Abortion

[JavaTigress]

14 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

Oh yes, very much agree! I've been told it's because there have been cases of women who sued doctors because they got their tubes tied and then later decided they wanted a baby, which is frankly ridiculous, if you consent to the procedure and sign the forms you have no right to sue! But yes, for whatever reasons it is horribly difficult for a younger woman to get that procedure done. Doctors will outright refuse to do it on younger women. Even worse, there are doctors who insist that 'if you get married maybe your husband will want children', *that* is horrid. It's ridiculous and horrible that some doctors seem to think a *potential* future husband should have more say in the woman's medical procedures then the woman herself! 

 

I definitely agree that if a woman knows for a fact that she'll never want to bear a child, or would never be capable of going through the pregnancy, then she should take steps to eliminate that option, ie have that procedure. I definitely think a woman needs to be responsible enough to realize that it's better to do that procedure then to risk getting pregnant down the line and having to abort. Unfortunately, that procedure is simply not an option for many women. Doctors refuse because she's 'too young' and 'may change her mind' etc etc. Also, many insurances won't cover that at all, or only if it's deemed 'medically necessary' because of some disease or something. As much as I *never* want to get pregnant, I can barely afford rent, I certainly can't afford to pay for that procedure myself. And that's a huge issue in general when it comes to medical care, there are things that *could* be done to prevent pregnancy but it's so expensive that it's not even an option for many women, and insurances don't see it as 'necessary' so they won't pay a dime.

 

Some of that ought to change, IMO.

 

Like... IF a woman can get an abortion on the grounds that it is her body and she should be able to do what she wants to with it, WHY shouldn't the same logic apply here. Inconsistent IF you ask me. As I said, I personally think that the situations that lead to abortions are tragic at best and would prefer to see ways of reducing the perceived need for them.

[Cecona]

so Georgia just passed the heart beat bill which makes abortions illegal if there is a detectable heart beat, which occurs after only 8 weeks. This.... I just can't. For the women that find out they are pregnant at 6 or so weeks basically only have two weeks to think it over, and then there are the women that don't find out until after the 8 week mark who have absolutely no choice in the matter. The law also gives citizenship to fetuses! Meaning they are counted in the population and can be written on your taxes as a dependent. They are literally giving more rights to something that may not even survive than it's already established mother! Please can we discuss this?

Edited May 7, 2019 by Cecona

[Fuzzbucket]

Well, I am 100% with you. It's appalling. But discussion will only bring in the Right to Force A Woman to Carry An Embryo No Matter What brigade - also known as Right to Life. But to them, the woman's life doesn't count, only the cells.  They can't see any point of view other than that of the bunch of unborn,  unconscious, unviable cells. As for the dependent thing - that's terrifying. Men will be forcing women to get pregnant just so they can claim tax breaks.

 

Suddenly the mess that is the UK just now looks sane.

Edited May 8, 2019 by Fuzzbucket
Great Big Typo.

[spatio]

I just read about those new 6-week laws.  It's horrific.  As I saw someone put it, 6 weeks pregnant literally just means your period is 2 weeks late.  Whenever I talk to my family about how bad these kinds of laws are, they're always so nonchalant.  "Well, we can afford to fly you wherever you need to go to get an abortion if it becomes illegal here, so don't worry about it!"  Like, that is not an option for so many people.  Pisses me off.

 

But, going back to the previous topic, women's health is so messed up.  I have a condition where, unless I'm on hormonal birth control constantly, my periods will eventually become so severe and unending that I will bleed to death.  Literally.  I have come close to dying a few times.  It's bad news.

So, I tried talking to my doctor about a partial hysterectomy.  Because being on drugs for the next few decades is A.) expensive, and B.) has potential for side effects.  "But, you're so young!  You might change your mind and want kids!"

Like, even if I wanted kids, what?  Did you miss the part in my file where it's birth control or death by exsanguination?  This pro-birth mentality has gone entirely too far.  It trickles down into all aspects of a woman's access to healthcare (even for someone like me, who's light years away from even being able to get pregnant).  And, I fear it's only going to get worse.  The state I live in just elected a super conservative, anti-choice governor.  It's terrifying.  If the kind of hormones I need to live get knocked off of insurance because the US has sunk deeper into theocracy, and I can't pay out of pocket, I'm gonna be one of those statistics.

