Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

As stated, childbirth is a dangerous process for the body. If you're in a high income country, you're more likely to be okay (but as Infinis pointed, death rate during childbirth is ridiculously high in the USA for such a high-income country). But if you are not lucky enough to live in the "elite" world? Then your chances of surviving childbirth literally drop.

 

AND! Because sometimes pro-lifers seem more concerned with the embryo/fetus' rights than with the mother's (this is not pointing anyone in particular, just a thought), I'll also say that childbirth is dangerous for the baby itself.  Those are facts from the WHO (take a look).

In lower-middle countries, preterm birth complications are the 8th cause of death (this means that babies born before 37 weeks of pregnancy are more likely to die due to illness and disabilities).

In low-income countries, preterm birth complications are the 8th cause of death too. And birth asphyxia/birth trauma is the 9th cause of death.

What this means is that plenty of babies that are carried to term won't ever make it past a couple of days. 

 

Now, before anyone misinterprets my words, I'm not saying abortion is the solution for this death rates.

I'm just joining others pointing that pregnancy is not trivial. While it can be wonderful, for those who actually want to be pregnant, it causes discomfort, pathologies and even death, not only for the carrier, but also for the baby itself. Why should we force women to expose themselves to these risks ? We cannot debate this strictly from our point of view, which is privileged and biased with our access to a well developed health system (well, I can't speak for the US, but I know Spain's is pretty good all things considered). If a pregnancy is already dangerous for us, it can be lethal in plenty of countries ("99% of all maternal deaths occur in developing countries", still the WHO ). Btw, one of the reasons women in developing countries die during pregnancy is because of unsafe abortion methods. A woman who really doesn't want to carry a fetus will probably try to have a n abortion, be it legal or not. The difference is that clandestinity makes it x times more dangerous. Legality comes with regulation and more safety. And forcing a woman to give birth to a baby that has such high chances of not surviving ? That's just cruel for everyone involved.

 

 

As parting words, just to reinforce everything that's been said, and still taking info from the WHO:

 

Quote

About 830 women die from pregnancy- or childbirth-related complications around the world every day.

 

Every. Single. Day.

Edited by relaks

Share this post


Link to post

Just saying, but it's around 400,000 people who are born every day (ratio for 2018). Death rate through giving birth is then around 0.2%. In some industrial countries, it's way less. (I know that many European countries, including my own, have rates below 0.01%, most others have rates between 0.01% and 0.02%.)

 

Also, your argument perpetuates a very common argument in here: It's okay to kill an embryo because it might not survive anyway. Applying the same logic, it would be okay to kill infants because they might not survive for long anyway (SIDS). It would also be more than acceptable to kill terminally ill people because they most assuredly won't last long anyway. That, in and of itself, is not a valid argument pro choice. (But there are others, which I will gladly accept. But not this one.)

 

13 hours ago, relaks said:

Btw, one of the reasons women in developing countries die during pregnancy is because of unsafe abortion methods.

Another is because the mothers are young adolescents, the mothers don't have access to proper health care or due to lack of hygiene. Two of these reasons are related to local customs (eg marrying off young girls, unhygienic practices surrounding birth). Plus, there's poverty - which, once again, is one of the predominant reasons for women to choose an abortion.

 

Just wondering, is it really acceptable to argue that pregnancy in and of itself is dangerous because of unsafe abortion methods? I think I'll still need to wrap my head around this one.

Edited by olympe
Edited for punctuation. Any other errors are my own.

Share this post


Link to post

Just gonna pop in and say that in some places it is legal for terminally ill people to choose to end their own lives. I firmly believe it should be a choice everywhere, but I digress. The difference is that they are adult human beings with fully developed minds, opinions, and experiences who can choose for themselves whether they want to live or die.

 

The same exact thing could be said about a woman with a dangerous pregnancy - whether that danger come from physical, mental, or environmental factors. The difference is that she is a fully developed human being with her own mind, opinions, and experiences and she should be allowed to decide if she wants to take a risk with her life or not.

 

There's no need to kill infants because we already HAVE options if a parent decides they don't want an infant any longer - giving the child to the other parent, to family, up for adoption... none of them good, mind you, but infants aren't a danger to another person physically. A toddler is not going to result in the mother dying from health reasons. They are their own developed human being with experiences, thoughts, and (vague) opinions. 

 

Anyone who is danger of health issues should be allowed to take steps to avoid them. However small the chance is, it is their decision how much risk/discomfort/etc they are willing to accept - no one else's. A fetus is not fully developed; it does not have its own mind, its own opinions, or its own experience. All of its resources are borrowed from another person. Every single one. Every chemical that flows through it is taken from a parent who has every right to decide what to do with their body and what risks they want to take.

