Risk to life, including suicide?

strobe

I'veyIt may happen in our life times, it may not. Impossible to say with any kind of educated certainty. Every generation is full of people saying x will never happen in their lifetime. They're frequently wrong. I hope it's the former, and sooner rather than later personally. As the anti arguments tend to be ludicrously awful imo, and the benefits worthy.

But this is a whole separate thread, so I'll get back to work. Might start a standalone thread for the topic when I'm home, might be interesting. Perhaps their are arguments against its viability etc I've yet to hear. V

HellFireClub

Very interesting OP, but is society not gone mad altogether lately? Suicide is a blight on this country and how have we fallen into such a place now where we pander to what are always mentally unstable people in this manner, be it a man or a woman, threatening suicide? I do not mean to castigate suicide or people who are suicidal but what are we doing as a society with so many people lacking the coping skills to live in Irish society today, who then decide to kill themselves? And why are we legislating now to accommodate people who want to commit suicide? I just think it's a fúcked up world we are living in lately and we should stop pandering to those who are suicidal all the time. Look at how our parents and our grandparents lived, the times they lived through, we have every mod con these days and every convenience, yet I doubt people have ever been committing suicide in such numbers?

HellFireClub

GarIT wrote: »

Many people still see abortion as murder and for that reason I think abortion should only ever be ok if both parents agree to it.

I also think if abortion is made legal either parent should also be able to give up their responsibility to the child.

I think we should try to get to a place where people can better understand the very simple technical relationship between having unprotected sex and the likelihood of a pregnancy emerging. If you're big enough to have sex, then the deal that mother nature hands us is very simple, we are risking pregnancy. We can reduce but not eliminate the risk.

The biggest problem our society seems to suffer from these days is people somehow constantly expecting someone else (usually the state) to stand over the consequences of their actions. Why should any parent be able to sign away, as a matter of practice, their responsibilities to a child they have created? Why should that burden be transferred onto the backs of taxpayers?

eviltwin

strobe wrote: »

I'veyIt may happen in our life times, it may not. Impossible to say with any kind of educated certainty. Every generation is full of people saying x will never happen in their lifetime. They're frequently wrong. I hope it's the former, and sooner rather than later personally. As the anti arguments tend to be ludicrously awful imo, and the benefits worthy.

But this is a whole separate thread, so I'll get back to work. Might start a standalone thread for the topic when I'm home, might be interesting. Perhaps their are arguments against its viability etc I've yet to hear. V

Its an interesting idea. I actually think a DNA database is a great idea but more for crime, bodies that turn up etc. What niggles me about your idea is that it seems to be assuming that a lot of women lie about who the father of their babies are.

Honey-ec

HellFireClub wrote: »

Very interesting OP, but is society not gone mad altogether lately? Suicide is a blight on this country and how have we fallen into such a place now where we pander to what are always mentally unstable people in this manner, be it a man or a woman, threatening suicide? I do not mean to castigate suicide or people who are suicidal but what are we doing as a society with so many people lacking the coping skills to live in Irish society today, who then decide to kill themselves? And why are we legislating now to accommodate people who want to commit suicide? I just think it's a fúcked up world we are living in lately and we should stop pandering to those who are suicidal all the time. Look at how our parents and our grandparents lived, the times they lived through, we have every mod con these days and every convenience, yet I doubt people have ever been committing suicide in such numbers?

I can kind of see your point, and, tbh, think it's a separate issue to what the OP was getting at, but would you not agree that allowing a woman who's suicidal as a result of being pregnant to have an abortion is, in effect, giving her the means to cope with her suicidal feelings?

Honey-ec

HellFireClub wrote: »

I think we should try to get to a place where people can better understand the very simple technical relationship between having unprotected sex and the likelihood of a pregnancy emerging. If you're big enough to have sex, then the deal that mother nature hands us is very simple, we are risking pregnancy. We can reduce but not eliminate the risk.