[JavaTigress]

8 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

Men will be forcing women to get pregnant just so they can claim tax breaks.

But I mean... can't that sort of pressure happen anyway?

 

Like... COULDN'T a man push his wife to have kids purely for the tax breaks? 

 

At said, my thoughts on what @spatio said are this. FIRST... Questioning exactly when life starts is a FAR cry from taking away any and all birth control. So please, please PLEASE do NOT lump everyone that so much as dares to think that abortion is NOT an unmitigated blessing or even * gasp* questions the ethics of the thing, somehow wants to go full scale take all birth control away. Admittedly there MIGHT be those that do, but that is the extreme, I would think and not that common. Many are much more reasonable than that. Saying this as someone who also sort of depends on BC hormone pills for other reasons than BC. Furthermore... I don't see how they CAN refuse to pay ( at least in part) BC in cases like yours where that isn't even the primary reason for taking it. Especially if there were definite statements by your doctor stating it was necessary to your health/life and such.

 

For myself  don't like the idea of abortions and would rather see fewer of them needed. Just saying.

 

AND i cases like yours, spatio, hysterectomy should totally be an option.

 

Sorry... getting off my soap box but I LOATHE being lumped with the hardcore anti-BCers

Edited May 8, 2019 by JavaTigress

[spatio]

1 hour ago, JavaTigress said:

 

@spatio

Furthermore... I don't see how they CAN refuse to pay ( at least in part) BC in cases like yours where that isn't even the primary reason for taking it. Especially if there were definite statements by your doctor stating it was necessary to your health/life and such.

 It has already happened. My doctor wrote my insurance two letters of medical necessity and they still refused to cover it.  I ended up having to get a new insurance.

 

I apologize if you feel I lumped you or others in unfairly with the extreme anti-BC crowd. It has simply been my experience with my health (and living in the conservative-leaning US South) that there is a slippery slope that can quickly lead to fewer and fewer protections for women simply seeking reasonable healthcare (not even related to availability of abortion).  When legislators and their personal beliefs instead of doctors and their patients are more and more in control of what a woman can and cannot decide about her body, there can be consequences beyond reasonable abortion restrictions.

 

...not quite sure why mobile won't let me un-ping myself with that quote lmao

Edited May 8, 2019 by spatio

[JavaTigress]

8 minutes ago, spatio said:

 It has already happened. My doctor wrote my insurance two letters of medical necessity and they still refused to cover it.  I ended up having to get a new insurance.

 

I apologize if you feel I lumped you or others in unfairly with the extreme anti-BC crowd. It has simply been my experience with my health (and living in the conservative-leaning US South) that there is a slippery slope that can quickly lead to fewer and fewer protections for women simply seeking reasonable healthcare (not even related to availability of abortion).  When legislators and their personal beliefs instead of doctors and their patients are more and more in control of what a woman can and cannot decide about her body, there can be consequences beyond reasonable abortion restrictions.

And I will be fair, too and state that it is possible that is more of a problem in some parts of the country than others ( The law being referenced, I believe , was in Georgia...) 

 

If I may... I am a bit surprised at the insurance company, however. Seems like THEY are part of the issue as well IF you ask me. At is a bit off topic , however.

 

I WILL simply say too, that I THINK maybe conservative in the South is a somewhat... different animal... than is a conservative in Yankee land. Something to keep in mind.

I have run into that with issues as regards race, as well.

