Abortion

ME - posted on 07/14/2009

Right...and just because right wing publications claim that PP is the devil, doesn't make it so.

ME - posted on 07/14/2009

Quoting Christa:

Quoting Mary:

I've talked about my sister in another thread, so briefly...She just graduated from college (magna cum laude :), and got engaged to her long time bf. She had not found a job yet, and lost her insurance through my parents when she discovered she was pregnant. No insurance...so the only place she could afford to have a medical pg test to confirm the pg was Planned Parenthood. NO ONE pressured her to have an abortion, they told her the service was available there, she told them she wasn't interested, and NOTHING more was said. PP is not the devil...they are there to help women who have no other resources...get over it!

 

It's good that your sister had a good experience but there are many women who have very different stories.  And they are the #1 advocate for abortion, they are the biggest lobbyist for abortion.  Come on Obama was making them promises and speaking at their events, because of how much money they throw around.  They do make most of their profits from abortion, so to me that is a major conflict of interest.  When a company is making millions off of killing babies, why would I trust them to give women honest unbiased information.  The facts are there plain as day, so I don't think that they are out for the best choice for the mother.  If abortion numbers were reduced because of legislation they would loose millions.  You know they aren't making much money off giving girls the pill and testing them for HIV.  They couldn't survive off just that.  If they also made money off of women carrying babies to term, then I would say they were unbiased.  But they don't, they make very little money off a women who decides to keep her baby.

 

Every corporation in America’s #1 focus is selling their product to stay in business, well PP’s product is abortions.

 

Yes...I agree...who gets to lobby our elected officials and with how much money is a serious problem in this country...but I don't see what that has to do with abortion rights. There are far worse offenders (oil companies, gun lobbies, etc...), and while I'm all for changing these rules, it doesn't change my mind about a woman's right to make a private medical decision with her doctor.

ME - posted on 07/14/2009

I believe that the law here is up to the 14th week...or in the case of physical risk to the mother it can be done later.

Cathy - posted on 07/14/2009

What is the actual law regarding abortion in the US?

UK abortion law

Abortion is legal in the UK up to the 24th week of pregnancy. However, if there is a substantial risk to the woman's life or if there are foetal abnormalities there is no time limit.

To comply with the 1967 Abortion Act, two doctors must give their consent, stating that to continue with the pregnancy would present a risk to the physical or mental health of the woman or her existing children.

Christa - posted on 07/14/2009

Quoting Mary:

I've talked about my sister in another thread, so briefly...She just graduated from college (magna cum laude :), and got engaged to her long time bf. She had not found a job yet, and lost her insurance through my parents when she discovered she was pregnant. No insurance...so the only place she could afford to have a medical pg test to confirm the pg was Planned Parenthood. NO ONE pressured her to have an abortion, they told her the service was available there, she told them she wasn't interested, and NOTHING more was said. PP is not the devil...they are there to help women who have no other resources...get over it!

It's good that your sister had a good experience but there are many women who have very different stories.  And they are the #1 advocate for abortion, they are the biggest lobbyist for abortion.  Come on Obama was making them promises and speaking at their events, because of how much money they throw around.  They do make most of their profits from abortion, so to me that is a major conflict of interest.  When a company is making millions off of killing babies, why would I trust them to give women honest unbiased information.  The facts are there plain as day, so I don't think that they are out for the best choice for the mother.  If abortion numbers were reduced because of legislation they would loose millions.  You know they aren't making much money off giving girls the pill and testing them for HIV.  They couldn't survive off just that.  If they also made money off of women carrying babies to term, then I would say they were unbiased.  But they don't, they make very little money off a women who decides to keep her baby.

Every corporation in America’s #1 focus is selling their product to stay in business, well PP’s product is abortions.

?? - posted on 07/14/2009

I am pro-choice. I think no one has any right to tell a woman that she can not have an abortion or that she should have an abortion. Someone said something about laws that say when abortion is alright and when it's not - if those laws were to pass, laws should also pass that people can be subjected to mandatory infertilization. Men who rape - balls chopped off - women who spread their legs after every drink that's bought for them - crotch sewn up - drug dealers, drug users, alcoholics, abusers, anyone living in poverty, anyone that by "society"s standards doesn't have the moral, finacial or emotional standing to raise a child they should not be allowd to have children.



I don't mean to offend anyone by saying this but not a single person on this site, in this country, in any other country - I don't care if God himself came down and told me I couldn't have an abortion - if I felt that it was what was right, I would find a way to do it. No I have never had an abortion, no I don't think I would ever want or need an abortion - I'm just saying hypothetically.



