Does the abortion debate reveal what some people really think about women?

Dubhlinner

Men and women seem to have no problem arguing that if suicide is grounds for legal abortion, women will fake or exaggerate suicidal thoughts to get what they want. There's a inherent distrust of women, particularly pregnant women, that seems to be innate in some circles.

Its impossible to make reasoned comment about that sort of thinking from a sexism point of view because only women can get pregnant.

What I mean is that if men could get pregnant I don't think these people would be any less suspicious of them faking suicide to have an abortion, and in all likelihood, probably a lot more suspicious. So in answer to the question, no I just really don't think it reveals anything about what people think of women.

And to be quite blunt, I don't see anything wrong with someone faking suicidal thoughts in order to have an abortion. A woman shouldn't have to travel abroad to get one, so given the end result is gonna be the same, it would seem irrational to not fake thoughts if you were content in doing so.

bronte

pwurple wrote: »

You mention adoption as an aside, but I know 4 couples personally who would be utterly utterly delighted to adopt a child. They are approved by the irish adoption board, but have to go abroad to find someone. They would be overjoyed to look after all the night feeds, all the worry for school, every second of it. I don't understand why the adoption rate is so low here now.

Don't get me wrong, I know very well how hard pregnancy can be, and it can even be life threatening in some cases. but why on earth is adoption not even considered as an option anymore? Why? There are open adoptions, and all sorts of options there too.

You don't know why?
Please talk to some women who have given a child up for adoption.
It very often haunts them forever.
They can never make peace with the fact that somebody else is raising their child. It is not as simple as enduring a pregnancy.
I know a couple who wanted to do the night feeds too..and the school worries. My parents. They did it. I ended up having an amazing privileged life because of them...but why is that all people see? What about the birth mother and what she has to live with? Why does nobody think about her? Everyone seems to love this idea of a happy ending. It's a happy ending for me and for my parents...but the next time you trot out the adoption angle...please think about the woman who will live with it for the rest of her days.

pwurple

bronte wrote: »

You don't know why?
Please talk to some women who have given a child up for adoption.
It very often haunts them forever.
They can never make peace with the fact that somebody else is raising their child. It is not as simple as enduring a pregnancy.
I know a couple who wanted to do the night feeds too..and the school worries. My parents. They did it. I ended up having an amazing privileged life because of them...but why is that all people see? What about the birth mother and what she has to live with? Why does nobody think about her? Everyone seems to love this idea of a happy ending. It's a happy ending for me and for my parents...but the next time you trot out the adoption angle...please think about the woman who will live with it for the rest of her days.

And abortion doesn't?

fatmammycat

pwurple wrote: »

And abortion doesn't?

Pregnant women are not incubators for the childless. There are thousands of children in foster and care homes in this country that could do with permanant homes. Women who opt for abortion have no wish to be pregnant/go to term. That's why 'oh what about adoption' generally doesn't factor into it.

lazygal

pwurple wrote: »

And abortion doesn't?

No, it doesn't. Not every woman who's had an abortion is scarred for life. Women like Caitlin Moran have said it was an easy decision with no long term mental health effects on her. Some women do suffer - they suffer in pregnancy, labour and birth too. But its not true to say every woman, or the vast majority of women, suffer for life from the procedure. Having been pregnant, I now know there's circumstances in which I would find opting for abortion the easier option than remaining pregnant.

CaraMay

Thought this thread was supposed to be about people's thoughts on women and not an actual abortion debate

Noffles

CaraMay wrote: »

Thought this thread was supposed to be about people's thoughts on women and not an actual abortion debate

It would appear some people can't seperate the the two...

I've just read through a lot of this thread... it really is depressing, I must be blind, as I NEVER thoght women were treated like this..

CaraMay

Yeah the abortion debate has been done to death and I had hoped to see a good discussion going on the actual topic of the thread but its gone off on a tangent....

username123

pwurple wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, I know very well how hard pregnancy can be, and it can even be life threatening in some cases. but why on earth is adoption not even considered as an option anymore? Why? There are open adoptions, and all sorts of options there too.

This is a very interesting comment and revealing of some of the thinking out there towards women.

I dont want to have children. I dont want to be pregnant. I dont want to suffer morning sickness, back pain, a stretched stomach etc... In short, I dont want to be an incubator, particularly for a child I dont want to have. I dont want an interruption to my career, to my health, to my mental health, to my exercise regime etc....