Edited May 8, 2019 by JavaTigress

[Cecona]

The law passed in Georgia and like 13-15 other states are in the process of trying to get it passed as well. I understand that where you live it might be rare for people to be against abortion and birth control, but in my experience and the experiences of the women around me, the people that want to ban abortion also want to ban birth control. They don't understand or care that it is used for reasons other than preventing pregnancy. They see it as a way for women to sleep around, be loose, and basically disobey god. That's what most of it boils down to, bible says it's bad so there for it must be. It's the same reason they want to refuse rights to the LGBTQ+, and some even want them to be killed. It's this backwards kind of thinking that refuses progress and puts people in danger, and worst of all the people with this kind of mindset are the ones in power. As much as you might not like it, Abortion is something that must be accessible in order to provide the best care for women. Making it harder to get only puts those women at risk. It might seem evil to you but it is a necessary evil. The life of the already established mother takes higher priority than a 6-8 week clump of cells that have just as much a chance of ending up non-viable as they do ending up as a living baby. A heart beat alone does not equal life.

[Sazandora]

I'm gonna be honest here, ever since I was a teenager I knew I'll never want children. To me babies and toddlers are like weird screaming aliens that I don't understand and don't know what to do with them. Besides, I know I'd be a terrible mother and I don't want to pass on my faulty genes and have someone else suffer because of it. I feel glad to live where I live because it's not run by idiots who think God and everything the "good book" says comes before women's rights. Really feels like the world is going one step forward, but then a million steps backwards.

[ValidEmotions]

Can I come in and just point out that this Heartbeat Bill does not exclude cases of rape or incest? So the 11-year old girl who was recently raped and is now pregnant cannot, under any circumstance, abort a really unwanted and dangerous-to-her pregnancy. 

[Cecona]

3 hours ago, ValidEmotions said:

Can I come in and just point out that this Heartbeat Bill does not exclude cases of rape or incest? So the 11-year old girl who was recently raped and is now pregnant cannot, under any circumstance, abort a really unwanted and dangerous-to-her pregnancy. 

That is the most disgusting part of this, it doesn't care what the reason is. I think the ONLY exception is if the mother is in immediate danger from the pregnancy, I'm not even sure if they will do it if it's dangerous for the woman later on in the pregnancy. It's horrible, it's backwards, it doesn't take into account ANYTHING about women's health. The only thing it does is cause more harm, more deaths, more unwanted children, more people that will end up abused and unloved, and wishing they HAD been aborted. It's the sad, sad truth.

[JavaTigress]

1 hour ago, Cecona said:

That is the most disgusting part of this, it doesn't care what the reason is. I think the ONLY exception is if the mother is in immediate danger from the pregnancy, I'm not even sure if they will do it if it's dangerous for the woman later on in the pregnancy. It's horrible, it's backwards, it doesn't take into account ANYTHING about women's health. The only thing it does is cause more harm, more deaths, more unwanted children, more people that will end up abused and unloved, and wishing they HAD been aborted. It's the sad, sad truth.

 

9 hours ago, Cecona said:

The law passed in Georgia and like 13-15 other states are in the process of trying to get it passed as well. I understand that where you live it might be rare for people to be against abortion and birth control, but in my experience and the experiences of the women around me, the people that want to ban abortion also want to ban birth control. They don't understand or care that it is used for reasons other than preventing pregnancy. They see it as a way for women to sleep around, be loose, and basically disobey god. That's what most of it boils down to, bible says it's bad so there for it must be. It's the same reason they want to refuse rights to the LGBTQ+, and some even want them to be killed. It's this backwards kind of thinking that refuses progress and puts people in danger, and worst of all the people with this kind of mindset are the ones in power. As much as you might not like it, Abortion is something that must be accessible in order to provide the best care for women. Making it harder to get only puts those women at risk. It might seem evil to you but it is a necessary evil. The life of the already established mother takes higher priority than a 6-8 week clump of cells that have just as much a chance of ending up non-viable as they do ending up as a living baby. A heart beat alone does not equal life.

I don't mean there AREN'T people opposed to both. just one doesn't automatically mean the other.

 

AFTER ALL... extramarital sex aside. BC can be a useful thing for MARRIED women as well. So...

 

As for me personally, while I don't believe in having extramarital sex ( And therefor don't have it myself) I understand that not everyone believes as I do and... anyway, sometimes people make regrettable choices. I would much RATHER they used birth control and DIDN'T need to have an abortion than otherwise. Again. I realize that not everyone thinks as I do, as you pointed out... just clarifying my views on it.

