478 replies to this topic

[Kraftwerk]

I take the pill but I'm also very anxious. A few months ago, I constantly felt sick because of the same thing (and the pills). The doctor said I could be pregnant, and it made things much worse...

 

I wasn't, and now my boyfriend uses condoms APART from me taking the pill. I think it is practically impossible to get pregnant this way, but I still worry all the time. It sucks... especially when you know there are people who would not respect your choice and would even FORCE you to do something you are just not prepared to, don't want or whatever reason you have.

 

I simply cannot understand why people want to force others into doing something that doesn't even affect them. If everyone who is "pro-life" would adopt a couple of kids, donate to (and be part of) sexual education campaigns, give support to women who are passing through this instead of calling them whores who should face their choices etc... I would respect their "pro life" opinion. Otherwise, I don't. I want to respect everyone but I won't ever respect people who don't respect other's rights... (that sounds awful but... you get my point).

 

Fortunately I live in a country where abortion is a right... except for me, since I'm foreigner. In a few months though I'll have the right too, and I know I will feel much better and safer then. 

 

Anyway, this is not about women's rights (I hate that phrase actually) but about HUMAN rights. The right to make a choice. And nobody should force you to do something you don't want to do.

 

P.S. Saying you're pro-choice only if the woman is a rape victim or her life is in danger is like saying people should only vote if they have a career... Everyone has the right to choice and I agree that there are some stupid people who have unprotected sex thinking nothing is going to happen but still, they have the right.

Edited by Kraftwerk, 24 June 2014 - 06:06 PM.

[Cthulhu]

I am pro-choice. 

[Halcyon]

Pro-choice under any circumstance, even if it was consensual. There are enough people in this world and too many children who need homes. Like if a litter of 8 puppies are born, it would mean bad news for 8 homeless dogs in kennels. Also, it's usually those with low iq's in highly populated, low income areas who carelessly get pregnant. Kids learn from their parents and we have enough idiots in the world.

I fail to see how it's any worthy of a life just under conception. Perhaps because it's a human life that people are biased? Because when a small ant gets stepped on, no one shouts murder. And why isn't it mass genocide when a little boy masturbates into a tissue?

[jonis]

Wow, we're actually having one of these threads?

 

Being a "Scandinavian socialist" the choice is already determined, we're pretty much conditioned from birth. I would end up being pro choice I guess although I don't really sympathize with that option. Why I am certain no one is asking oneself?

 

On a large scale term I do not believe it's the government's or any religious institution's right to decide what an individual does with his/her own body on an individual level, as a society today does neither benefit nor detriment from an individual's right to abortion. Hence he/she should be given the options that are available, and abortion of an unwanted fetus is such on option. I won't go in to arguments regarding what's best for the child and so on since they quite often lead to stale mated arguments (an unwanted child can be adopted to families who can't have children etc.). However, I do believe consultations should be scheduled before any abortion as they are with any other surgical procedure.

 

As for women not understanding what an abortion might cause. If their doctor didn't inform them of the risk I'd sue the hell out of him/her. And that right there is yet another reason why I'm pro choice. Abortions should be carried out by medical professionals who knows and can explain the risks. Saying "abortions aren't legal" won't make them go away.

 

Now, on a socioeconomic level I'm a bit more restricted (remember that I live in a welfare country). I'm all for individual rights and the right to make choices, but I'm not all that willing to pay if anyone is going to abuse the system. Using abortions as a contraceptive is a drain on medical resources and funding. It's nothing different from not using seat belts while driving. You don't want to? Fine! Don't come asking me for money to fix you up after a crash though! You don't want to use a contraceptive? OK, but then you should be aware of the risk of being pregnant. I'm not all that happy to bail you out every other month/year.

 

Since abortion really isn't a debate over here it has pretty much turned into a woman's right to chose debate, meaning that the debate nowadays focuses on that it's the woman, and the woman alone, who decides. If we're heading down this route, I'm even more opposed. Two people made the baby, two people should be involved in the discussion. Of course the final say belongs to the woman, it is her body after all (see above), but it's not a one man show.

[Kaddict]

As a med student, and having worked in the med field, I must say a doctor can tell a patient something, but that doesnt mean the patient will understand it or it's implications. I am pro-life, but OF COURSE feel abortions should be allowed in the case of rape or potential complications to the mother's life.

