A Mere Mention of Abortion.

hattoncracker · 23-02-2012 2:21am

Einhard wrote: »

I'm sure you don't mean it as such, but that argument could be seen as having something of a eugenics bent to it. The idea that an unborn child/foetus should be aborted because there is a chance it mightn't be loved or have a secure, comfortable family life is somewhat shocking to me. It's akin to saying: this child mightn't have a great life so best to deny it the chance of life altogether. I know that's probably not what you believe but that's where such arguments as above logically lead.

What you're rally saying here is that you have no problem with someone being pro-life as long as they STFU, keep their opinions to themselves, and in no way try to act on their convictions.

I can see where you're going with this, however, if the parents truly believe that they cannot offer a child a good quality of life, then that shouldn't be questioned, they are the ones that are the best judges of that.

In relation to your second paragraph, I don't really know how one could 'act on their convictions' in relation to a pro life opinion, it's such an inflammatory subject that people's opinions are going to be extreme on it, depending on what they believe, and will lead to what can be construed as extreme actions.

bronte · 23-02-2012 2:23am

Einhard wrote: »

Can I ask why not? Many people that I know who are pro-choice accord the foetus no special status before a certain period. If that is the case, if the foetus at 14 weeks is no more than a clump of cells, then what's wrong with abortion as contraception?

If though, one believes that a foetus at 14 weeks does have a special status, does that not bring in a moral dimension to it?

To my mind, while I think that lady's actions were pretty horrible, I could see that she was being consistent in her beliefs.

To use it as contraception when there are numerous methods available including sterilisation is strange.
Why would you put your health at such risk when you can avoid it?

histories · 23-02-2012 2:23am

Einhard wrote: »

I'm sure you don't mean it as such, but that argument could be seen as having something of a eugenics bent to it. The idea that an unborn child/foetus should be aborted because there is a chance it mightn't be loved or have a secure, comfortable family life is somewhat shocking to me. It's akin to saying: this child mightn't have a great life so best to deny it the chance of life altogether. I know that's probably not what you believe but that's where such arguments as above logically lead.

I absolutely did not mean it that way.

Einhard wrote: »

What you're rally saying here is that you have no problem with someone being pro-life as long as they STFU, keep their opinions to themselves, and in no way try to act on their convictions.

What I'm really saying is what I said. In the same way people who are opposed to same-sex marriage should not be able to deny same-sex couples from getting married. I have friends who are anti-abortion but would never dream of preventing women from having the right to choose.

PS you'll have to forgive the layout of my post, I can't figure out this quote within a quote business.

hattoncracker · 23-02-2012 2:28am

Einhard wrote: »

Can I ask why not? Many people that I know who are pro-choice accord the foetus no special status before a certain period. If that is the case, if the foetus at 14 weeks is no more than a clump of cells, then what's wrong with abortion as contraception?

If though, one believes that a foetus at 14 weeks does have a special status, does that not bring in a moral dimension to it?

To my mind, while I think that lady's actions were pretty horrible, I could see that she was being consistent in her beliefs.

The first Trimester of pregnancy is the hardest, all hormones scream at preservation of the baby, with sickness, miscarriage risks, and health risks not to mention psychological health risks of the abortion itself, it's not feasible to use it as a form of contraception. Prevention is better than cure, in this instance.

Einhard · 23-02-2012 2:41am

hattoncracker wrote: »

I can see where you're going with this, however, if the parents truly believe that they cannot offer a child a good quality of life, then that shouldn't be questioned, they are the ones that are the best judges of that.

So if a mother thinks she can't give her child a decent life then that's an entirely legitimate reason for her now to allow that child a chance at life at all?

In relation to your second paragraph, I don't really know how one could 'act on their convictions' in relation to a pro life opinion, it's such an inflammatory subject that people's opinions are going to be extreme on it, depending on what they believe, and will lead to what can be construed as extreme actions.

You seem to be stating that abortion is an inflammatory subject (which it is), but that the only extreme positions are those held by the pro-choicers, and they shouldn't act on their convictions.

That seems a very partisan argument.

bronte wrote: »

To use it as contraception when there are numerous methods available including sterilisation is strange.
Why would you put your health at such risk when you can avoid it?