 

I also agree that IF the law isn't flexible enough to allow for something to be done in at least certain cases, then yes , that is absolutely a problem. (The example of the eleven year old that was raped and ended up pregnant comes to mind. An extreme example, BUT it makes the point well enough)

Edited May 9, 2019 by JavaTigress

[ValidEmotions]

13 minutes ago, JavaTigress said:

 

I don't mean there AREN'T people opposed to both. just one doesn't automatically mean the other.

 

AFTER ALL... extramarital sex aside. BC can be a useful thing for MARRIED women as well. So...

 

As for me personally, while I don't believe in having extramarital sex ( And therefor don't have it myself) I understand that not everyone believes as I do and... anyway, sometimes people make regrettable choices. I would much RATHER they used birth control and DIDN'T need to have an abortion than otherwise. Again. I realize that not everyone thinks as I do, as you pointed out... just clarifying my views on it.

Well, see... rape isn't extramarital sex and.... well the girl is 11 years old. I don't think "did you remember to take Birth Control?" applies to this kind of situation.

 

EDIT because: you made an edit. Kind of feel free to disregard my reply?

Edited May 9, 2019 by ValidEmotions

[JavaTigress]

4 minutes ago, ValidEmotions said:

Well, see... rape isn't extramarital sex and.... well the girl is 11 years old. I don't think "did you remember to take Birth Control?" applies to this kind of situation.

I was primarily addressing Cecona's post, however, i have went back and edited to include some your specific example as well. 

Agreed that rape isn't the same as consensual sex at ALL. 

 

 

Edited May 9, 2019 by JavaTigress

[Sundew]

5 hours ago, ValidEmotions said:

Can I come in and just point out that this Heartbeat Bill does not exclude cases of rape or incest? So the 11-year old girl who was recently raped and is now pregnant cannot, under any circumstance, abort a really unwanted and dangerous-to-her pregnancy. 

I'm not sure which state's bill you're talking about, but from what I've read on Georgia's proposed bill, an exception can be made for the results of rape or incest when a police report has been filed, or for pregnancies that pose significant risk to the mother. I read this here.

[Cecona]

1 hour ago, JavaTigress said:

 

I don't mean there AREN'T people opposed to both. just one doesn't automatically mean the other.

 

AFTER ALL... extramarital sex aside. BC can be a useful thing for MARRIED women as well. So...

 

As for me personally, while I don't believe in having extramarital sex ( And therefor don't have it myself) I understand that not everyone believes as I do and... anyway, sometimes people make regrettable choices. I would much RATHER they used birth control and DIDN'T need to have an abortion than otherwise. Again. I realize that not everyone thinks as I do, as you pointed out... just clarifying my views on it.

 

I also agree that IF the law isn't flexible enough to allow for something to be done in at least certain cases, then yes , that is absolutely a problem. (The example of the eleven year old that was raped and ended up pregnant comes to mind. An extreme example, BUT it makes the point well enough)

 

Just want to address the birth control part of this post, nothing else. As wonderful as it would be if everyone could have birth control to prevent abortions, it doesn't always work and actually a lot of abortions are preformed on women who's birth control failed. Unless we were to live in a completely perfect world there is no way we would be able to avoid all abortions being preformed. The best we can do is educate everyone and provide access to proper care. Which is not making abortions illegal.

[JavaTigress]

6 hours ago, Cecona said:

 

Just want to address the birth control part of this post, nothing else. As wonderful as it would be if everyone could have birth control to prevent abortions, it doesn't always work and actually a lot of abortions are preformed on women who's birth control failed. Unless we were to live in a completely perfect world there is no way we would be able to avoid all abortions being preformed. The best we can do is educate everyone and provide access to proper care. Which is not making abortions illegal.

*Nods* I know that what we have isn't perfect. BUT that isn't any reason NOT to use it. More importantly not to know HOW to use it.

 

It also isn't any reason they ought not to look for new and better methods that fail less often. 