Ah come off it, HFC, it's not always the case that every woman who finds herself unexpectedly pregnant is in that situation because she had unprotected sex.

Accidents happen. Far too many of them, imo, but I'd still never say to anyone considering an abortion "Well, you took the risk, now live with the consequences!"

HellFireClub

eviltwin wrote: »

Its an interesting idea. I actually think a DNA database is a great idea but more for crime, bodies that turn up etc. What niggles me about your idea is that it seems to be assuming that a lot of women lie about who the father of their babies are.

I think a lot of guys assume fatherhood for fear of insulting a girl as to whether someone else could be the father or not, if the pregnancy wasn't planned or didn't emerge from a relationship type set up.

It's not something I've ever been troubled with thank Christ but I'd NEVER assume parentage without a DNA test if I wasn't in a serious relationship with someone who was claiming I was a father or going to be a father.

HellFireClub

Honey-ec wrote: »

Ah come off it, HFC, it's not always the case that every woman who finds herself unexpectedly pregnant is in that situation because she had unprotected sex.

Accidents happen. Far too many of them, imo, but I'd still never say to anyone considering an abortion "Well, you took the risk, now live with the consequences!"

No but come on, it is a lot of the time. If someone is considering an abortion, I think it is often because they don't feel properly supported in terms of their set up, (in the case of a one night stand or whatever). I've been in long term relationships where if contraception failed and a pregnancy was the result, it wouldn't have been a big huge problem I think, for either of us. I think in the vast majority of cases, it's down to people not wanting a relationship (through parentage), with someone they might not even remember having sex with.

EDIT: I do think that is exactly what we should tell people, if you are big enough to have sex, then be big enough to live with the possibility of a pregnancy emerging, especially if you are not using contraception. The alternative is abortion on demand which I don't agree with.

eviltwin

HellFireClub wrote: »

I think a lot of guys assume fatherhood for fear of insulting a girl as to whether someone else could be the father or not, if the pregnancy wasn't planned or didn't emerge from a relationship type set up.

It's not something I've ever been troubled with thank Christ but I'd NEVER assume parentage without a DNA test if I wasn't in a serious relationship with someone who was claiming I was a father or going to be a father.

I would say though the idea of setting up a database for every single birth with the added costs of that is a bit ott, I'm sure most men are quite satisfied that they are the fathers of their babies and I doubt vast numbers of women in relationships are having it away with other blokes. If a man has reasons to suspect he is not the father why should the state pay for it? There are plenty of places that will do a DNA test and its not that expensive either.

Honey-ec

HellFireClub wrote: »

No but come on, it is a lot of the time. If someone is considering an abortion, I think it is often because they don't feel properly supported in terms of their set up, (in the case of a one night stand or whatever). I've been in long term relationships where if contraception failed and a pregnancy was the result, it wouldn't have been a big huge problem I think, for either of us. I think in the vast majority of cases, it's down to people not wanting a relationship (through parentage), with someone they might not even remember having sex with.

EDIT: I do think that is exactly what we should tell people, if you are big enough to have sex, then be big enough to live with the possibility of a pregnancy emerging, especially if you are not using contraception. The alternative is abortion on demand which I don't agree with.

Well we're probably never going to see eye to eye on this, then, because I completely support abortion on demand.

Anyway, I don't necessarily agree that the majority of people who end up with an unplanned pregnancy weren't using any contraception. I'd guess that in the vast majority of cases, either a condom failed or they'd missed a Pill and, instead of getting the MAP, they took a gamble on it being ok, and lost. Now, that's where I kind of go "Stupid risk to take, you should have spent the €12 on the MAP just to be on the safe side", but I don't agree that people who do end up in that situation should be punished for it for the rest of their lives.

I took the MAP twice during my marriage, even though I was on the Pill, because there was a tiny chance on both of those occasions that my Pill might have been compromised. If I had ended up pregnant on either occasion, I'd have been straight on the plane to England for an abortion despite being happily married at the time. I have no problem admitting that. I don't want children, and if an accident had happened, I'd have dealt with it. However, I also did absolutely everything in my power to make sure I never ended up in that position, and it worked.