If crackheads, heroin dealers, abusers, rapists, child molesters, George W Bush war mongers have the choice to have babies, then any woman should be allowd to have the choice to not have a baby.



In many situations the woman is doing the responsible thing by terminating her pregnancy. And to anyone who says "give the baby up for adoption." You go give your baby up for adoption. I think that is the most unrealistic stance on abortion but being mothers we should know VERY well how it feels to bond with your child in your stomach and to give birth. Even if a child wasn't wanted, or conceived by rape, or the mom is unable to care for that child in any of the ways a child needs - choosing adoption over abortion leads to more unwanted babies being bonded with and then kept in a "home" where they are not provided for because "mom is making the best of it" since she bonded with the kid.



I know people who have had abortions and I know people who have chosen not to have an abortion when it was contemplated very seriously - more of the women who chose abortion are A LOT happier than the ones who kept their babies. Their children are well taken care of but those moms didn't want to be moms just yet, and now they are at times resentful, bitter and distant to their children.



Abortion is an option, it's a priviledge - just like having a baby is an option and a priviledge. And there is no one in this world that has any right to revoke either of those priviledges in my opinion.

Sarah - posted on 07/14/2009

Oh i see! Maybe not a popular view, but to me it sounds like a good thing!
Women without health care need birth control and things too.
Do you have to pay for birth control?? :)

ME - posted on 07/14/2009

It's a place for women without health care to get free/low cost gynocological care, birth control, and abortions.

Cathy - posted on 07/14/2009

I would have thought it's like our family planning clinics?

Sarah - posted on 07/14/2009

Sorry for being dense, but what exactly is Planned Parenthood?? :)

ME - posted on 07/14/2009

I've talked about my sister in another thread, so briefly...She just graduated from college (magna cum laude :), and got engaged to her long time bf. She had not found a job yet, and lost her insurance through my parents when she discovered she was pregnant. No insurance...so the only place she could afford to have a medical pg test to confirm the pg was Planned Parenthood. NO ONE pressured her to have an abortion, they told her the service was available there, she told them she wasn't interested, and NOTHING more was said. PP is not the devil...they are there to help women who have no other resources...get over it!

Sara - posted on 07/14/2009

Thanks, i'm interested in looking at them.

Sarah - posted on 07/14/2009

In the UK it is free on the NHS so guess the money making thing doesn't really apply here. Tho it does mean that some women can see it as a form of contraception as mentioned before. To be honest tho, i doubt it is used that way too often. :)

Sara - posted on 07/14/2009

Christa, where did you get the information about the monetary gains of certain facilities? I'd be interested to read that info for myself.

Jocelyn - posted on 07/14/2009

hmmm, well, i'm not quite sure where i stand on this issue, so if i sound a bit hypocritical, bear with me :)
now, since i've had my son, i believe that under normal circumstances, i would not have an abortion. but if i were raped, yes i would (i am married and i read a comment above about your hubby having to watch your belly grow, knowing that it wasn't his, and i just couldn't do that to my husband). that being said, when i was 15 i got preg (thankfully i had a miscarriage, and no offense intended for anyone who has had a miscarriage, but there was no way i was ready for a child, so i would have ended it by abortion anyways).
i don't have a set belief on when i think life starts, i've read that it begins the moment of conception, but then i read that the soul finally enters the baby's head when it is being born, and everything in between. for me personally, i don't really "feel" pregnant until i feel the baby move, so it would be much easier for me to have an abortion before i felt it move, as opposed to after. that being said, i am not in support of late trimester abortions, unless there is a medical reason for it (moms health is in great danger, baby has some horrible disease, where it wouldn't being able to live a proper life ie, one filled with pain, or it's missing organs etc).
now, if you are using abortions as a form of birth control (i had a friend in high school who did this) or you have gotten more than 2 abortions (not due to medical reasons) then as far as i'm concerned keep your fricken legs closed, or you should be made to have your tubes tied (i would even go so far as to suggest sterilization in extreme cases, like 5 or more abortions). i don't think that having cheaper birth control (or free) will help all that much, because you are still going to have the sluts that like to go "bareback" (like my friend in highschool, and believe me, she was bad, i mean, i was fairly slutty too, but i was always safe about it, she just didn't care)
i also think that if you have an abortion (any type for any reason) that you should be provided with free councilling, i mean, there has GOT to be emotions that need to be worked thru after the fact.
so there is my long ramble, hope it makes sense.
OH i do have a question for those of you in the states, i heard that in order to get an abortion, they make you listen to the heartbeat beforehand to try and get you to change your mind, is that true?

