Abortion

[ShadowsInAsh]

When she turned 18, she got her tubes tied. I got married and had 3 kids. I'd have had more if I could have.

 

She got a lot of flak when she got her operation, everyone said she'd regret it. I had to respect a person who KNEW they didn't want kids, and then made sure she couldn't have any that she wouldn't want. Gotta respect a person like that, not afraid to know what she wants, and then do it.

Like you said about your poor friend getting flak for not wanting kids...

 

I know JUST how that feels!!!

 

At work, all the time, my female co-workers are always getting on me about being 31-years-old and having no husband or children yet. They always tell me I am getting old and to hurry up and get married and have children.

 

Did I miss something here? Is it my obligation to have kids? It seems to me that the human race isn't at risk of dying out if I don't reproduce, so how is it other people's business if I choose not to have children? With so much pressure, I feel like maybe there is something wrong with me for not wanting to have kids...

 

And seriously, it's my uterus and I should be able to choose whether or not I want a baby in it. I know that if I accidentally got pregnant (and I am super paranoid and careful because I understand the enormity of creating human life), abortion would be a tough decision for me, but NOT because my own personal feelings are against it, rather because again and again society has told me it's wrong.

[Svataben]

why is it okay to perform an abortion at 24 weeks and not at 30?

Human foetus feels no pain before 24 weeks, study says

For one thing.

 

A human foetus is only viable around 28 weeks.

 

There is a very great difference between 24 and 30 weeks. Why not google these things instead of asking us?

[Shienvien]

Why does viability have anything to do with humanity?

The stage of development has everything to do with humanity - and viability just happens to be linked to stage of development.

 

Before it has grown itself a brain, it is not a person - and as I've stated earlier, only a person can be murdered. I do not consider the potential to eventually become something as a valid factor, especially in those kinds of cases.

[HollyTheColliegirl]

My SIL sends her kids to daycare. Those kids bring home every illness that could possibly be floating around this city. They make everyone constantly sick. They are also horribly misbehaved and cry and throw a tantrum if you even look at them wrong.

As one who went to daycare, I have personal experience with this. My parents both had to work and it would have been a struggle financially not to. My father's family criticized my parents for their decision and they believed that I would become too attached to the daycare workers. As a matter of fact, I didn't. The time spent away from my parents made me all the more happy to see them at the end of the day. As for the illnesses, yes, I caught them. ALL of them, especially as a toddler. But doing so gave me a huge advantage in school later on -- a super strong immunity. I rarely missed school and I have several perfect attendance awards whereas other kids would miss 10-20 days a year. Going to daycare also meant the first day of school was a piece of cake for me; no screaming, no embarrassment for my parents. In fact, it gave me experience socializing and working with others that I might not have had, being an only child.

 

Every daycare is different, but the ones I went to were strict on rules and made sure the kids were all well behaved. Besides, the parents themselves have a big part in their children's behavior. Don't blame the daycare for any possible mistakes on your SIL's part.

 

 

Linking back to topic ~

 

Daycare is sometimes the only option for families with low income. Just because they send their children to daycare does not mean they are shirking their responsibility as a parent.

Edited April 13, 2013 by HollyTheColliegirl

[Syaoransbear]

As one who went to daycare, I have personal experience with this. My parents both had to work and it would have been a struggle financially not to. My father's family criticized my parents for their decision and they believed that I would become too attached to the daycare workers. As a matter of fact, I didn't. The time spent away from my parents made me all the more happy to see them at the end of the day. As for the illnesses, yes, I caught them. ALL of them, especially as a toddler. But doing so gave me a huge advantage in school later on -- a super strong immunity. I rarely missed school and I have several perfect attendance awards whereas other kids would miss 10-20 days a year. Going to daycare also meant the first day of school was a piece of cake for me; no screaming, no embarrassment for my parents. In fact, it gave me experience socializing and working with others that I might not have had, being an only child.

 

Every daycare is different, but the ones I went to were strict on rules and made sure the kids were all well behaved. Besides, the parents themselves have a big part in their children's behavior. Don't blame the daycare for any possible mistakes on your SIL's part.