 

Are we going to be able to prevent ANY abortions from being performed... sadly, NO. Not even making it illegal can accomplish that, from what I have been given to understand.  IF desperate women feel the need for them badly enough, they WILL happen, regardless of the risk... and regardless of what anyone else thinks. I understand, that much. But if better knowledge an more education can reduce the need for them... then absolutely that is what we need to do. What bugs me are the cases where ignorance is the issue and an abortion could have been made far less likely if people had had better information. So yes, I can totally agree with you in that we DO need to be educating people, and doing more research into the subject. You hear about some of the ignorant ideas some people have about how the human body works sexually and it is like... they have no idea and of COURSE they are going to run into trouble. IF we are giving people a choice, that only works if they also have information to make an informed one. NO excuse for the kind of ignorance you sometimes hear about.

 

Is that naive and idealistic? Perhaps, but that is what I think.

Edited May 9, 2019 by JavaTigress

[Cecona]

I don't think anyone should disagree that better education on the subject is needed and would go a long way in preventing many abortions and unwanted pregnancies. Sadly not everyone has the sense to go and do research themselves because the people that told them the bad info or kept the info from them are people they trust like a parent or a teacher. they assume the person that told them know better.

 

My older cousin believed for the longest time chickens bred like fish because that's what a farmer told her.

Edited May 9, 2019 by Cecona

[TCA]

I'm just gonna drop this here:

 

I feel like most people who don't agree with abortion being legal and accessible... THINK they support a ban because they don't want 'baby murder', but end up supporting policies that are more consistent with punishing women for having any sort of sex.

[Cecona]

I'd also like to add a few things. So, this bill's exceptions are utterly ridiculous, starting with the rule for women that were raped where they require a police report. This puts some women in the position of asking themselves "should I accuse the man I love of rape so I can get an abortion?" At the moment only about 7% of all rape accusations are false, and if this bill passes that number will rise just for the sake of being able to get an abortion. And what if it ends up the man is ruled not guilty, will that reverse it and make the abortion illegal? Then we have the exceptions of women that will die or get permanent irreversible injuries from the pregnancy, which has to be confirmed by a doctor that could easily misdiagnose and tell you that you'll be fine. Same goes for if the child ends up being stillborn or in a vegetative state. If it's possible to reverse the damage, no abortion, if it will eventually heal up, no abortion. Know what else I learned? This rule does NOT include mental illness. A woman that is mentally unstable and could end up committing suicide over being pregnant, giving birth, or being forced to raise an unwanted child is not considered a case for abortion because it would be her own action to take her life and there for does not count.

 

I dare someone to tell me this bill is supposed to be for the greater good.

[HeatherMarie]

40 minutes ago, Cecona said:

I'd also like to add a few things. So, this bill's exceptions are utterly ridiculous, starting with the rule for women that were raped where they require a police report. This puts some women in the position of asking themselves "should I accuse the man I love of rape so I can get an abortion?" At the moment only about 7% of all rape accusations are false, and if this bill passes that number will rise just for the sake of being able to get an abortion. And what if it ends up the man is ruled not guilty, will that reverse it and make the abortion illegal? Then we have the exceptions of women that will die or get permanent irreversible injuries from the pregnancy, which has to be confirmed by a doctor that could easily misdiagnose and tell you that you'll be fine. Same goes for if the child ends up being stillborn or in a vegetative state. If it's possible to reverse the damage, no abortion, if it will eventually heal up, no abortion. Know what else I learned? This rule does NOT include mental illness. A woman that is mentally unstable and could end up committing suicide over being pregnant, giving birth, or being forced to raise an unwanted child is not considered a case for abortion because it would be her own action to take her life and there for does not count.

 

I dare someone to tell me this bill is supposed to be for the greater good.

 

Yeaaaaahhh. Goodness, the more I think about this bill the worse it gets. 