ME - posted on 07/14/2009

Quoting Esther:

I think a very big part of preventing abortion is also fighting poverty. I would bet almost anything that by far most abortions happen in lower income groups.

SO TRUE! Did you know the abortion rate has gone up in the US since the recession began in 2007...health care reform, and better public/social health care here would certainly help as well!

Esther - posted on 07/14/2009

I think a very big part of preventing abortion is also fighting poverty. I would bet almost anything that by far most abortions happen in lower income groups.

ME - posted on 07/14/2009

Quoting Emily:

My views on abortion have changed significantly after dealing with unexplained infertility and having children. I think it should be legal but really only used in extreme circumstances with therapy and others involved in the decision. Second and third term only when absolutely necessary.

My twins were concieved through IVF (I hope nobody is insulted by this...if so I respect that and am sorry...I am Catholic so I get it but ya gotta do what ya gotta do sometimes). I believe that life starts at the blastocyst stage as those cells are multiplying, multiplying, multiplying. I didn't before but I considered myself carrying a human life as soon as those embryos were placed back inside of me.

Something that I think is of utmost importance here is that we are the kind of mothers who will be realistic about what COULD happen to our children in the future. They COULD make the mistake and find themselves pregnant. Being against abortion is one thing...but being so against it can lead a teenager to opt for an abortion because they are too fearful to talk to anyone in their family. There are many parents out that that are unapproachable about the topic...and it is those kids who end up having abortions. Our job is to be the type of parents who will guide our children toward making choices other than abortion if they do end up in the situation. Easy to think, "Not MY child!" But seriously that is the type of thinking that would drive a choice of abortion. Am I making sense.

This group is AMAZING!!

I completely understand where you are coming from...my views on abortion mellowed a little when my younger sister lost her baby at 6 months...I truely wish there was some way to change our culture to make abortion less prevelent...but like I said, the only logical way I can see is to improve community education and community support for women who choose life! If we make it easier for women to make that choice, maybe fewer abortions will take place. As someone else said above, very few women make this choice lightly, and if we gave them a REAL option, maybe they wouldn't feel so ALONE!!!

Emily - posted on 07/14/2009

My views on abortion have changed significantly after dealing with unexplained infertility and having children. I think it should be legal but really only used in extreme circumstances with therapy and others involved in the decision. Second and third term only when absolutely necessary.



My twins were concieved through IVF (I hope nobody is insulted by this...if so I respect that and am sorry...I am Catholic so I get it but ya gotta do what ya gotta do sometimes). I believe that life starts at the blastocyst stage as those cells are multiplying, multiplying, multiplying. I didn't before but I considered myself carrying a human life as soon as those embryos were placed back inside of me.



Something that I think is of utmost importance here is that we are the kind of mothers who will be realistic about what COULD happen to our children in the future. They COULD make the mistake and find themselves pregnant. Being against abortion is one thing...but being so against it can lead a teenager to opt for an abortion because they are too fearful to talk to anyone in their family. There are many parents out that that are unapproachable about the topic...and it is those kids who end up having abortions. Our job is to be the type of parents who will guide our children toward making choices other than abortion if they do end up in the situation. Easy to think, "Not MY child!" But seriously that is the type of thinking that would drive a choice of abortion. Am I making sense.



This group is AMAZING!!

ME - posted on 07/14/2009

Quoting Mary:

Sarah brings up an excellent point...it is NOT possible to judge each individual case as it presents...the biggest factor in this being time. It is why I believe that abortion needs to remain legal, and available to all women. If the government of any country tried to mandate criteria that must be met to justify a women's choice or need to abort...well, by the time such documentation was assembled by her and her MD, and then presented to the appropriate judicial authority....often times, it would be too late. This is especially true in the case of the mother's life/health being in jeopardy. There are no clear cut absolutes in medicine, and it would be close to impossible to develop a "list" of conditions that warranted a late term abortion. Every obstetrical "expert" out there would never completely agree...and for almost any case out there, you could always find one or two medical "experts" who would give a dissenting opinion from the rest. This happens every day with OB malpractice suits...both sides dig up expert witnesses who will support their arguments, and you have non-medical people, be they judges or juries, listening to these arguments and trying to determine right from wrong. Bottom line is that these cases are rarely decided on the medical facts or merits, but rather on emotion.