HellFireClub

eviltwin wrote: »

I would say though the idea of setting up a database for every single birth with the added costs of that is a bit ott, I'm sure most men are quite satisfied that they are the fathers of their babies and I doubt vast numbers of women in relationships are having it away with other blokes. If a man has reasons to suspect he is not the father why should the state pay for it? There are plenty of places that will do a DNA test and its not that expensive either.

I never said the state should pay for it or we should set up a database of DNA material for males, where are you getting that from?!? I just made the point that if it was a situation that I was presented with, where I wasn't in a serious relationship with a girl who was claiming I was a father, I'd be insisting on a DNA test as a matter of course, (that I'd be more than happy to pay for myself), before ever accepting parentage. I've seen it play out once where a guy just assumed he was the father (because he was told he was the father), then it emerged a few years later that he wasn't the father at all. I don't think any guy should have to go through that sort of an ordeal.

HellFireClub

Honey-ec wrote: »

Well we're probably never going to see eye to eye on this, then, because I completely support abortion on demand.

Anyway, I don't necessarily agree that the majority of people who end up with an unplanned pregnancy weren't using any contraception. I'd guess that in the vast majority of cases, either a condom failed or they'd missed a Pill and, instead of getting the MAP, they took a gamble on it being ok, and lost. Now, that's where I kind of go "Stupid risk to take, you should have spent the €12 on the MAP just to be on the safe side", but I don't agree that people who do end up in that situation should be punished for it for the rest of their lives.

I took the MAP twice during my marriage, even though I was on the Pill, because there was a tiny chance on both of those occasions that my Pill might have been compromised. If I had ended up pregnant on either occasion, I'd have been straight on the plane to England for an abortion despite being happily married at the time. I have no problem admitting that. I don't want children, and if an accident had happened, I'd have dealt with it. However, I also did absolutely everything in my power to make sure I never ended up in that position, and it worked.

It's a difficult one to call. I do think though, as a society, we have well and truly lost the ability to stand by & accept the consequences of our actions on a personal level. We seem to be completely determined to come up with any method, no matter how unsavory, (for example deliberately terminating a perfectly healthy pregnancy, albeit an unwanted one), for the purposes of being able to revisit mistakes that we might have made, to retrospectively change/re-engineer the consequences for ourselves.

However, our aspirations on children differ in that they are opposite, I'd love to have children, you wouldn't, so I suppose our beliefs are generally grounded in very different places.

eviltwin

HellFireClub wrote: »

I never said the state should pay for it or we should set up a database of DNA material for males, where are you getting that from?!? I just made the point that if it was a situation that I was presented with, where I wasn't in a serious relationship with a girl who was claiming I was a father, I'd be insisting on a DNA test as a matter of course, (that I'd be more than happy to pay for myself), before ever accepting parentage. I've seen it play out once where a guy just assumed he was the father (because he was told he was the father), then it emerged a few years later that he wasn't the father at all. I don't think any guy should have to go through that sort of an ordeal.

That was the original suggestion made by Strobe, not you:

My possibly contentious solution would be for a national DNA database to be compiled and for paternity testing to be carried out on every child born in the state as standard. Would also have the effect of eliminating 'paternity fraud'.

HellFireClub

eviltwin wrote: »

That was the original suggestion made by Strobe, not you:

My possibly contentious solution would be for a national DNA database to be compiled and for paternity testing to be carried out on every child born in the state as standard. Would also have the effect of eliminating 'paternity fraud'.

It would certainly eliminate cheating!

eviltwin

HellFireClub wrote: »

It's a difficult one to call. I do think though, as a society, we have well and truly lost the ability to stand by & accept the consequences of our actions on a personal level. We seem to be completely determined to come up with any method, no matter how unsavory, (for example deliberately terminating a perfectly healthy pregnancy, albeit an unwanted one), for the purposes of being able to revisit mistakes that we might have made, to retrospectively change/re-engineer the consequences for ourselves.