[Kraftwerk]

As a med student, and having worked in the med field, I must say a doctor can tell a patient something, but that doesnt mean the patient will understand it or it's implications. I am pro-life, but OF COURSE feel abortions should be allowed in the case of rape or potential complications to the mother's life.

 

May I ask why you think people who have been raped have more rights than the rest?

Or why the life of a rapist's baby is worth less?

[Kaddict]

May I ask why you think people who have been raped have more rights than the rest?

Or why the life of a rapist's baby is worth less?

The Hippocratic Oath makes you swear to never preform an abortion. It also says to do no harm. For women who will be in danger of death (for instance) forcing her to have the baby would be doing harm. In many instances (not all) the women who is raped would suffer much more psychological trauma by being forced to go through her pregnancy and raise her child. In many instances, mothers have the child and are happy to raise them, but to some, it would be a reminder of an incident that should happen to no one.

 

EDIT: Also, women who were raped had at least 1 fewer right than the rest: The right to chose with whom they will have sexual relations. Also, the choice of when to get pregnant. Many people don't choose the latter, but this right is forcible taken from the victims. The baby isn't worth less, but if it will be a cause of problems for the mother, the mother's life comes first.

Edited by Kaddict, 15 July 2014 - 07:13 AM.

[Sweeney]

The Hippocratic Oath makes you swear to never preform an abortion.

The Limit on Ends is omitted by many medical schools. Plenty of physicians have never sworn to that.

[Kaddict]

It also isn't required to swear to the oath at all. But I will, and I will stand by it to my interpretation of it.

[Sweeney]

It also isn't required to swear to the oath at all. But I will, and I will stand by it to my interpretation of it.

That's fine. It's not a reason, explanation or justification for your beliefs, though, so I don't see why you brought it up.

[Cass]

I'm pro-choice for a number of reasons.

 

For one, the statement that an underdeveloped foetus that isn't capable of living outside the uterus (21-25 weeks is where most countries and states draw the line for this and abortion) is a full life is pretty debatable. 

 

Secondly, there are way too many unwanted children in the world. Forcing a woman that doesn't want a child to raise it also gives the child a pretty shitty live. Putting it up for abortion is obviously the better solution then, but a foster home isn't found for every child.

 

Thirdly, I'm going to give an example that, I agree, is definitely an exception but is an existing scenario. My mother had 3 children WHILE using anti-conception, one of which is myself (in a time when it wasn't yet known that anti conception doesn't work in combination with antibiotics), my youngest brother and one which was aborted. Now, luckily, my mother really really really loves children and didn't mind unexpected pregnancies; she just had me and my brother at very unfortunate times. 

 

When she got pregnant with my aborted sibling, my mother was married to a man from a very religious Christian family. They had sex before marriage (which they obviously hid from the family), and despite protection my mother got pregnant. My ex-stepfather swore that he would leave her if she did not abort it, because otherwise he would be shunned for the rest of his life by his family. This whole shitty situation pressurized my mother into that abortion (although if it had been different, she would've loved to keep the child).

 

See? Not a rape victim, and not someone who carelessly opens her legs without protection. Three children concieved in perfectly stable relationships (they were married for 10 years before divorcing, so I'd say that's reasonably stable). Anti conception just isn't 100% safe. It may be for you, but you'll never know for sure until it goes wrong.

 

Now, yes, abortion should be in my opinion a decision of two. It's not ideal, but I think there should be some arrangement possible that if the mother doesn't want it but the father does, the father should be able to "adopt" the child and the mother pays child support. 

 

As for banning abortion because it involves risks, I think that's a pretty stupid argument. Then we should just be banning breast implants because they have a high chance of causing breast cancer. We should go ahead and ban skydiving because obviously there's a chance of imminent death. People choose to take their own risks.

Edited by cassiopeiic, 15 July 2014 - 10:00 AM.

[Kaddict]

I feel in most cases, abortions are an unnecessary waste of life. A doctor should not be doing harm. Whether you swear to it or not. It is up to each person whether or not an abortion is appropriate, and it is often in a case by case situation. In most cases, I can't justify the waste of life of the fetus vs the discomfort it would cause the mother. It is a tough blanket debate though because there are so many unique situations. This is also why it sucks at the political level. It is usually "Should abortions always be legal vs should abortions never be legal."

[Karla]

I am pro - choice for a few reasons:

One thing that pisses me off is that pro life politicians are willing to defend a child before it's born, yet as soon as that baby's born, those same politicians don't give a shit about it and its mother. They proceed to cut health and education programs for those babies when they get older, and it baffles me that they are willing to let waste away the very lives they swore to protect.