This is exactly the point I made in the thread on the other debate page. Having worked with teen moms who were victims of rape, family abuse, incest, and drug addiction; girls who have stories that most of us couldn't imagine in our wildest nightmares, I see no way to write a comprehensive law on this issue. Therefore, my best advice on how we can compromise, is by making sex education and community support MUCH better. Help young women avoid unwanted pregnancies by making birth control free (or nearly free). In Boulder Co there was a womens clinic where the pill cost 5$ and medical care was given on a sliding scale...it was a wonderful community resource! Unfortunately, nothing like this was availble to these girls, and there were no supportive pro-life people hanging around to help these little girls (who all had their babies with them).  There were very limited social programs (govt run) that really didn't do enough, because they couldn't have survived on their own without our agencies help. I'm not saying that I wish these girls hadn't had their babies...they were all beautiful. However, I cannot imagine being the one that told them they HAD to carry to term a baby that was the result of being raped and held hostage for 3 months. I also cannot imagine being the child of a meth addict, spending my whole childhood moving from my mom's to a foster home, back to my moms. I have never been in such a position personally, so I don't know what I would have done if I was one of these girls. I just don't think that the people on capital hill...SO far removed from this type of life, should be the ones making the rules!

Alison - posted on 07/14/2009

I believe that life begins at conception, but I'm not sure when conception actually begins. I personally think it begins when the embryo gets into the womb rather than when it becomes an embryo because it can't start growing into a baby until this point. However, I do still have a guilty concience sometimes because I use the mirena coil and this can prevent an embryo from planting itself. I have also used the morning after pill when I was younger before I believed in anything.



Obviously the above comments mean that I would never consider abortion as an option for dealing with an unplanned pregnancy. My son wasn't planned and I didn't want to have a baby, but I was scared of the consequences of abortion even before I became a Christian. Now I know I made the right choice because I wouldn't change my son for the world. Having said that, I don't judge others and I have no desire to lobby the government to change the abortion law.

Mary - posted on 07/14/2009

Sarah brings up an excellent point...it is NOT possible to judge each individual case as it presents...the biggest factor in this being time. It is why I believe that abortion needs to remain legal, and available to all women. If the government of any country tried to mandate criteria that must be met to justify a women's choice or need to abort...well, by the time such documentation was assembled by her and her MD, and then presented to the appropriate judicial authority....often times, it would be too late. This is especially true in the case of the mother's life/health being in jeopardy. There are no clear cut absolutes in medicine, and it would be close to impossible to develop a "list" of conditions that warranted a late term abortion. Every obstetrical "expert" out there would never completely agree...and for almost any case out there, you could always find one or two medical "experts" who would give a dissenting opinion from the rest. This happens every day with OB malpractice suits...both sides dig up expert witnesses who will support their arguments, and you have non-medical people, be they judges or juries, listening to these arguments and trying to determine right from wrong. Bottom line is that these cases are rarely decided on the medical facts or merits, but rather on emotion.

Sarah - posted on 07/14/2009

I think the problem with abortion is that it should probably be judged on each individual case, and that's just not possible.
What one woman sees as a 'good' reason may not be what another woman sees as a good reason. Hence you have to have to have universal 'rules' about it, and no-one is ever going to be fully happy with them. It's too much of a grey area. :)

Erin - posted on 07/14/2009

Quoting Cathy:

Quoting Erin:

On a personal level, despite being pro-choice, abortion is not something I would consider at this point in my life. The reason I am a single mother is because I refused to follow my ex's request to terminate. Our circumstances were complicated though, so I would certainly understand another woman, if in the same situation, choosing to have the abortion. It wasn't right for me, but I would hate to not have had that option.

I was in the same position with my first pregnancy. The descision is never so easy when contraception has failed to do its job, you're being told to abort and  feel completely alone. I consider myself to be a strong person and continued with the pregnancy because I felt I could do it. I would not want 1st term abortion made illegal because I know that not every woman capable of coping in that situation.

Exactly... A different woman if faced with the same situation may well have felt abortion was their best (or only) option. I'm a strong, capable woman with an education to fall back on and a lot of family support. Not everyone is so lucky.

Cathy - posted on 07/14/2009

Quoting Erin:

On a personal level, despite being pro-choice, abortion is not something I would consider at this point in my life. The reason I am a single mother is because I refused to follow my ex's request to terminate. Our circumstances were complicated though, so I would certainly understand another woman, if in the same situation, choosing to have the abortion. It wasn't right for me, but I would hate to not have had that option.

I was in the same position with my first pregnancy. The descision is never so easy when contraception has failed to do its job, you're being told to abort and  feel completely alone. I consider myself to be a strong person and continued with the pregnancy because I felt I could do it. I would not want 1st term abortion made illegal because I know that not every woman capable of coping in that situation.