It is astonishing to me that anyone would think that I should endure such a thing because "sure why not give it up for adoption". And thats not even getting into the long term emotional effects of adoption on the birth mother which obviously will be huge.

In addition to this, as a married woman in this country I dont think there is a legal option for me to "hand a child up for adoption" to the state. So I would be forced to be a parent - something that I dont want to do.

However, lets just take this idea to its full conclusion. Suppose that abortion was outlawed in Ireland, including travelling for abortion. The only options left available for women would be back street abortionists, sticking knitting needles in themselves etc, and adoption. Lets hope the back street abortionists and knitting needle numbers are low, and that instead women opt for adoption. Currently 5,000 women a year travel for safe abortion. Currently Irish adoption rates stand at around 400 a year. (source, source). So allowing that there is a 4 or 5 year backlog on adoption in Ireland, immediately, in one year, there will be places for 2,000 unwanted children to be adopted. What happens after that? 5,000 children going into oprhanages with 400 or so of them being adopted each year? Is this really a solution? In just 10 years, you have ~45,000 unwanted children sitting round in orphanages. Who is going to pay for that? The tax payer? What kinds of places are these orphanages going to be? It really doesnt bear thinking about and anyone who is pro-life clearly hasnt considered the logical end point if we say that women have to have the babies and give them up for adoption.

eviltwin

I'm not surprised that people have such low opinions of women, its hardly new. When it comes to all aspects of sex women are judged. I have direct experience of that being a young unmarried mother at one point, people look at you and make assumptions about your character. No one made those assumptions of my partner despite him also being a young, unmarried parent.

You can't win, you get pregnant and choose abortion your heartless and cruel and all the other worse things I won't print here, keep the baby and you are a scrounger or doing it to get a house. You can't win!!!

Re abortion I can see a definate judgement of women but mainly towards young, single women. I post a lot on a parenting board and have told my own abortion story there and have met mostly understanding but I think people assume because I was married and therefore "respectable" that my decision was a tragic one. I don't think it was any different to any other woman's decision but I'm sure if I had said I was single and it was the result of a one night stand I would have faced a different attitude.

People look on adoption differently but I think thats becasue any baby put up for adoption here will be lucky enough to find a family, put an older child into the care system and you're judged. Would people think a woman who gives up a toddler for example to be great? I doubt it.

eviltwin

pwurple wrote: »

And abortion doesn't?

I had severe post natal depression with both my children, its quite common but no one ever uses that as a reason why women shouldn't go through pregnancy.

eviltwin

eviltwin wrote: »

Would people think a woman who gives up a toddler for example to be great? I doubt it.

If a woman put her toddler up for adoption to give that child a better life, I'd think she was a heroine to be so self sacrificing and brave.

Macha

I agree with the OP that it has revealed some very disappointing attitudes to women (from men and women).

First, the point that's been made that women will lie about suicidal tendencies to get an abortion. If we trust our medical professionals, this shouldn't even be an issue but we back women into a corner and then make preemptive accusations about how they will (understandably, imo) try to get out of that corner. Would I really cry wolf over suicidal tendencies and subject myself to medical examination, or would I just get on a plane to Liverpool?

More generally, there has been a shocking lack of empathy for women (and couples) who are faced with a crisis pregnancy. From what I can see, the main arguments are along the lines of women/couples shouldn't have sex if they don't want to have children or women/couples are heartless and care too much about their lifestyles. I wasn't around during the contraception debate in the 1980s but I imagine similar arguments were used then.

Ultimately, the extent to which some parts of our society expect women to bend over backwards in their role as incubators and child-rearers is incredible. The point to which they think women should give up control over their own bodies in service to these activities is shocking. I think it stems from the idea that this is a woman's primary role and any desire by a woman not to engage in either of these activities is still considered "unnatural" by many.

This is not to say that all people who hold anti-choice views think this way, but I believe a lot of them do.

Finally on the adoption point, my grandmother gave my father up for adoption and it haunts her to this day. The guilt she feels is difficult for her to deal with. To portray this as some sort of simple solution for all is to not understand anything about adoption.

mariaalice

Back to the op....I think it might be cultural thing in Ireland and it is related to a culture of deference that we have.... you do not get it in the UK, for example a woman ( or a man ) speaking up and demanding a good or even a great services is seen at best as cranky or a nuisance there is almost an expectation that you should be grateful for any medical services.

iguana

pwurple wrote: »

And abortion doesn't?