So it's only insane from the POV of the health of the woman involved, and not from any moral or ethical perspective? In other words, if abortion was entirely risk free, then you'd have no issue with this woman acting in such a manner?

What I'm really saying is what I said. In the same way people who are opposed to same-sex marriage should not be able to deny same-sex couples from getting married. I have friends who are anti-abortion but would never dream of preventing women from having the right to choose.

I think they probably would seek to prevent that option existing. If not, then they're hardly anti-abortion. If there was a referendum tomorrow, i'd vote against abortion. If it were passed, I'd respect the decision of the people and leave it at that. What you seem to be implying is that, because I don't agree with your position, I shouldn't be allowed act on my own convctions. It's very easy to respect the diversity of opinion as long as those opinions are not expressed in any way whatsoever.

bronte · 23-02-2012 2:50am

Einhard wrote: »

So it's only insane from the POV of the health of the woman involved, and not from any moral or ethical perspective? In other words, if abortion was entirely risk free, then you'd have no issue with this woman acting in such a manner?

Do you believe women should be a prisoner of their uterus despite taking every precaution available to them?

hattoncracker · 23-02-2012 2:51am

Einhard wrote: »

So if a mother thinks she can't give her child a decent life then that's an entirely legitimate reason for her now to allow that child a chance at life at all?

In a lot of cases, they think that not bringing a child into the world is the more responsible thing to do, it is not an easy decision, it takes a lot of soul-searching and tears to make it, and IMO making that decision seem so black and white is demeaning.

hattoncracker · 23-02-2012 2:57am

Einhard wrote: »

You seem to be stating that abortion is an inflammatory subject (which it is), but that the only extreme positions are those held by the pro-choicers, and they shouldn't act on their convictions.

That seems a very partisan argument.

Acting on their convictions in this instance, can sometimes (not ALL) end up with Pro Life groups marching around University Campuses with pictures of dead foetuses on sticks.

My definition of Pro Lifers are the people who see absolutely nothing wrong with forcing a woman to go through with a pregnancy no matter what the consequences to her, the baby, etc with no room for compromise. Those people currently have the law on their side in this country.

Anyone who can live and let live, in my eyes is Pro Choice.

saa · 23-02-2012 3:13am

No woman who is well takes the decision lightly so even if it was freely available that would only mean that later abortions are avoided.

Getting an abortion because of your job, education, people around you etc. is not the reason to get this procedure, it should be an autonomous choice. I would be saddened to think women who want to complete the pregnancy would go through an abortion if they would prefer not to because of work [e.g] pressures (not saying that is what OP was talking about) I have no idea how difficult it is to go through with an abortion, to give away your child, raise a child you do not wish to but I do know what it is to be an unwanted child, it's indescribable, the consequences and knock on effects are immensely complex are ones that you would not wish upon your worst enemy.

So even through this post I am simplifying the issue, omitting exceptions, way too involved with my own perspective but all I would like to see is a disinterested position that the law could provide that ensures safety and the best possible outcome that the woman is not put into but in an informed manner chooses what happens.

histories · 23-02-2012 3:16am

I think they probably would seek to prevent that option existing. If not, then they're hardly anti-abortion. If there was a referendum tomorrow, i'd vote against abortion. If it were passed, I'd respect the decision of the people and leave it at that. What you seem to be implying is that, because I don't agree with your position, I shouldn't be allowed act on my own convctions. It's very easy to respect the diversity of opinion as long as those opinions are not expressed in any way whatsoever.[/QUOTE]

I suppose I'm coming at it from a 'which position is more harmful' point of view. Personally, I think preventing women from being able to avail of a medical procedure like abortion is primitive and is akin to treating women as incubators. It is denying women the right to self-determination over their own bodies. You take legal abortion off the table and you can give a big howdy to back ally abortions. If a woman is utterly opposed to being forced to carry and give birth to a child she doesn't want she will do whatever it takes to get rid of it, regardless of the risk to her own life.

You referenced eugenics - forced pregnancy and labour is equally dangerous. And all of this before you get into the mental health reperucssions!

hattoncracker · 23-02-2012 3:23am

histories wrote: »

I think they probably would seek to prevent that option existing. If not, then they're hardly anti-abortion. If there was a referendum tomorrow, i'd vote against abortion. If it were passed, I'd respect the decision of the people and leave it at that. What you seem to be implying is that, because I don't agree with your position, I shouldn't be allowed act on my own convctions. It's very easy to respect the diversity of opinion as long as those opinions are not expressed in any way whatsoever.