 

 

Linking back to topic ~

 

Daycare is sometimes the only option for families with low income. Just because they send their children to daycare does not mean they are shirking their responsibility as a parent.

I wasn't blaming the daycare for their misbehaving, it was mostly an unrelated comment, but I think having your kids in daycare makes it more difficult for you to learn how to deal with them and then you spend your time just trying to temporarily manage your kids from day-to-day instead of actually teaching the kids how to behave long term. They live with us while their house is being built, so I know how they raise their kids. Instead of telling their kids what to do, they ask them what they want to do. The kids are the authority and in charge of every situation, and when the kids throw tantrums the parents bargain with them instead of punishing them or providing any consequence. They are terrible at parenting, but I don't think daycare or having people babysit them all the time is helping them learn how to parent. So it's not so much about the kids learning bad behavior at daycare, but the parents not learning how to raise their children better because they don't see them much.

[CatCreature]

At work, all the time, my female co-workers are always getting on me about being 31-years-old and having no husband or children yet. They always tell me I am getting old and to hurry up and get married and have children.

 

Did I miss something here? Is it my obligation to have kids? It seems to me that the human race isn't at risk of dying out if I don't reproduce, so how is it other people's business if I choose not to have children? With so much pressure, I feel like maybe there is something wrong with me for not wanting to have kids...

Tell me about it.

 

I even get strangers and not only co-workers who ask me if it isn't "about time" I got a baby. They ask me this before they ask me if I want a baby to begin with or if I have someone to make that baby with.

 

I might have the hardware for baby-making but I'm lacking the software. Never liked kids, never will.

 

I rather get a puppy.

[Starscream]

Tell me about it.

 

I even get strangers and not only co-workers who ask me if it isn't "about time" I got a baby. They ask me this before they ask me if I want a baby to begin with or if I have someone to make that baby with.

 

I might have the hardware for baby-making but I'm lacking the software. Never liked kids, never will.

 

I rather get a puppy.

I like you.

 

My mother knows my stance with kids. I got a good husband who would be a great dad, but he's similar mindset to me. No kids.

 

So my mother does not say, Hey give me grandchildren. I only heard it once or twice from his side. Anyway, its not like his sisters have not had children.

 

I'd rather have a pet instead.

[Vhale]

I got some seriously bad vibes when I said I didn't want kids. I knew when I was 16. I love kids, love my nephews. But I have my mother's temper and I suppose it's what they call PSTD now. I'm about 99% positive any kid I had, would not have a happy childhood. There's a huge difference is having a kid around 100% of the day and being able to send it home. Huge. If people want to be uptight about that, I'd like to know how they are working to help victims of abuse so that they can lead the life they think they have the right to demand I lead. 1 out of 3 women are victims of rape and 3 are killed every day. And people wonder... why a woman might not want to have kids...

 

On a far lighter note, I had to share this:

 

Federal Appeals Court Explains Why Rubber Fetuses And High Schools Don’t Mix

 

An anti-abortion student group in Roswell, New Mexico thought it would be a good idea to pass out hundreds of small rubber replicas of fetuses to students at two high schools. As it turns out, this was not such a good idea:

 

    Both schools experienced doll-related disruptions that day. Many students pulled the dolls apart, tearing the heads off and using them as rubber balls or sticking them on pencil tops. Others threw dolls and doll parts at the “popcorn” ceilings so they became stuck. Dolls were used to plug toilets. Several students covered the dolls in hand sanitizer and lit them on fire. One or more male students removed the dolls’ heads, inverted the bodies to make them resemble penises, and hung them on the outside of their pants’ zippers.

 

    Teachers at both schools complained that students’ preoccupation with the dolls disrupted classroom instruction. While teachers were trying to instruct, students threw dolls and doll heads across classrooms, at one another, and into wastebaskets. Some teachers said the disruptions took eight to 10 minutes each class period, and others said their teaching plans were derailed entirely. An honors freshman English class canceled a scheduled test because students had become engaged in name calling and insults over the topic of abortion. A Roswell security officer described the day as “a disaster” because of the dolls

 

So rubber fetuses legitimately disrupted these schools’ learning environments, and the school administration had a way of shutting that whole thing down. After school officials ordered the student groups to stop distributing the fetuses, several students involved in the groups sued the school, claiming they had a First Amendment right to distribute these rubber toilet-cloggers to their fellow students.

