or anyone else, what you think these people are kicking up a fuss over, nothing ... come on now.

What makes our laws in the States even more confusing is that they're constantly changing. I live in Alaska, by no means a blue state, and I had a friend who was pregnant, and decided to abort in her fourth month. The state procured a plane ticket for her, flew her down to Seattle (because evidently they don't perform second-trimester abortions here), and paid for the abortion through a program called Denali KidCare. This state-funded childcare program was terminated later that same year - I guess our heated sidewalks and convention centers are more important.

Anyway, I don't know what the laws are now, only that there are people on both sides tirelessly working to change them.

Not True, you bring up a very salient point, in that so many people here don't see abortion as "how things should be." I guess when you have a decent national healthcare plan, forcing people to pay astronomical fees for abortion, or withholding it altogether, must be like charging people to breathe.

I deliberately avoided talking about Australia for that reason. In Germany the health plan actually doesn't cover abortion unless you're poor, and in France and Sweden, there's a serious restriction on when in the pregnancy you can abort.

I think Not True is exaggerating the case in Australia. It is illegal in most states to have an abortion, unless the baby would cause 'pscyhological distress' or harm the mother's health or some such shite. Of course doctors just sign the form saying its a psychological distress and off you go. I think it is a little rude that women have to pretend their unreadiness or unwillingness to have a child is a psychological problem, even if they and the doctor both know its for show only. The reason that abortion is 'free on demand' here is that all health care is free on demand - it's nothing special. (not that this isn't an important aspect of life in Oz!!)

Certainly abortions here are easy to obtain, but they do remain illegal, and just because the police doesn't prosecute doesn't change that fact.

Sylke: It's so sad when someone requires an abortion at such a late stage. More liberal attitudes would help.

Alon Levy: I am not sure what you mean, when you say deliberately avoided - for that reason?
Too, if your laws are so liberal, why is it such an emotionally charged issue.
.
Sweden, Germany and France may well have the attitude it's free, act early and be responsible.

BTW isn't France ranked No.1 for healthcare by WHO.

The fact that doctors are so ready to "sign on" for abortion proves that women and doctors know what is needed, and legislators just will not listen. I know there are doctors here who will hook up a woman with a very late-term abortion in secret, even though it's illegal. The fact that the vast majority of us have to sneek around to get what we need because a few pompous men in power think they know "what's best" is infuriating and a waste of time.

Free on demand, baby. Since the US is so pro-family, shouldn't tampons, pads and divacups be free, too?

(((donna ... donna darko))) Tampons, pads, divacups? Of course not, you should be reminded with every crimson drop that you have failed in your duty as a woman.

Funny, though ... huge argument here, when GST (tax) was introduced, that tampons etc previously exempt, should remain so ... did they - NO

Menstruation is part of the reproductive cycle. We're pre-pregnant anyway so they should pay for anything related to reproduction including Midol which is damn expensive. Since we're so pro-family, they should also adopt babies we don't want and provide comprehensive child and mother welfare like they do in France. Now there's a real pro-family state.

I am not sure what you mean, when you say deliberately avoided - for that reason?

I deliberately avoided talking about Australia because it has inconsistent abortion laws between states.

Donna Darko: I agree, the US should start supporting it's citzens. I am not much into politcs (ah but I do vote, it's compulsory), doesn't Hillary support healthcare change ... yet nobody seems to like her. In spite of Bill's cavorting ... who cares ... they are both intelligent individuals, really just don't get the whole Bush thing, Elmo would do a better job, and he is only 3.

Alon Levy: Thank you, that is how it read, just wanted to be sure.

So by that I assume you know that Germany, Sweden and France rigidly adhere to their laws, meaning there are no confusing statutes, precedents etc.

For example in New Zealand, where the is law strictly interpreted, abortion is free and RU486 is routinely administered.

I really think it comes down to a difference in cultural attitudes. Being less inclined to interfere in the lives of others 1) because it is none of our business 2) because, morally it encumbers one to follow through ie responsibilty of outcome.

I don't understand how people can actively thwart abortion, yet not be responsible for that child's health, care and welfare for the duration ... it's dereliction of duty.

Please don't misunderstand my stance, I think abortion is heinous, but only with respect to the child (forget foetus), so anything that facilitates early, expedient abortion is good. Yet in the rising evangelical climate of the US, it would seem not only is early abortion difficult to procure for those who really need it, ie 35mil below the poverty line, facts are so distorted, attitudes are so judgemental ... I don't know, it's all so hard to fathom, depressing really.

Not True, for what it's worth, I don't know how abortion laws came about in other countries, but several have argued that the reason it's such an emotionally charged issue in this country is because the legalization of abortion was decided by the Supreme Court. A lot of people attribute the angst over abortion to the fact that the decision to legalize was made by the courts rather than the people. While I don't agree here, the argument is that if people had voted on legalizing abortion and it was legalized, at least opponents would know that they had a say in the matter but the fact that it was decided by the Supreme Court took that decision away from the people and placed it in the hands of judges. Again, I definitely do not agree with this train of thought but that's one perspective on it.