I suppose I'm coming at it from a 'which position is more harmful' point of view. Personally, I think preventing women from being able to avail of a medical procedure like abortion is primitive and is akin to treating women as incubators. It is denying women the right to self-determination over their own bodies. You take legal abortion off the table and you can give a big howdy to back ally abortions. If a woman is utterly opposed to being forced to carry and give birth to a child she doesn't want she will do whatever it takes to get rid of it, regardless of the risk to her own life.

You referenced eugenics - forced pregnancy and labour is equally dangerous. And all of this before you get into the mental health reperucssions![/QUOTE]

+1000

And again, Pro Life people would not bother me in the slightest if abortion was legal here, that way people would be free to make up their own mind.

jill_valentine · 23-02-2012 4:00am

A little angular to the topic, but could somebody more informed than I tell me in idiot-friendly terms how close the absolutely batsh*t transvaginal ultrasound bill in Virginia is to going through?

Kooli · 23-02-2012 9:33am

Einhard wrote: »

So if a mother thinks she can't give her child a decent life then that's an entirely legitimate reason for her now to allow that child a chance at life at all?

Yes I think so.

I think the damage done to a lot of adults who spent 18 years in a home with parents or a parent who was unwilling or unable to look after them with any kindness or competence is a worse damage than the abortion of a foetus.

No woman should EVER have to go through with a pregnancy she doesn't want to have or raise a child she doesn't want to have. It's just unthinkable.

KittyeeTrix · 23-02-2012 11:00am

jill_valentine wrote: »

A little angular to the topic, but could somebody more informed than I tell me in idiot-friendly terms how close the absolutely batsh*t transvaginal ultrasound bill in Virginia is to going through?

What transvaginal ultrasound bill in Virginia?

LittleBook · 23-02-2012 11:02am

jill_valentine wrote: »

A little angular to the topic, but could somebody more informed than I tell me in idiot-friendly terms how close the absolutely batsh*t transvaginal ultrasound bill in Virginia is to going through?

It's been passed (with amendments) by the lower house (House of Delegates) and will now go to the upper house (State Senate).

Now that the House has passed the bill, it will head back to the Senate, where its fate is less clear. The Virginia state Senate is evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats; Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, a Republican, would be the tie-breaking vote.

Neyite wrote: »

However, I do believe that counselling services should be provided in tandem with any abortions performed and I believe that early scans get re-introduced into our maternity units - this 20+ weeks for a first scan is ludicrous - I was visibly pregnant and baby moving at that stage.

I just found this element so ironic in the context of Jill's question. In Virginia they were trying to make transvaginal ultrasounds mandatory for women seeking abortions.

In its original form, every Virginia woman seeking an abortion would have had to submit to a transvaginal ultrasound, in which a probe is inserted into the vagina. The proposals were condemned by pro-choice campaigners as "state-sponsored rape".

The resulting fetal image would remain in a woman's medical file for seven years, and any doctor who failed to perform an pre-abortion ultrasound would be liable to prosecution and fines.

As I understand it, the bill has gone through with the amendment that non-invasive ultrasounds would be mandatory, as well as two trips to the clinic before the abortion.

It’s a stance that Planned Parenthood said they are firmly against.

"This bill is just a delay tactic,” [a field director with Planned Parenthood, Tanya] Semones said. “It's really just an effort to make first trimester, legal abortion difficult in Virginia."

Again, ironic that people worry about late terminations when pro-life lobbyists are trying to make early abortions (in a place where it is already legal) as difficult as possible.

Morag · 23-02-2012 11:27am

KittyeeTrix wrote: »

What transvaginal ultrasound bill in Virginia?

A trans vaginal ultrasound is were they put an ultrasound probe (which looks like a dildo) up inside the vagina, can be used to detect more in the very early stages of pregnancy and can detect the earl list heart beat possible.

Each state in the USA set it's own law, that is why there are 'dry' states were the sales of alchol are restricted.

The state of virgina is trying to pass a law to force women to have a transvaginal ultrasound before she can have an abortion, even before she can get the abortion pill.