JL - posted on 07/13/2009

I am Pro-Choice. I cannot say 100% that could never have an abortion because I have not ever been put in situtation where that would be an option for me. I have been pregnant only twice and in both situations my children were planned. I do not agree with abortion being used as a form of birth control and abused by women. I do wish that we could regulate this someway in which all sides could be satisfied. I do not agree with late term abortions unless their is a medical necessity and once again I wish we could devise laws that would satisfy both sides on this issue because I think it has to be horrifying to be told that your unborn child is dead or dying and that your life is at a great risk or your chances to have another baby are at a great risk if you continue the pregancy and it would make these situations worse if laws made it legally difficult for doctors to provide women and their families with all their options during such a difficult time.



My husband and I with both my pregnancies discussed what we would do if God forbid I was put in the horrifying situation in which I was told during my second and third trimester that something was wrong and that if I continued the pregnancy my life was at risk. My husband in both pregnancies said he would choose my life without question end of story. With my first pregnancy I said if my child could in any way be saved I choose the baby. We got into a heated discussion because he said he could not continue on without me and raise a child on his own. He said we could have more kids but he could not have another me. We never agreed but thankfully we never had to deal with it. During my second pregnancy the same fight insued, but I saw things in a different light and even though it killed me to say it I eventually agreed with him on the subject because I thought about the child I had at home and how I needed to be there for her. I think abortion is such a gray issue and both sides of the aisle can bring up compelling stories but at some point we do need to come together and push our political leaders into doing what is right for us as a nation not what is right for the pro-choice and anti-abortion advocates, because as long as we let lobbyist and organizations speak for us we will continue to focus on the polarizing extremist rhetoric that prevents us from coming to some middle ground.

Joy - posted on 07/13/2009

Sorry Traci and everyone else who cringed when they saw the topic! I cringed a little at the thought myself, but I also knew we would be able to get our ideas on the table and keep it civil. I have to say that on this one, I've learned a few things from some of you who have the opposite opinion of me, and in my book that's a good thing. I'm always open to learning, especially on a topic like this one. Like Christa has said, we in this room who stand on different sides of the issue, are able to have a decent conversation and even give and take and compromise on both sides a little. I wish our government here in the US would do the same thing. Just sit and discuss...instead of it all being about politics and policies and lawyers and technicalities. Open discussion is the healthiest form of learning, which is why I'm so proud of us. I almost didn't start this topic earlier but, I figured we've been everywhere else and survived each other's differences...why not here? Thanks for keeping the gloves off ladies, and for being so well spoken and passionate....both sides :) I can't say it enough....we friggin' rock lol

Traci - posted on 07/13/2009

Let me just say this first...I am so glad this convo is staying so civil. I cringed when I saw this convo started and I have to say, way to go ladies :)!!!!



I am pro life. My period is a mess, very irregular, so with all three of my pregnancies I had to have an ultrasound to get my due date. At 6 weeks along, I saw my baby's heartbeat on that ultrasound. Six weeks. Many women don't even know they are pregnant that early on, which means the abortion they are undergoing is stopping a beating heart. I just cannot agree with that. I don't think the arguement is about legislating morality, stopping a beating heart is ending a life, I don't understand the whole morality arguement there. Not too many people think murder is okay, let alone such an innocent life. I also don't agree with the "gov't telling me what I can do with my body" arguement. Your body ends where your baby's begins, in my eyes. Scott Petersen was tried for the death of his wife and his unborn child, wasn't he? That baby should have the same rights as any other person, whether they have seen the light of day or not. There, of course, is a difference if the mother's life (not "health") is in danger. That is so rare, though, that is not what this debate is about.



I also think that it undermines our civil society to kill our offspring. I mean, animals do that, not humans. Abortion also breeds a culture of irresponsibility. We always hear about the back alley abortions back in the day, but I highly doubt there were as many of those back then as there are legal ones now. When something is legal, it becomes an accepted practice, people look at it differently. That's what Roe v Wade has done, taken away much of the taboo of aboriton.



That's just my feelings. I know this is a touchy subject, so no hostility is meant in anything I've said. It's kind of something I feel very strongly about, especially since I've had children of my own. :)

Jenifer - posted on 07/13/2009

Quoting Christa:

That's what I don't understand. I think 2nd and 3rd term abortions should be illegal except when either the mother's life is in danger, or there in 100% certainty that the child won't take it's first breath. And I agree with Joy, except for rare situations the healthy baby should be given a chance to survive outside of the womb. The way I feel about the babies that are born with diseases/disabilities that might limit their life, I don't think those should be aborted. While I understand how hard it would be to give birth to a child they think will only last a month, a week, a day, miracles happen all the time. I think that baby should be given a chance and see what happens. I equate it to, God forbid your child get's diagnosed with cancer and is give a month to live, you wouldn't kill it to spare it that month of suffering. You would do EVERYTHING you could to prolong that life whether it by a day, a week, or a year. I think the babies in the womb should be given the same chance. I know I would rather spend 1 hour with my sick baby then just kill it, either way you have to mourn your dead child. Anyway I do think we could get legislation that would account for the health of the mother and the child in the 2nd and 3rd trimesters and make the rest illegal. The fact that they are still legal really disgusts me with our society. I think everyone with a brain and a heart can admit that by that stage in pregnancy that is a living human not a "cluster or cells".