However, our aspirations on children differ in that they are opposite, I'd love to have children, you wouldn't, so I suppose our beliefs are generally grounded in very different places.

I love children, have two of my own but I would also support abortion on demand.

I know where you are coming from re personal responsibility but I think when a pregnancy has happened its gone past that point and to force someone to have a baby they don't want seems like an extreme form of punishment.

I would rather see people use that responsibility before a conception occurs but if something fails or the worst happens and someone gets drunk or just makes a mistake I wouldn't stand in their way if they felt abortion was the only choice. After all its not going to have any impact on me, what they do with that pregnancy is going to last the rest of their life. They should be allowed to make the choice that is right for them.

RDM_83 again

eviltwin wrote: »

I would say though the idea of setting up a database for every single birth with the added costs of that is a bit ott, I'm sure most men are quite satisfied that they are the fathers of their babies and I doubt vast numbers of women in relationships are having it away with other blokes. If a man has reasons to suspect he is not the father why should the state pay for it? There are plenty of places that will do a DNA test and its not that expensive either.

I do think we'l have a national DNA database in our life times (but not in the next decade). The UK already has 4 million samples!

In terms of the paternity question according to wiki it ranges from (around) 2% for those "low risk" to (around) 30% (where its disputed). So its small for the general population but not insignificant (in 2001 there was only an unemployment rate of 3.6 for example).

In terms of the question I suppose it really depends on how the legislation is worded and how harm/risk is assessed.
For example I heard of a case where a termination/abortion was carried out on mental health grounds in NI (a long time ago too) and in NI it is generally considered to be illegal, however in that case there was pre-existing mental condition(s) apparently.
IMO as the law is applied in Great Britain (its wording is stricter than its application), apart from the increased cost to the state I don't see why a legal "abortion/detachment" from the father should not be allowed.

HellFireClub

eviltwin wrote: »

I love children, have two of my own but I would also support abortion on demand.

I know where you are coming from re personal responsibility but I think when a pregnancy has happened its gone past that point and to force someone to have a baby they don't want seems like an extreme form of punishment.

I would rather see people use that responsibility before a conception occurs but if something fails or the worst happens and someone gets drunk or just makes a mistake I wouldn't stand in their way if they felt abortion was the only choice. After all its not going to have any impact on me, what they do with that pregnancy is going to last the rest of their life. They should be allowed to make the choice that is right for them.

It's not "punishment", it's the logical and natural consequence of having unprotected/careless sex and I think a lot of people seeking abortion on demand, as a means of what I could only call retrospective contraception by the deliberate termination of a pregnancy, the only reason being the want to terminate that life as a matter of convenience, are the same people who are too scabby or stupid to buy & use contraception.

It might not affect "you" but it will affect the lives, or the termination thereof, of many many children who will not be born, who regrettably will have no say in the matter. I am of the view that we will have abortion on demand in this country within 12 months, I accept that, that appears to be what the majority want, although I would NEVER get into a relationship with someone who had pro-abortion views for obvious reasons.

But if the same incoming abortion regime had been in existence in this state 20-30 years ago, (I don't know what age you are), then maybe a very casual & cold decision could have been made to terminate your life at the time. This is what I think we need to factor into this, in our rush to eradicate any inconvenience to our precious little lives these days, regardless of the size of wrong that we have to commit to go back and fix the mess that we made.

HellFireClub

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I do think we'l have a national DNA database in our life times (but not in the next decade). The UK already has 4 million samples!

In terms of the paternity question according to wiki it ranges from (around) 2% for those "low risk" to (around) 30% (where its disputed). So its small for the general population but not insignificant (in 2001 there was only an unemployment rate of 3.6 for example).