At a national level all states have to comply with abortion being legal but they are trying to make it extremely complicated for women to have them.
Some women in the USA have to travel even further then Irish women do and pay more to have abortions.

Some law makers are fed up with all the attachments and amendments which get put on health care bills surrounding this issue and are hitting back with ones like this.

http://jezebel.com/5887293/smartass-state-lawmaker-proposes-vasectomy-limits-for-men

hattoncracker · 23-02-2012 11:59am

Sharrow wrote: »

A trans vaginal ultrasound is were they put an ultrasound probe (which looks like a dildo) up inside the vagina, can be used to detect more in the very early stages of pregnancy and can detect the earl list heart beat possible.

Each state in the USA set it's own law, that is why there are 'dry' states were the sales of alchol are restricted.

The state of virgina is trying to pass a law to force women to have a transvaginal ultrasound before she can have an abortion, even before she can get the abortion pill.

At a national level all states have to comply with abortion being legal but they are trying to make it extremely complicated for women to have them.
Some women in the USA have to travel even further then Irish women do and pay more to have abortions.

Some law makers are fed up with all the attachments and amendments which get put on health care bills surrounding this issue and are hitting back with ones like this.

http://jezebel.com/5887293/smartass-state-lawmaker-proposes-vasectomy-limits-for-men

I read another article http://jezebel.com/5887417/why-rick-santorum-would-have-killed-my-daughter, which raised an interesting point. When you're ill or pregnant, you follow your doctor's advice, not your local politician's.

Neyite · 23-02-2012 2:47pm

I have had heaps of trans-vaginal scans. I have had them pre-pregnancy to check ovarian function, and later, to monitor the effects of the meds on ovulation.

On this pregnancy, I had two TV scans done - the first was at 7weeks 4days pregnant. I had found out about the pregnancy at exactly 4 weeks - the very day my period was due, and 3weeks later I got the scan. At 7+4 there were heartbeats there, visibly and audibly, I had measurements of my babies, even though they were only just over a centimetre.

We had a repeat TV scan at 9weeks 4 days which showed that one of my twins had died at 8 weeks - 3 days after the first scan. I was devestated, and still am - those scan pictures are so precious to me now.

The detail in them was incredible - images were crystal clear, wheras my 11 week and 21 week tummy scans in the public system were blurry and indistinct.

If I was facing a decision to terminate, I think that to see the scans and to hear the heartbeat would make me feel like the most horrible person in the world. I can see why pro-lifers would love the TV scans to be mandatory - if you dismiss their pictures because you are not personally connected to the image, there is no way that on a scan you can disconnecct.

LegacyUser · 23-02-2012 4:02pm

Neyite wrote: »

If I was facing a decision to terminate, I think that to see the scans and to hear the heartbeat would make me feel like the most horrible person in the world. I can see why pro-lifers would love the TV scans to be mandatory - if you dismiss their pictures because you are not personally connected to the image, there is no way that on a scan you can disconnecct.

I beg to disagree. I had these scans myself, at about the same time (7th week) you did. I still chose to have an abortion. Fortunately, this was back in my home country where abortions are legal and I was provided with excellent care both before and after the abortion, facing no judgment, just help and advice. In this country, however, I wouldn't dare even mention that I had an abortion. Too many highly judgmental people who think they have an answer to everything. Why would I have to justify myself to them while they happily point the finger and label me a murderer? The only person who had any right to know and discuss this with me was my partner. He was (and still is) 100% behind me. Neither of us have regretted it, and I doubt we will. We made an informed decision, not an emotional one.

metaoblivia · 23-02-2012 5:04pm

Neyite wrote: »

I have had heaps of trans-vaginal scans. I have had them pre-pregnancy to check ovarian function, and later, to monitor the effects of the meds on ovulation.

On this pregnancy, I had two TV scans done - the first was at 7weeks 4days pregnant. I had found out about the pregnancy at exactly 4 weeks - the very day my period was due, and 3weeks later I got the scan. At 7+4 there were heartbeats there, visibly and audibly, I had measurements of my babies, even though they were only just over a centimetre.

We had a repeat TV scan at 9weeks 4 days which showed that one of my twins had died at 8 weeks - 3 days after the first scan. I was devestated, and still am - those scan pictures are so precious to me now.