Like I said originally, if it were up to me they would all be illegal, period. But I am willing to compromise to at least reduce the amount of blood spilled. If we could save just one baby that's a start.

The sad thing about the abortion debate in America is that - as someone who is strongly pro-choice - there is very little you've written here with which I disagree. One thing I'd say differently is that I'd include the option of termination for cases of very poor quality of life and no chance of recovery (of course, I favor euthanasia in some cases as well, so maybe that's why). And yet this issue polarizes American perhaps more than any other. 

Allison - posted on 07/13/2009

Esther - I absolutely agree.

Erin - posted on 07/13/2009

I haven't read any other posts but I'll give my opinion first :)

I'm very much pro-choice, and in no way do I see it appropriate for any government to make abortion illegal. In saying that, Australian laws only allow for termination beyond 12 weeks if it's medically-indicated. I DO have a problem with late-term abortion without a serious medical reason. And I DO have a problem with women using abortion as a form of contraception.

On a personal level, despite being pro-choice, abortion is not something I would consider at this point in my life. The reason I am a single mother is because I refused to follow my ex's request to terminate. Our circumstances were complicated though, so I would certainly understand another woman, if in the same situation, choosing to have the abortion. It wasn't right for me, but I would hate to not have had that option.

Mary - posted on 07/13/2009

Hmmm...thought about letting this one ride, as I don't have enough time in the day to type out all my thoughts on this, which are conflicting at best. Summed up, I personally would never chose to abort...I had no prenatal testing other than the 20 week anatomy scan for that reason...and I purposely chose to work in a Catholic institution to avoid having to deal with abortion on a professional level...didn't want to be a part of it as a nurse. However, I vehemently support a women's right to chose. I am anti-abortion, but remain pro-CHOICE. Perhaps a tad hypocritcal, but it is where I stand.



The one thing I want to address is the "mother's health in jeopardy" issue that has popped up. What everyone needs to remember is this...sick momma, sick baby; dead momma, dead baby. This may sound harsh, but when you are pregnant, YOU are your baby's life support system...a fetus is essentially a parasite living off of you, and if you get sick, your body's defense mechanisms kick in, and will gradually stop supporting that baby in an effort to protect itself. As the mother's health declines, so does that of her unborn child. Last week I took care of a patient who became severely preeclamptic at 22 weeks. While uncommon, it can happen. Viability does not begin until 24 weeks, and despite our best efforts, there was no way we were going to get 2 more weeks out of that pregnancy without killing the mother...in which case that baby would never survive either. This was a much desired pregnancy, and the family was VERY Catholic and pro-life. However, the mother was extremely sick, and continuing the pregnancy was only going to make her worse, and jeopardize her chances at survival. After 24 hours, the decision was made to induce labor, and she delivered her little girl, whome she named Hope, within 10 hours. Hope lived for about an hour, and was held in the arms of her loving family well past the moment she took her last breath. Within a day, the mother's health was drastically improved, and she is back to her pre-pregnant state of health today.



Technically, this was an "abortion" in the medical sense...but in my heart, I know that it was the only responsible option, and I have no misgivings about having been a part of her induction or delivery. Remember, I work in a Catholic hospital, and despite the CHurch's stance on the sanctitiy of life, there was no debate by the ethics committee about how to proceed; there was no question about what the appropriate plan of care was, or whose life was a priority....allowing that pregnancy to continue would have only ensured that the mother got sicker, and possibly died...the baby was never going to survive, even if we had kept her pregnant longer...her body would have either done it's best to expel it, or ceased all circulation to the placenta. I reiterate that I believe that this was the absolute right thing to do, but I also acknowledge that at it's very basest level, this WAS an abortion, and a decision was knowingly made to terminate that baby's life prematurely.