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, Alrexwolf said:

The same exact thing could be said about a woman with a dangerous pregnancy - whether that danger come from physical, mental, or environmental factors. The difference is that she is a fully developed human being with her own mind, opinions, and experiences and she should be allowed to decide if she wants to take a risk with her life or not.

I'm not disputing that in the least. As a matter of fact, I wholeheartedly agree with that - just as much as I disagree with the notion that it's okay to get rid of an embryo because it might die anyway.

I also agree that it should be possible/legal to get your life ended if you want to, and in as painless a way as possible.

 

54 minutes ago, Alrexwolf said:

A fetus is not fully developed; it does not have its own mind, its own opinions, or its own experience.

This is wrong on so many levels...

A newborn isn't fully developed, either. The brain, the immune system, the bones, the visual system, the blood (especially the hemoglobin variants) - there's so much that still has to develop.

Even a fetus has its own mind and opinion. While my daughter was still in my womb, somewhere around the end of the 2nd/start of the 3rd trimester, she already decided she didn't like that musical box (hidden in a brightly colored ladybug plushie) I got for her after it once managed to lull her to sleep on a day she was very active. (She later decided she liked the plushie, as long as it didn't play its music.) She also decided she hated Shakira's Objection (Tango) because she tried to kind of stamp her feet inside of me in the faster rhythm of the song - and totally missed the moments where it stopped. (Boy, did she kick out in anger after the first time that happened! And did she give me some hard kicks whenever she heard the song again!) I don't quite remember how she showed this, but I do remember that she didn't like the song any better after she was born. She already showed discomfort at loud noise while still in the womb, and seemed to like samba rhythms, for some reason, and tried to match them with her own movements.

 

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, olympe said:

Even a fetus has its own mind and opinion. While my daughter was still in my womb, somewhere around the end of the 2nd/start of the 3rd trimester,

 

snipped for reference but you know this isn't the time period of development I'm talking about. I am specifically talking about the first two or three months of development. You know, when abortions are likely to actually happen.  

 

A newborn is fully developed in the sense that they could survive on their own. Yes, they need food, and water, and everything else - but they won't simply die just from existing. The same cannot be said for an early fetus. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Alrexwolf said:

 

There's no need to kill infants because we already HAVE options if a parent decides they don't want an infant any longer - giving the child to the other parent, to family, up for adoption... none of them good, mind you, but infants aren't a danger to another person physically. A toddler is not going to result in the mother dying from health reasons. They are their own developed human being with experiences, thoughts, and (vague) opinions. 

 

 

(bolded for emphasis)

 

This this this. The whole infant/terminally ill/etc comparison is completely off-base because of THIS. I don't think anyone could rationally argue that a terminally ill person is forcibly taking nutrients from another person and endangering that person in a physical way. That's just not a thing that happens. Same with infants. Sure, they could die, they might die soon, etc etc, but they are not *endangering* a separate human's life while they are alive. They are not *directly* causing another person's body to change in ways that could end in that person's death. I honestly don't get how anyone could try to argue that comparison, it's just so completely different. That comparison is taking one tiny aspect- a fetus/embryo's viability- and completely ignoring all the other aspects that make these situations so very very different. Yes- an infant may not live, just as an embryo or fetus may not survive through childbirth. Are they at *all* the same? No, they aren't. The fact that an embryo/fetus may not survive is just one tiny piece of what goes into a pregnancy, what goes into an abortion decision. Pointing out that they may not survive, or that they don't have thoughts/etc, is just *one* little part of why abortions should be available and allowed. It can't be separated from all these other parts and compared to something completely different that doesn't have all those other parts. ... And I confused myself with that sentence, oops. I hope it's understandable what I'm saying: The viability of a completely separate human being is in no way the same as the viability of a fetus/embryo.

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, olympe said:

Also, your argument perpetuates a very common argument in here: It's okay to kill an embryo because it might not survive anyway. Applying the same logic, it would be okay to kill infants because they might not survive for long anyway (SIDS). It would also be more than acceptable to kill terminally ill people because they most assuredly won't last long anyway. That, in and of itself, is not a valid argument pro choice.

Okay, so I admit, if you twist it like that, it's not a good argument.

 

But it is kind of twisting words, for me personally, because I (and many pro-choicers) cannot compare the life of a feeling, conscious and alive person to the existence of an embryo/fetus. I'm not "killing" an embryo any more that I would be killing a tumor. My words may seem callous for some, but this is how I see things. 