The detail in them was incredible - images were crystal clear, wheras my 11 week and 21 week tummy scans in the public system were blurry and indistinct.

If I was facing a decision to terminate, I think that to see the scans and to hear the heartbeat would make me feel like the most horrible person in the world. I can see why pro-lifers would love the TV scans to be mandatory - if you dismiss their pictures because you are not personally connected to the image, there is no way that on a scan you can disconnecct.

In the original bill, they would not have had to look at the images, just undergo the transvaginal ultrasound (which is terrible enough, in my opinion). And it would have applied to all women, including those who had been raped (which is extra terrible; one of the lawmakers said if a women consented to sex with her boyfriend, then that was the same as consenting to this procedure. Nevermind the fallacious thinking there, but what about the women who never consented in the first place?)

However, the governor of Virginia just recently said he would not sign that bill, so they scaled it back yesterday to mandating external ultrasounds and women still don't have to look at the images. This is all because the supporters of this bill in Virigina want women to have as much information about their pregnancy as possible, apparently.

Interestingly, the potential Republican candidate for president, Rick Santorum, recently criticized President Obama's health care program that required insurance of prenatal testing because he believes it might encourage abortions if a woman learns about a defect.

I can understand why abortion is a very emotive subject. I personally have known three women who have had abortions, and two of them aborted a child that would have been related to me. All of them had their reasons, and I can't judge them for their choice. And truly, I feel that in all cases, it was probably the best choice.

KittyeeTrix · 23-02-2012 5:13pm

@Neyite....I'm so sorry to hear of the loss of one of your babies:(.....I had no idea

I wasn't aware of the practise of TV scanning in the States and wondered if they were being linked somehow to causing abortions:eek:

I too had about 4-5 of them as I've had pre-term babies so was being monitored on my last pregnancy in anticipation of a cerclage (stitch).

Thanks for clearing that up for me guys.....:)

Morag · 23-02-2012 5:25pm

It seems that there is a notion that adult women don't know what an abortion is and that they have to be 'informed' when they start the long booking appointments to have one.
They have already been over all the options and through the mill emotionally when they reach their decision and they still have to have medical consults and see a counselor, there are plenty of times to opt out.

It's not like they on a whim decided to have an abortion one morning and can get it done at lunch time the same day.

baby and crumble · 23-02-2012 5:35pm

metaoblivia wrote: »

In the original bill, they would not have had to look at the images, just undergo the transvaginal ultrasound (which is terrible enough, in my opinion). And it would have applied to all women, including those who had been raped (which is extra terrible; one of the lawmakers said if a women consented to sex with her boyfriend, then that was the same as consenting to this procedure. Nevermind the fallacious thinking there, but what about the women who never consented in the first place?)

I can only imagine how horrendous and traumatic it could be for a woman who has been raped to be forced to undergo a tv ultrasound. It's highly invasive and no doubt triggering.

jill_valentine · 23-02-2012 5:38pm

There's absolutely no medical basis for the ultrasounds in this case, and the patients don't have to look at the image. Republicans just want to punish and humiliate women for making the decision, and they aren't even pretending any different. Grotesque.

LegacyUser · 23-02-2012 5:44pm

I like DifferentOpinion had an abortion.
I had been to the family dr to ask about going on the pill, I was sexually active and using condoms, he told me to think about it and come back to him in a month.
During that month I got pregnant.

I have no regrets about having an abortion what so ever.

I do have regrets about having to travel.
I had to make an appointment with the well woman center and see them and then they made a referral for me to a clinic in the uk.

It tripled the cost and it was the first time I had ever been flown anywhere.
It was a Tuesday morning flight and there were too other worried looking young couples on it. The air hostesses can tell by what flights and when and can spot women traveling.
We saw the same people on the train and then in the clinic waiting rooms.

I had to see a dr and a counselor and get a scan and then go back to a B&B.
It was a horrid place but close to the clinic. I was very upset and in a strange country and far away from the comforts of home. The next day I had to go back and see another counselor and then dr who would preform my abortion. I had to spend the night in the clinic as I had a general anesthetic. The next day I was still emotional, sore, tired and groggy from the anesthetic and pain killers and I had to try and then travel all the way home.