Wandering a bit here I know...again, little sleep deprived. I think the point I'm trying to make is really to the pro-life faction that finds the above situation an "acceptable" exception. I just want you to realize that this is still ending a life, and is really a form of euthanasia. Don't be fooled or comforted by the argument that it was necessary to save the mother's life. Letting God decide would have been allowing the pregnancy to continue, and letting that child live out it's "natural" timespan inside, until the mother's body either aborted it, or ceased to live.

Esther - posted on 07/13/2009

Allison - I agree that it's still a great country. I chose to be here for a reason. Doesn't mean every country doesn't have it's flaws or that we couldn't learn from other countries.

Allison - posted on 07/13/2009

Our government has it's issues, no doubt about that. But all said and done there's is nowhere else I'd rather be than right here in the United States of America!!

Esther - posted on 07/13/2009

Quoting Christa:

So here's my question? I don't want to get into the rights and wrongs of abortion, I've already said my feeling on those. But I want to know, it appears most of you agree that there are many cases where abortions shouldn't be allowed. So why can't we ever get legislation that could limit the abortions that are performed? We can include the exceptions you all have mentioned, but why when this goes to legislation there is never any compromise? It appears we all want the amount of abortions reduced, so why can’t we get that done?

You know - I think politicians also get a lot of mileage out of this controversy on both sides. If a compromise was struck, they would not be able to use the issue to bring out their voters anymore.

Allison - posted on 07/13/2009

Quoting Sara:

Allison, thanks for the numbers. I wasn't trying to attack what you had previously said or anything like that, I just guess I and no one I know would be so flippant with abortion, so while I know it's how there i wonder how prevalent it actually is to be soooo irresponsible with your body.

No worries.  I just didn't want anyone to be left with the impression that I thought anyone who had an abortion was disgusting because I didn't say that.  To be clear, I am pro-choice as I believe the gov't doesn't have the right to tell me what to do with my body.  We as women and as human beings need to take the responsibility of choice very seriously.  And not be so 'flippant' about the decision.  I think we both agree on all that!!

As far as why we, (meaning the gov't) can't figure this out.  I'm not too politically charged but I would say that, in part, every polititian has consitituents who feel very strongly about this.  If  you go left the right side won't re-elect you.  If you go right the left side wont re-elect you.  So, they bury the subject for as long as possible and when it does come up just be vague so that none of your constituents get mad.  Oh, and let's not forget the lobbyists behind the scenes. . . someones supporting something behind the scenes that we are not seeing. . . likely on both sides. . .  .

Esther - posted on 07/13/2009

Yeah, on prostitution we are pretty liberal. I'll give you that. Prostitutes even have their own union (I think it's called something like the "red thread") - hahaha

Sara - posted on 07/13/2009

I got into a discussion with my friend's Dutch parents about Prostitution, they made me feel very conservative on that one! :) But I meant no offense, I don't think the Dutch are out there or anything...they just in my experience have very liberal views...not complaining!

Esther - posted on 07/13/2009

Quoting Sara:

Esther, in my experience with the Dutch, they make me and liberal friends look like Bill O'Reilly! :)

Sara - posted on 07/13/2009

Esther, in my experience with the Dutch, they make me and liberal friends look like Bill O'Reilly! :)

Esther - posted on 07/13/2009

I will definitely agree with you that it is more than a "cluster of cells" we are talking about here and as I said in my original post, I find the whole issue of abortions to be a very difficult one.



Another thing I wanted to mention is that despite abortions being non-controversial and legal in the Netherlands, Holland has the lowest rate of abortions in the world (or at least it did last time I looked, pretty sure it's still at the bottom), so "liberal" legislation does not automatically lead to high abortion rates.

Esther - posted on 07/13/2009

In The Netherlands there are laws governing abortions and although I would have to look up the specifics, I'm pretty sure it's illegal after the first trimester except in very extreme situations. I think the reason they were able to legislate it there and not there though is that there it has never been the hot button issue that it is in the US. I think in the US things have gotten so heated and so polarized that both sides are afraid to give a finger for fear the other side will take the whole hand.

Joy - posted on 07/13/2009

Quoting Jenifer:

Joy, I don't think that cases in the 2nd or 3rd trimester where c-sections are a viable medical option are the ones that end in partial-birth abortion. Lots of women are induced early for that reason. I may be wrong, but I think that late-term abortions for the mother's health are mostly cases where the mother wouldn't survive childbirth or a c-section. I came across this woman's blog last year on her late-term abortion, as case where delivery wasn't possible:
http://www.uppercasewoman.com/wastedbirt...

That's one of the saddest things I've ever read.  It made me go wake my son from his nap just to hug him tightly and thank my lucky stars I was never faced with that woman's choice. 