I know it's not cut and dry, when an embryo becomes a developing person,  but for the first months, it's a mass of cells that are sucking nutrients from the mother's body. The heart beats? Yeah, if you take myocardial cells and put them on a petri dish, they'll continue contracting rhythmically. That won't make them a sacred life that must be preserved. 

 

9 hours ago, olympe said:

Even a fetus has its own mind and opinion. While my daughter was still in my womb, somewhere around the end of the 2nd/start of the 3rd trimester, she already decided she didn't like that musical box

If you talk about a pretty developed fetus, yes, of course. A 12 weeks embryo? No opinion, no likes or dislikes. No personality whatsoever. 

 

As I said, the limits are not so easy to define. When do we decide that it is not a group of cells but an individual?  There lies the debate. For pro-lifers, I guess, an individual starts at fecundation. That is totally overwhelming for me, I cannot even comprehend it. As you cannot comprehend my views about this, I imagine. 

 

[On that note, I actually think the time limits established in my country are reasonably good (until week 14, total liberty; from week 14 to 22 if there's a risk for the mother or the fetus' lifes; from week 22 to term, only if the fetus suffers anomalies incompatible with life outside the uterus, always with the approval of an ethical committee). ]

 

9 hours ago, olympe said:

Just wondering, is it really acceptable to argue that pregnancy in and of itself is dangerous because of unsafe abortion methods? I think I'll still need to wrap my head around this one.

My point wasn't to say that unsafe abortion methods make pregnancy dangerous. I literally said that it was to point how prohibiting access to safe methods (which only can be achieved with legality) only leads to deaths. Be it in a rich or in a poor environment, if you set your mind on an abortion and cannot legally go somewhere safe, you'll get it done with unsafe methods. 

 

I totally agree that some customs (as marrying young girls) can lead to more unwanted pregnancies, especially in young girls who are not physically prepared to carry a pregnancy, but that's a different problem ???

 

 

As Alrexwolf said:

10 hours ago, Alrexwolf said:

Anyone who is danger of health issues should be allowed to take steps to avoid them. However small the chance is, it is their decision how much risk/discomfort/etc they are willing to accept - no one else's. 

Obviously the risks of dying because of a pregnancy are not that high. Thanks goodness for that. But a woman has the right to decide if she wants to expose herself to that risk, especially if the cause of that risk is something she doesn't even want. 

Edited by relaks

Share this post


Link to post

Good article I just read about the sometimes devastating effects of pregnancy-caused depression and the difficulties of getting abortion in Canada (!!) She was lucky enough to be able to pay and travel (two flights and a hotel room a few provinces away) to get her abortion after searching and searching for a clinic in her province who could do it without making her wait ("calm down, you're just pregnant, not dying"). She's someone who's already had two children.

 

The difficulties of getting an abortion in the States is tenfold. Why do you see this difficulty as a good thing?? You feel like you can make a decision for her that she doesn't need an abortion, because that thing in her is more important than her wellbeing, and her ability to be there for her children, and her husband, and her ability to enjoy life and not suffer from depression, and for her work, and for herself? It causes so much distress in a situation which could affect the rest of your year or your life. And this is from someone who loves their children and has had two.

 

The reasons why someone may want an abortion is so varied and valid. It's genuinely horrible to whitewash the reasons why people would want or need an abortion in favor of the embryo. And even in places where it's legal, you see here how difficult it is to get. We need legal and accessible abortions because at the end of the day, real people need them. 

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-i-wanted-an-abortion-in-nova-scotia-but-all-around-barriers-still/

Edited by High Lord November

Share this post


Link to post

Oh god yes - the Maritimes in Canada are a nightmare. I believe PEI is even worse. Last I heard ALL their OB/GYNs were Roman Catholic...

Share this post


Link to post

..... That article seriously terrifies me. That is *exactly* what I fear if I were to ever get pregnant... Not necessarily that I wouldn't be able to get an abortion ever, but that I would be forced to wait and jump through hoops and travel and do all this different stuff just to be allowed to have one. Because so many doctors assume that it's perfectly fine for a woman to wait, for weeks, if it's not what *they* consider 'life-threatening'. Because so many doctors and insurances and everyone who is *not* the woman being affected assume that they know what's best or what the woman can deal with. I feel so much for that poor woman and it scares the crap out of me to think of being in that position. Just that opening, 'you need to calm down', like really? They really just have no idea what it feels like for a woman with mental issues to feel so out of control and scared. It *terrifies* me to think that people would block me from having an abortion, for weeks, make me travel and carry this thing inside me that is stealing my sanity more and more every single hour it's in me.... That is the scariest thing in the world to me. And is *sickens* me to know that I would be put through all of that just because some random strangers think they should be allowed to control my body. 