Studies show that it doesn't usually, no. Studies do however show that there is a severe psychological impact usually felt by those who give a child up for adoption.

clairefontaine

Candie wrote: »

If a woman put her toddler up for adoption to give that child a better life, I'd think she was a heroine to be so self sacrificing and brave.

Wouldn't that depend on the outcome? No guarantee adoptive parents will be a better life or that they won't end up on the foster care carousel for years on end.

username123

Candie wrote: »

If a woman put her toddler up for adoption to give that child a better life, I'd think she was a heroine to be so self sacrificing and brave.

Besides the fact that a child may never get adopted and may up in state institutions or foster care until they reach the age of majority, I am sure that many people would judge the reasons a woman would do such a thing in exactly the same way they judge women for wanting abortions. Perhaps if the woman was poor and unable to provide basics (highly unlikely in this welfare state), but what if she decided to give the child up for adoption because she wanted to go to the states and pursue her dream of being a topless model? Can you see how the judgements would be happening?

bronte

pwurple wrote: »

And abortion doesn't?

That you would even try to compare the two shows how little you understand about it.

clairefontaine

clairefontaine wrote: »

Wouldn't that depend on the outcome? No guarantee adoptive parents will be a better life or that they won't end up on the foster care carousel for years on end.

username123 wrote: »

Besides the fact that a child may never get adopted and may up in state institutions or foster care until they reach the age of majority, I am sure that many people would judge the reasons a woman would do such a thing in exactly the same way they judge women for wanting abortions. Perhaps if the woman was poor and unable to provide basics (highly unlikely in this welfare state), but what if she decided to give the child up for adoption because she wanted to go to the states and pursue her dream of being a topless model? Can you see how the judgements would be happening?

Of course it depends on the outcome. Which is why I stipulated she was doing it to provide a better life for her child.

LittleBook

eviltwin wrote: »

Would people think a woman who gives up a toddler for example to be great? I doubt it.

Candie wrote: »

If a woman put her toddler up for adoption to give that child a better life, I'd think she was a heroine to be so self sacrificing and brave.

I would too Candie but would "society"? Unfortunately I have to agree with eviltwin here.

Of course this doesn't apply to all of "society" but, for example ... it's so common for a mother to get full custody (unfairly sometimes obviously) that when the reverse is true and a father has full custody of the children, it's often assumed that there must be something wrong with the mother, some extreme reason why she "gave them up" or was forced to do so ... "why would a mother do that?"

And yet I've read several cases where women have given full custody to the father simply because they know that the father can do better (financially or for other reasons) by the children or to maintain the best possible stability for the children.

I'm not sure the assumptions around an adoption/fostering in the case of an older child would be different.

iguana

Candie wrote: »

Of course it depends on the outcome. Which is why I stipulated she was doing it to provide a better life for her child.

The reasoning behind her action ≠ the outcome to her action. She could give up the baby for the most altruistic reasons in the world, that doesn't mean the child will live a better life because of it.

LittleBook

LittleBook wrote: »

I would too Candie but would "society"?

I was giving a personal opinion, not speaking on behalf of all society, recommending adoption as a preferable alternative to abortion, or otherwise judging anyone who either had an abortion, put a child up for adoption or moved to the states to be a topless model.

Its extraordinary that expressing a fairly pedestrian opinion has garnered the reaction it has.

The reasoning behind her action ≠ the outcome to her action. She could give up the baby for the most altruistic reasons in the world, that doesn't mean the child will live a better life because of it.

And that may be the case. But if a mother gives up a child in the clear belief its in that childs best interest, I don't see why commending that act is a controversial opinion.

Lingua Franca

Candie wrote: »

If a woman put her toddler up for adoption to give that child a better life, I'd think she was a heroine to be so self sacrificing and brave.

I know women who have put their children into care to give them a better life or because they couldn't cope. How many of them do you think are considered heroines for being self sacrificing and brave? By anyone at all?

eviltwin

Candie wrote: »

I was giving a personal opinion, not speaking on behalf of all society, recommending adoption as a preferable alternative to abortion, or otherwise judging anyone who either had an abortion, put a child up for adoption or moved to the states to be a topless model.

Its extraordinary that expressing a fairly pedestrian opinion has garnered the reaction it has.




And that may be the case. But if a mother gives up a child in the clear belief its in that childs best interest, I don't see why commending that act is a controversial opinion.

I would agree, I wouldn't judge any woman who gives up a child but I think in general society sees women as nurturers, we are expected to have this unbreakable bond with our children that giving them up is seen as a flaw on the part of the woman rather than a reaction to her circumstances.