The flight got delayed and we were stuck for another 5 hours in the airport, they still are some of the most miserable hours of my life and I won't ever travel to that airport again.
All I wanted was to be back home in my own bed.

All my immediate family know, my partner knows, most of my friends know and someday I will even tell my kids.

Some times I think I am a coward for not saying publicly that I have an abortion, that I am one of the thousands of women a year who travel and have one. Going on the numbers which BPAS release I am one of at least 100,000 Irish women who have had an abortion in a Uk clinic.

There are people who don't want us to speak up, want us to remain ashamed and to keep it taboo as it is easy to then vilify women who choose to have an abortion and to say all the hateful things they do.

I had an abortion, I don't regret it.
I regret having to travel and I resent being told I should be ashamed.

coffee_cake · 23-02-2012 5:58pm

let's force everyone to watch graphic videos of any surgery first before undergoing it then :rolleyes:

Giselle · 23-02-2012 6:03pm

baby and crumble wrote: »

I can only imagine how horrendous and traumatic it could be for a woman who has been raped to be forced to undergo a tv ultrasound. It's highly invasive and no doubt triggering.

Totally, but its more than that too.

The very definition of rape is penetration against ones will.

Being penetrated for a scan you do not want and for which your consent is not sought is nothing less than State sponsored rape.

WindSock · 23-02-2012 6:34pm

hattoncracker wrote: »

I have a friend who considered, but didn't have an abortion. She lost the baby at 13 weeks, and one of her friends who knew that she had considered it and is very pro life told her it was karma, and that she deserved to loose it, and that she and her bf were murderers.

What a horribly disgusting thing to say. She can't be that much pro life if that's the view she holds.

hattoncracker · 23-02-2012 6:51pm

WindSock wrote: »

hattoncracker wrote: »

I have a friend who considered, but didn't have an abortion. She lost the baby at 13 weeks, and one of her friends who knew that she had considered it and is very pro life told her it was karma, and that she deserved to loose it, and that she and her bf were murderers.

What a horribly disgusting thing to say. She can't be that much pro life if that's the view she holds.

It was a he. He got a girl pregnant with twins when he was in his early 20's. He forbade her from having an abortion, so she went through with the pregnancy.

They broke up, he's with someone else, wants kids with her even though he is literally up to his eyes in debt and wants to cut ties with his other two girls.

hattoncracker · 23-02-2012 6:53pm

NoRegret wrote: »

I like DifferentOpinion had an abortion.
I had been to the family dr to ask about going on the pill, I was sexually active and using condoms, he told me to think about it and come back to him in a month.
During that month I got pregnant.

I have no regrets about having an abortion what so ever.

I do have regrets about having to travel.
I had to make an appointment with the well woman center and see them and then they made a referral for me to a clinic in the uk.

It tripled the cost and it was the first time I had ever been flown anywhere.
It was a Tuesday morning flight and there were too other worried looking young couples on it. The air hostesses can tell by what flights and when and can spot women traveling.
We saw the same people on the train and then in the clinic waiting rooms.

I had to see a dr and a counselor and get a scan and then go back to a B&B.
It was a horrid place but close to the clinic. I was very upset and in a strange country and far away from the comforts of home. The next day I had to go back and see another counselor and then dr who would preform my abortion. I had to spend the night in the clinic as I had a general anesthetic. The next day I was still emotional, sore, tired and groggy from the anesthetic and pain killers and I had to try and then travel all the way home.

The flight got delayed and we were stuck for another 5 hours in the airport, they still are some of the most miserable hours of my life and I won't ever travel to that airport again.
All I wanted was to be back home in my own bed.

All my immediate family know, my partner knows, most of my friends know and someday I will even tell my kids.

Some times I think I am a coward for not saying publicly that I have an abortion, that I am one of the thousands of women a year who travel and have one. Going on the numbers which BPAS release I am one of at least 100,000 Irish women who have had an abortion in a Uk clinic.

There are people who don't want us to speak up, want us to remain ashamed and to keep it taboo as it is easy to then vilify women who choose to have an abortion and to say all the hateful things they do.

I had an abortion, I don't regret it.
I regret having to travel and I resent being told I should be ashamed.

+1.

And youre very brave, and lucky to have people who will stand by you.

A Mere Mention of Abortion.

Comments