Like several previously stated reasons, birth control and protection doesn't work 100%. And for those women/couples who use protection that failed, they're saddled with the responsibility of taking care of a child that they either can't afford or did not plan to have immediately. I just don't think it's fair to have to spend money, time, and resources on someone you didn't plan on. The choice of whether or not a couple should have a child should really be left to the couple themselves.

[Mizk]

Pro-choice

I don't think anyone should be *required* to have a baby if they become pregnant and do not want it.

There are other, much better reasons for this thinking (i.e. rape baby), but that is the overall statement I am going with.

[Ali]

I feel in most cases, abortions are an unnecessary waste of life. A doctor should not be doing harm. Whether you swear to it or not. It is up to each person whether or not an abortion is appropriate, and it is often in a case by case situation. In most cases, I can't justify the waste of life of the fetus vs the discomfort it would cause the mother. It is a tough blanket debate though because there are so many unique situations. This is also why it sucks at the political level. It is usually "Should abortions always be legal vs should abortions never be legal."

Yes, forcing a woman against her will to continue growing something inside her for 40 weeks, through the huge potentially life-changing physical and emotional consequences that come with that is "a discomfort".

 

Not to mention that you fall down a rabbit hole in what happens after you've forced the poor thing to have the child. Do you have social workers monitor her to ensure she doesn't harm the baby? How long until you consider she's gone from being someone who didn't want that baby to being a fit mother? Where's the funding coming from for this extra support? Or do you just leave her to get on with it? Abandon her despite knowing full well for at least a portion of that pregnancy she quite categorically did not want the child.

 

 

 

Ultimately I am a grown woman with the legal mental capacity to do whatever I want with my life, I'll be damned if somebody else gets to decide what is appropriate for my body to endure. I think abortion is something the UK really gets right, we (supposedly) don't have true abortion upon request but it's highly unlikely you won't be granted one because we recognise that forcing a woman to go through with it runs the risk of permanent injury to their mental health.

[Waser Lave]

I feel in most cases, abortions are an unnecessary waste of life. A doctor should not be doing harm. Whether you swear to it or not. It is up to each person whether or not an abortion is appropriate, and it is often in a case by case situation. In most cases, I can't justify the waste of life of the fetus vs the discomfort it would cause the mother. It is a tough blanket debate though because there are so many unique situations. This is also why it sucks at the political level. It is usually "Should abortions always be legal vs should abortions never be legal."

 

Ultimately for me it comes down to balancing the 'harm' to the foetus (which, in my opinion, consists purely of deprivation of further development since a foetus has no comprehension of what is happening during abortion and from what I've read doesn't feel any pain before around 24 weeks after which abortion tends to be illegal anyway) against the harm to the mother (which consists undeniably of considerable amounts of physical and mental pain over quite a long period of time and then potentially to being bad for the child after birth). Given that, in my opinion as long as the mother (and ideally with input from the father too) is capable of making an informed decision and it takes place within a certain period of time (I think it's 24 weeks here already) then abortion should be an option. After the 24 weeks there are and should also be situations where abortion can still take place if it's in the interests of the mother's health (i.e. it would be life threatening to carry on to full term) or in the interests of the unborn child (i.e. if they have certain developmental problems which will cause suffering after birth).

[Tetiel]

I feel in most cases, abortions are an unnecessary waste of life. A doctor should not be doing harm. Whether you swear to it or not. It is up to each person whether or not an abortion is appropriate, and it is often in a case by case situation. In most cases, I can't justify the waste of life of the fetus vs the discomfort it would cause the mother. It is a tough blanket debate though because there are so many unique situations. This is also why it sucks at the political level. It is usually "Should abortions always be legal vs should abortions never be legal."

You need to be very careful about using that logic when it comes to issues like this. As it sits right now, at least in the United States, legally obtained first trimester surgical abortion is remarkably more safe than full term childbirth. We lose 21 mothers per 100,000 live births according to the CIA world fact book. In comparison, abortions which are had at 8 weeks or earlier have a maternal mortality rate of as little as 0.1-0.6 per 100,000 cases depending on the source (naturally, as the pregnancy progresses, death rates increase significantly). A woman is therefore at least 35 times more likely to die during childbirth in my country than if she were to abort the fetus immediately upon discovery.