In terms of the question I suppose it really depends on how the legislation is worded and how harm/risk is assessed.
For example I heard of a case where a termination/abortion was carried out on mental health grounds in NI (a long time ago too) and in NI it is generally considered to be illegal, however in that case there was pre-existing mental condition(s) apparently.
IMO as the law is applied in Great Britain (its wording is stricter than its application), apart from the increased cost to the state I don't see why a legal "abortion/detachment" from the father should not be allowed.

As things stand, can a father not explore adoption as a way of removing himself from a child's life? It seems strange that, post birth, a mother can make that decision independently of the father, but the father cannot make the decision independently of the mother?

Piliger

HellFireClub wrote: »

It's not "punishment", it's the logical and natural consequence of having unprotected/careless sex and I think a lot of people seeking abortion on demand, as a means of what I could only call retrospective contraception by the deliberate termination of a pregnancy, the only reason being the want to terminate that life as a matter of convenience, are the same people who are too scabby or stupid to buy & use contraception.

It might not affect "you" but it will affect the lives, or the termination thereof, of many many children who will not be born, who regrettably will have no say in the matter. I am of the view that we will have abortion on demand in this country within 12 months, I accept that, that appears to be what the majority want, although I would NEVER get into a relationship with someone who had pro-abortion views for obvious reasons.

But if the same incoming abortion regime had been in existence in this state 20-30 years ago, (I don't know what age you are), then maybe a very casual & cold decision could have been made to terminate your life at the time. This is what I think we need to factor into this, in our rush to eradicate any inconvenience to our precious little lives these days, regardless of the size of wrong that we have to commit to go back and fix the mess that we made.

This is a load of BS and just another scare tactic used by the anti women brigade. Abortion on demand does not amount to people having an abortion as a method of contraception. If you knew women who are about to have an abortion or who have had one you would realise that almost NO woman goes through the process of an abortion lightly. Quite the opposite. And it is a nonsense to go around claiming that they do ro they will.

Your ignorance on contraception is equally unbounded. You clearly are ignorant of the number of teenagers who make mistakes, often because of a clueless lack of sex education by their parents and the education system. You are also ignorant to the number of women who become pregnant out of human error in their management of contraception or their partner's and in their human error in their consumption of alcohol.

To label them all as "too scabby or stupid to buy & use contraception" is offensive in the extreme and indicative of the kind of nasty and immoral tactics of the ant women brigade.

blacklilly

Piliger wrote: »

This is a load of BS and just another scare tactic used by the anti women brigade. Abortion on demand does not amount to people having an abortion as a method of contraception. If you knew women who are about to have an abortion or who have had one you would realise that almost NO woman goes through the process of an abortion lightly. Quite the opposite. And it is a nonsense to go around claiming that they do ro they will.

Your ignorance on contraception is equally unbounded. You clearly are ignorant of the number of teenagers who make mistakes, often because of a clueless lack of sex education by their parents and the education system. You are also ignorant to the number of women who become pregnant out of human error in their management of contraception or their partner's and in their human error in their consumption of alcohol.

To label them all as "too scabby or stupid to buy & use contraception" is offensive in the extreme and indicative of the kind of nasty and immoral tactics of the ant women brigade.

As a women who is pro life I find it funny and confusing how people tend to label pro life people as anti woman. I'm all for women!
It's very selfish to say that a man should have no say if a woman chooses abortion against his will yet if for instance he doesn't want the child he is still legally obliged to pay maintenance for 18 years of that child's life. Therefore men have no choice but you could also argue that if men used adequate contraception the chances of pregnancy would be slim. Same goes for women.
Also I know quite a few women who have had abortions and in each and every case I know of they were not using adequate contraception and a number of them have had more than one abortion
People all too often want to negate personal responsibility due to the inconvenience that pregnancy and parenthood might bring, this is a fact. Abortion on demand allows people become more flippant, men and women included.

Honey-ec

blacklilly wrote: »

Abortion on demand allows people become more flippant, men and women included.

Have you statistics to back up that statement?