It doesn't even have to be as drastic as adoption, women are judged for leaving their children to work, to go off on holidays with the girls, I've seen women whose relationships break up being judged for having left their children in the custody of their fathers.....society makes an assumption that children belong with their mothers and that if that woman takes extended time away from her kids even if its done in their best interests that she is somehow at fault.

Lingua Franca

Lingua Franca wrote: »

I know women who have put their children into care to give them a better life or because they couldn't cope. How many of them do you think are considered heroines for being self sacrificing and brave? By anyone at all?

Jesus.
Does no one understand the concept of the personal opinion?

I do, and I'm anyone. I don't see why I have to justify the rest of society's view to the contrary, or not.

LittleBook

Interesting article, if I hadn't read it in print I'd have thought that Dr Jones was reading this thread and knocked out the piece last night.

Seeing women as "mothers" skews our abortion debate

Women are referred to as mothers by most contributors to this debate, including during the recent Oireachtas abortion hearings. Catholic bishops spoke about “our two-patient model” for maternity services, meaning woman and child are seen as one unit.

The problem with this is that mother is a role, not a person, and providing medical services for a role is not only sexist but bad practice.

The use of the mother word instead of woman seems normal to most people, because mother is routinely used by the Irish Constitution, the courts and the medical profession. Article 40.3.3 says “The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.” The 1992 Supreme Court judgment in the X case referred to “the real and substantial risk to the life, as distinct from the health, of the mother”. The Medical Council guidelines state, “The Council recognises that termination of pregnancy can occur when there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother.”

Seeing women as mother and foetus-breeding pods, where one cannot be treated without the other, skews any discussion on abortion. Women have the right to be treated as equal, responsible, capable human beings, independent of any roles they may assume. Women are entitled to medical services in their own right, including abortion.

clairefontaine

Motherhood is a free for all of judgementalism. It starts with the + sign on the test. After that you are public property. And everyone is an expert.

Probably another big reason women would choose abortion over adoption.

Lingua Franca

Candie wrote: »

Jesus.
Does no one understand the concept of the personal opinion?

I do, and I'm anyone. I don't see why I have to justify the rest of society's view to the contrary, or not.

Yes, we do. But you said you would think of a woman as heroic and brave in response to this:

eviltwin wrote: »

Would people think a woman who gives up a toddler for example to be great? I doubt it.

And I was pointing out that society doeslooks down on women who give up their children, especially when they've mothered them for a while already. I don't think your personal opinion expressed on a message board is much comfort to these women. I also doubt that you would think they were so heroic and brave if you learned that they were giving up a child they'd mothered for a few years (or in one case, abandoned her teenagers to force them into care) to stay on drink or drugs or in an abusive relationship, but that's just my personal opinion.

Lingua Franca

Lingua Franca wrote: »

Yes, we do. But you said you would think of a woman as heroic and brave in response to this:



And I was pointing out that society doeslooks down on women who give up their children, especially when they've mothered them for a while already. I don't think your personal opinion expressed on a message board is much comfort to these women. I also doubt that you would think they were so heroic and brave if you learned that they were giving up a child they'd mothered for a few years (or in one case, abandoned her teenagers to force them into care) to stay on drink or drugs or in an abusive relationship, but that's just my personal opinion.

You don't know me, so I'd appreciate you not extrapolating to extremes and imagining how I feel about anything.

I expressed admiration for women acting in the childs best interest, not admiration for people who choose to adopt over abort, but that seems to be what people have inferred and responded to. I'm bewildered at the tone of the responses.

And I think I'm done here.

clairefontaine

Candie wrote: »

You don't know me, so I'd appreciate you not extrapolating to extremes and imagining how I feel about anything.

I expressed admiration for women acting in the childs best interest, not admiration for people who choose to adopt over abort, but that seems to be what people have inferred and responded to. I'm bewildered at the tone of the responses.

And I think I'm done here.

Hmnn... "the child's best interests." I heard that phrase tossed around before the childrens' referendum. Another way of saying, whatever the current expert in the room thinks, in other words a screen for adult projection.

I can see how you would admire it, because it is a courageous choice on one level, but on another it is a lottery. Unfortunately people can jump to conclusions that when you admire one choice you are condemning its alternative, even though I doubt that is what you are doing.

At this point I think I'm in neither camp of judgement or admiration, just pure sadness for anyone having to make this so called choice and of course for the lost children.