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/20/2018 at 11:25 PM, HeatherMarie said:

 

I have to agree with and add to what others have said. While it's good that you agree women should have the choice, you seem to have some misconceptions about how simple that choice can be. As someone above stated, adoption is *not* a good alternative here. Not at all. Do you have any idea how many children in the adoption system are abused? Have horrid lives, are sexually and mentally and physically abused? End up committing suicide? I would *never* willfully put a child into that system, I know way too much about it to ever feel comfortable doing that. Better that a child never live in the first place then to live a life full of fear and pain and *wishing* they were dead. 

 

Also, there is no actual measurement of being 'physically ready' for a child. Perfectly healthy women die during pregnancy or childbirth. It happens a lot more then you'd think, actually. Pregnancy changes the body in so many ways, in so many *destructive* ways, there is really no way to be certain that a woman's body is 'ready' for a child or that the woman will remain healthy throughout the pregnancy. And then of course, even if the body is 'physically ready', whatever that may mean, the mind may not be. Mental health is just as important as physical health, and the woman may not have the mental stability necessary to carry the baby without deliberately putting her own life at risk. .... That's a nice way of saying, if I ever got pregnant I'd easily commit suicide because I literally am not mentally stable enough to deal with that.

 

So the decision to abort or carry to term is much more complicated then you seem to think, involving many different factors that are impossible to put a black and white line on. There is no possible way to say 'if this and this are true, then she should have the baby', because the only one who actually knows what is best for that woman is... That woman. Not me, not you, not doctors, not politicians. Only that woman. 

 

I respect what you guys have said. And, of course, it isn't murder like I said before, but it is destroying possibilities. Yes, the baby could grow up to be Hitler. Yes, adoption can mess a child up. My opinion, however, is that everyone (or every little 'building block' of a human (good words(: )) should have a chance. I'm not saying everyone else should have that opinion. I know that the foster care system is far, far from perfect. But just ask yourself: would you rather have never been born than be adopted? It's kind of a tricky question because there a lot of variables but my personal opinion is that I would want that chance to be happy, even if I might have a miserable life.

 

No idea why I'm adding this on but as a side note it's a little messed up that my dad told me he had had abortions before. To clear up I meant that he had supported and payed for the abortions of many partners before. Thanks for replying, it's nice to be heard. :)

Share this post


Link to post

I am adopted and I can tell you that I would rather have not been born; and I didn't even go through the whole adoption system, I was adopted by a relative at birth. It still messes with you; I can't imagine how much worse it would be for someone in a closed adoption who, say, found out as a teenager. Or, worse, someone in foster care who keeps getting bounced around.

 

I'm not saying everyone who's adopted/was or is in foster care would rather not have been born. I am saying that for every person who wants a chance to be happy, there's an equal amount or even more who never asked for this life and have to suffer the consequences of someone else's choices.

Share this post


Link to post

A lot of people use the 'well what if you had never been born?' thing, but that really doesn't work for those of us who honestly don't care, or who possibly would've actually been better off never born. I can't say that for certain for myself, I know certain people's lives are better because I'm here (like my mother's), but just in terms of my own life and experiences? Never having been born would've saved a *lot* of horrid times for both me and the people around me. It's a horrible thought, a horrible reality, but sometimes people *are* better off never being born in the first place. There are certain situations where I *know* for a fact that I would rather just not exist then have to go through that thing. So yeah, it's possible that the fetus/embryo that gets aborted may have had a fine life, but it's just as possible that they would grow up wishing they'd never been born. All in all, I don't see 'their potential future' as a good reason to *not* abort. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, HeatherMarie said:

A lot of people use the 'well what if you had never been born?' thing, but that really doesn't work for those of us who honestly don't care, or who possibly would've actually been better off never born. I can't say that for certain for myself, I know certain people's lives are better because I'm here (like my mother's), but just in terms of my own life and experiences? Never having been born would've saved a *lot* of horrid times for both me and the people around me. It's a horrible thought, a horrible reality, but sometimes people *are* better off never being born in the first place. There are certain situations where I *know* for a fact that I would rather just not exist then have to go through that thing. So yeah, it's possible that the fetus/embryo that gets aborted may have had a fine life, but it's just as possible that they would grow up wishing they'd never been born. All in all, I don't see 'their potential future' as a good reason to *not* abort. 

 

This so much. I know I wish I wasn't born a fair bit... and I was *supposed* to be wanted.

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.