Childbirth is messy. It's bloody. There are often complications. It will change her body for the rest of her life. There have been links to fecal incontinence in elderly women associated with perineal tears from labor - yes, that is a tear from the vaginal canal to the anus. There can be fistulas between the vaginal wall to the anal canal which form. They're very serious. They actually happen. A family friend of mine had severe damage to her pituitary due to hemorrhaging during childbirth. She is now on corticosteroids for the rest of her life. If she so much as starts vomiting from something as simple as gastroenteritis, she can die and must be rushed to the hospital to prevent dehydration. Nobody talks about these serious risks associated with childbirth. 

Do no harm applies to the mother as well. As a doctor, you would be doing harm to a patient with an unwanted pregnancy by not informing her of the drastic increase risk to her body the later she chooses to have an abortion, if she does, or if she decides to give birth. Morals be damned - there are clear, definitive facts of the risk of complications and potential mortality that nobody should be forced into.

And for the record, calling even an uncomplicated pregnancy and birth merely "discomfort" means that you have no bloody idea what it actually involves.

[Sweeney]

And for the record, calling even an uncomplicated pregnancy and birth merely "discomfort" means that you have no bloody idea what it actually involves.

They're only training to be a doctor.

[Frizzle]

It's a technically correct term though, in the same way being stabbed is a mild inconvenience.

[Tetiel]

They're only training to be a doctor.

Oh, in the same way I am - but it's my understanding they're a bit further along (and actually in med school?) so it's something they definitely NEED to be thinking about seriously. Thus why I said would rather than are. I tend to talk to people who are in my same field of study as if they were doctors just because they eventually will be. Maybe. Sorry about the confusion.
 

It's a technically correct term though, in the same way being stabbed is a mild inconvenience.

LOL. I love you right now. I sure bet your hand being stabbed was a very mild inconvenience indeed.

[Sweeney]

Oh, in the same way I am - but it's my understanding they're a bit further along (and actually in med school?) so it's something they definitely NEED to be thinking about seriously. Thus why I said would rather than are. I tend to talk to people who are in my same field of study as if they were doctors just because they eventually will be. Maybe. Sorry about the confusion.

 

I think they only cover empathy on your last rotation. It gets glossed over a lot - not everyone's a natural

[WhiteMage]

I'm mostly pro life but it would depend on the situation.

 

If the mother is pregnant but is having a life-threatening situation (like ectopic pregnancy, etc.) which would cause harm to her and the baby then I'm all in for abortion. 

[Sweeney]

I'm mostly pro life but it would depend on the situation.
 
If the mother is pregnant but is having a life-threatening situation (like ectopic pregnancy, etc.) which would cause harm to her and the baby then I'm all in for abortion.

How do you define "harm"?

[Kaddict]

You need to be very careful about using that logic when it comes to issues like this. As it sits right now, at least in the United States, legally obtained first trimester surgical abortion is remarkably more safe than full term childbirth. We lose 21 mothers per 100,000 live births according to the CIA world fact book. In comparison, abortions which are had at 8 weeks or earlier have a maternal mortality rate of as little as 0.1-0.6 per 100,000 cases depending on the source (naturally, as the pregnancy progresses, death rates increase significantly). A woman is therefore at least 35 times more likely to die during childbirth in my country than if she were to abort the fetus immediately upon discovery.

I am clearly aware of risks with pregnancies, and common occurrences afterwards (I have had multiple family members have perineal tears, I feel like this is common knowledge. I have lived with a doctor my whole childhood, and worked in hospitals and doctor's offices since I turned 16. I am not ignorant, and though I will not ever be pregnant, I feel I have had more experience with pregnancies more than most people on this thread). What I am saying is that the termination of life compared to pregnancy makes pregnancy look like a slight discomfort/mild inconvenience (easily remedied and short lasting--typically). The question of abortion should boil down to when you feel life begins (at conception? When the heart forms and beats? Full term?). What really disgusts me are late term abortions. I have heard of instances where an abortion fails, the baby is born alive at the time of the abortion, and they leave the baby to die. That is infanticide, is sickening, and is something that our beloved president has defended on multiple occasions.


EDIT: And Sweeney, that is one of the great questions in the debate, along with when life begins.

Also, going back to preg risks, how do you guys feel about the increasing trend of home birth?

Edited by Kaddict, 17 July 2014 - 09:51 PM.

[Cass]

That is infanticide, is sickening, and is something that our beloved president has defended on multiple occasions.

Thanks Obama!