 

I won't address the mental illness issues since I've said my piece on that many times already. But the whole idea of being required to *file a police report* in order to be allowed to get an abortion in the cases of rape or incest... It's ridiculous. It's downright DANGEROUS. The people who've worked on this bill obviously have no clue what actually goes on in a family when incest happens. They have no clue the lengths many families will go to to make sure their perfect image isn't soiled by 'accusations'. Filing a police report? I personally *know* people who would've been *killed* by their family if they'd gone to the police. Incest and rape is a very big 'shame' issue when it comes to many families and they will do anything it takes to keep it quiet. Filing a police report is often not an option in any way. And let's not forget that a lot of non-familial rapes are still committed by people the victim knows in some capacity. How many people out there keep quiet because the rapist is a co-worker, or boss, or community leader? Because they *know* that they will be blamed, insulted, possibly even attacked, if they try reporting it? So this bill is going to ADD to all that already-present trauma by saying 'nope, you can't get an abortion unless you risk your sanity and maybe even your life by filing a police report!' That's.... *screams*

[ValidEmotions]

We can't forget that this bill and police are going to specifically target WOC and women of poverty. 

Has anyone seen the sections that criminalizes miscarriages? And criminalizes women who go out of state to get a legal abortion (although, I think the language specifies criminalizing the doctors--who live in another state--for providing legal abortions)?

 

EDIT to add: For the conservative men and women who are excited to have this bill because "life starts at conception and abortion is murder" -- how do you feel about going to jail for second degree murder because you (or your wife) had a miscarriage?

Edited May 11, 2019 by ValidEmotions

[JavaTigress]

2 hours ago, ValidEmotions said:

We can't forget that this bill and police are going to specifically target WOC and women of poverty. 

Has anyone seen the sections that criminalizes miscarriages? And criminalizes women who go out of state to get a legal abortion (although, I think the language specifies criminalizing the doctors--who live in another state--for providing legal abortions)?

 

EDIT to add: For the conservative men and women who are excited to have this bill because "life starts at conception and abortion is murder" -- how do you feel about going to jail for second degree murder because you (or your wife) had a miscarriage?

Thing is...miscarriages can happen and it isn't USUALLY anybody's fault. 

So absolutely NO to women being punished for having miscarriages.

I would add that I believe even the scripture, if you believe in such, may imply there IS a difference. In the Old Testament Law, there is Exodus 21:22-23. Admittedly, there are differences on the translation and interpretation, here, but one commonly accepted interpretation is that if a man caused a woman to have a miscarriage, he was to receive a punishment ( often a fine payed to the husband of the woman) but that if the woman herself survived he wasn't punished as a murderer. if the woman , herself died as a result, on the other hand, then he received the penalty of a murderer. As I said, there are disagreements on this and there are those that say no it refers to premature birth. At said, interesting and worth considering. The research i did indicated that Jewish tradition has been arguing over that particular passage for a while... well before we Christians had to deal with it. So NO you absolutely cannot say that scripture teaches a woman ought to be punished for miscarrying. NO.

Edited May 11, 2019 by JavaTigress

[deathwisp]

I just read that Georgia will go after women who leave the state to get a legal abortion and return. 

 

[spatio]

Thing is, I'm not entirely sure how Georgia plans on enforcing that?  People travel between states all the time, and it's not like every time someone gets pregnant they report it to their local law enforcement.  They'd have to require the doctors in other states to report back to GA authorities that a woman from GA had an abortion, and I'm not an expert on politics, but I'm pretty sure one state can't make a law applicable only to people who don't even live in that state.  The only way they would know would be if GA ob/gyns had to report that their patient appears to have miscarried/aborted a pregnancy the Dr. was previously were unaware of, and that sounds like a major patient privacy violation. 

 

So... I guess it's just for people who feel like turning themselves in, or people maliciously reporting other people?  Even then I'm not sure how they could prove one person's claim that another person had had an abortion without, again, some major patient privacy law violations.

 

And literally wtf on making miscarriage illegal? So, even if you really wanted a baby, and had planned on a pregnancy, but got in a car accident/etc and were severely injured and ended up miscarrying, you'd be punished on top of your health care bills?  I need to read this for myself.  Because, if that's the case, that's not anti-abortion, that's just plain oppression against women (and their partners, who also wanted a kid... literally just what??)