Neewbie_noob

MaxWig wrote: »

If the Govt do pass this proposed legislation (X Case), does anyone see a scenario whereby a prospective father might be allowed to abdicate all rights and responsibilities, physical, emotional and financial to the new child, where that father is deemed to be suicidal as a result of the prospect of fatherhood. If not, why not?

I'm not looking for an argument, or any abusive posts.

I'm just curious about the idea.

But if the woman wants an abortion and the father doesn't, could the state not legislate to force the woman to keep the child and give the father custody upon birth and make the woman pay maintenance ??

eviltwin

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

But if the woman wants an abortion and the father doesn't, could the state not legislate to force the woman to keep the child and give the father custody upon birth and make the woman pay maintenance ??

That would never happen, forcing women to carry babies to term they don't want is not something I could ever see anyone suggesting let alone trying to implement. It would just result in women taking matters into their own hands here ( if they were banned from travelling say ) or just having the abortion without telling the father about the pregnancy.

blacklilly

Honey-ec wrote: »

Have you statistics to back up that statement?

Have you any statistics to prove otherwise?


1 in 3 women in the UK will have had an abortion by the age of 45. Now would you say the majority of these abortion are due to foetal abnormalities , suicide risk or just simply abortion on demand?

eviltwin

blacklilly wrote: »

As a women who is pro life I find it funny and confusing how people tend to label pro life people as anti woman. I'm all for women!
It's very selfish to say that a man should have no say if a woman chooses abortion against his will yet if for instance he doesn't want the child he is still legally obliged to pay maintenance for 18 years of that child's life. Therefore men have no choice but you could also argue that if men used adequate contraception the chances of pregnancy would be slim. Same goes for women.
Also I know quite a few women who have had abortions and in each and every case I know of they were not using adequate contraception and a number of them have had more than one abortion
People all too often want to negate personal responsibility due to the inconvenience that pregnancy and parenthood might bring, this is a fact. Abortion on demand allows people become more flippant, men and women included.

I'm always amazed at how so many pro lifers who have such terrible opinions of people having abortions know so many women who have. No offense Blacklilly but you sound like the last person in the world I would want share my abortion story with

jaffacakesyum

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

But if the woman wants an abortion and the father doesn't, could the state not legislate to force the woman to keep the child and give the father custody upon birth and make the woman pay maintenance ??

F*cking hell, are you serious?!

blacklilly

eviltwin wrote: »

I'm always amazed at how so many pro lifers who have such terrible opinions of people having abortions know so many women who have. No offense Blacklilly but you sound like the last person in the world I would want share my abortion story with

But you obviously do want me to take offence but as you don't know me I won't.
Friends of mine who have had abortions have told me, they know my opinions on the matter. I am not heartless and I am sympathetic to any women that goes through abortion and the issues that can arise for them after abortion. I have been a shoulder to cry on many times in these instances which gives me further justification as to why I do not agree with abortion.

Neewbie_noob

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

F*cking hell, are you serious?!

Yes, if the woman wants to keep the child and the father doesn't he is forced to pay maintenance.

If the woman wants the child, the father must pay up because he took part in crating it. If she doesn't, then she can delete it because it's her choice. Double standards.

eviltwin

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

Yes, if the woman wants to keep the child and the father doesn't he is forced to pay maintenance.

If the woman wants the child, the father must pay up because he took part in crating it. If she doesn't, then she can delete it because it's her choice. Double standards.

Its also her body, that's not a double standard its biology.

eviltwin

blacklilly wrote: »

But you obviously do want me to take offence but as you don't know me I won't.
Friends of mine who have had abortions have told me, they know my opinions on the matter. I am not heartless and I am sympathetic to any women that goes through abortion and the issues that can arise for them after abortion. I have been a shoulder to cry on many times in these instances which gives me further justification as to why I do not agree with abortion.

I'm not trying to offend you, its just odd that a woman who has had an abortion would turn to someone who has an objection to it.