Abby - posted on 07/13/2009

joy, i say all i did, but we refused allllllllll the tests we were offered, i would rather not know than worry. but if they picked something up on a scan or general blood test then god knows what i'd do.

(so happy ur lil man is fine and that ur not at risk category)

i worried throughout my whole pregnancy and was convinced i was gonna lose him, even in labour i thght something was gonna happen!! if i had something else to worry about then god knows what i'd have been like(if i hadnt felt him move for an hour id wake him up he he)

it's a diff subject, people can come out and say it's wrong it's always wrong, but is it wrong to bring a baby into the world, and have them live off morphine for the 2 weeks their alive?? who knos hey!!

Jenifer - posted on 07/13/2009

Joy, I don't think that cases in the 2nd or 3rd trimester where c-sections are a viable medical option are the ones that end in partial-birth abortion. Lots of women are induced early for that reason. I may be wrong, but I think that late-term abortions for the mother's health are mostly cases where the mother wouldn't survive childbirth or a c-section. I came across this woman's blog last year on her late-term abortion, as case where delivery wasn't possible:
http://www.uppercasewoman.com/wastedbirt...

Joy - posted on 07/13/2009

I know Abby. I thank God every day that my son is healthy as a horse. I always say my cousin is one of the strongest women I know. Her daughter had Cystic Fibrosis and my cousin fought, literally FOUGHT for 26 years to keep her daughter alive. She died in 2007 and now Debi is going through this horrible grief. Not only for the loss of her child, but because she has done nothing for so long but work and struggle to keep her child alive, that now she dosn't know what to do with herself. But the thing is, if she had been given the option to abort, I'm pretty sure she wouldn't have. Back then, the genetic testing in utero wasn't done like it is now. Because it runs in my family, they tested me for the genetic markers for CF when I was pregnant with Jacob. It wouldn't have mattered to me one way or another, as far as whether I would have aborted.....I wouldn't have even considered it. Thank God I was low on the scale (zero markers) and Jacob is fine. I couldn't imagine knowing that my baby was deathly ill before he/she is even born. It's something that, like you, I hope I never have to deal with and I feel for the women who do have to deal with it.

Abby - posted on 07/13/2009

abortion is killing a child....there's no 2ways about it for me, and i dont agree with people having them becasue it is not the right time to have a baby, to be honest i dont think anyone ever is ready for their first child!!!



however, if the child is not gonna live a pain free life for whatever reason, if a baby is gonna grow up only knowing pain, if that child wont ever leave hospital...then could i bring a child into this world knowin that child would only ever feel pain???then im not so sure!



there are so much higher cases of people with special needs because back int he day there wasnt the meds there are today! and in theory the medical system is failing itself becasue these children survive, but then live with pain and constant medication. and then some of them get abandoned by their parents cos they cant cope...



i dunno in this situation if it is wrong or right, but i wouldnt want to be a parent in that situation!!! xx

Joy - posted on 07/13/2009

Personally, I think that if a woman's health is at risk, in the second or third trimester, they should just go ahead and do an emergency c-section, save the mother and at least give the baby a CHANCE to live. That to me would be a more humane option rather than aborting. But that's just my personal view on the late term thing. But when it comes down to it, I'm able to step away from my personal opinion and understand that not everyone sees things like I do. Compromise would be nice, but it's not likely to happen unfortunately. That's why I'd rather see it legal and safe, than illegal and medieval.

Cathy - posted on 07/13/2009

What would happen if a woman in late stage pregnancy was told of complications that mean it's a choice, either she dies or the baby dies? If it's decided that late abortion of a healthy baby is illegal and the mother chooses to save her own life, what would happen? Most people may think that is reasonable grounds. What if the father is devout catholic and then threatens that doctor with legal action for killing his unborn child? This is not a "black and white" issue, as Joy said.

Joy - posted on 07/13/2009

I think the major thing stopping compromise is the emotional aspect that we all attach to this issue. Whether you're pro life, or considering an abortion, emotions come into play. With the other things I mentioned, it's pretty black and white. Cigarettes are harmful. Studies prove it. But they still let us choose to do it because the government can tax the shit out of it and make a bunch of money. Same with every other regulated thing I mentioned. If the government could convince enough people that smoking pot should be legal, you bet your butt the government would be regulating it and making a ton of money from it. Abortion is sticky though. There is no money in it for the government. So they keep their fingers out of the pot, so to speak, except to say whether it's legal or not, and that is only because the people DEMANDED it. Does that make sense? I hope so because right now I'm running on maybe 5 hours sleep in the past 2 nights and my head is fuzzy lol Should have taken a nap when Jacob did this morning but nooooo....