 

On Monday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit disagreed. As the unanimous court explained, a school may limit student speech when it reasonably forecasts such speech would “‘would materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in operation of the school,’ or ‘impinge upon the rights of other students.’” In this case, school officials didn’t just forecast substantial disruption from the rubber fetuses, they watched it unfold.

 

As the court emphasized, it would have been unconstitutional for the school to outright forbid discussion of abortion, so long as that discussion was carried on in a non-disruptive way.

[Spelunker]

that is absolutely hilarious. :3

[KageSora]

It's not necessarily returning back to the life before kids.  But it's not always about finances, either.  Some moms just want to work, love their jobs, want some time without kids, etc.  A healthy, happy parent means healthy, happy kids.  Don't get me wrong--I do think once you have kids they should be top priority, but that means different things for different moms and dads. 

 

Just the mum's, or do you want the dads to go on part time too?

 

Because really, having a child does not include giving up your entire life, personality and interests. Not for women as much as not for men.

 

Parents who work are not worse parents than parents who don't.

I mean both parents.

 

It's hard to put it into words, I think I'm not saying what I want to... Lemme try again...

 

Like, it's okay to go back to work. It's okay to want to have some time to yourself when you're not working. That's why it's good when a child has two parents or at least more than one person to help raise them--everybody can have some time to themselves, everybody can have some fun time, everybody can enjoy their jobs and earn money etc. Not that raising your child alone is a horrible thing! It's just easier for the parent if they have more people they can rely on to help out.

 

But there ARE people who don't realize the time commitment that having a kid is, and who DO think that they can just go back to their lives as usual once the kid is popped out. They have the kid for the experience, not realizing just how much a change to your life having a kid is.

 

THOSE are the parents I find incredibly selfish. The ones who think that it's horrible to have to learn to budget your time so you can spend time with your kid and have time for yourself and your job (if applicable).

 

 

@Vhale: Oh man, those dolls CLEARLY had the opposite effect if people thought ripping them up was a good idea.

[TCA]

Regarding the rubber fetuses: That is horrifying. And also hilarious.

Edited April 13, 2013 by TheCompleteAnimorph

[philpot123]

Human foetus feels no pain before 24 weeks, study says

For one thing.

 

A human foetus is only viable around 28 weeks.

 

There is a very great difference between 24 and 30 weeks. Why not google these things instead of asking us?

I didn't ask because I needed an answer. I asked to make people think. So viability determines humanity? A fetus is worth protecting at 28 weeks? Not 27? That's a little arbitrary, don't you think?

[Shienvien]

So viability determines humanity? A fetus is worth protecting at 28 weeks? Not 27? That's a little arbitrary, don't you think?

The line is not that strict in reality - law, however, needs lines to avoid debates over specific cases.

[Svataben]

 

I mean both parents.

 

It's hard to put it into words, I think I'm not saying what I want to... Lemme try again...

 

Like, it's okay to go back to work. It's okay to want to have some time to yourself when you're not working. That's why it's good when a child has two parents or at least more than one person to help raise them--everybody can have some time to themselves, everybody can have some fun time, everybody can enjoy their jobs and earn money etc. Not that raising your child alone is a horrible thing! It's just easier for the parent if they have more people they can rely on to help out.

 

But there ARE people who don't realize the time commitment that having a kid is, and who DO think that they can just go back to their lives as usual once the kid is popped out. They have the kid for the experience, not realizing just how much a change to your life having a kid is.

 

THOSE are the parents I find incredibly selfish. The ones who think that it's horrible to have to learn to budget your time so you can spend time with your kid and have time for yourself and your job (if applicable).

 

 

@Vhale: Oh man, those dolls CLEARLY had the opposite effect if people thought ripping them up was a good idea.

That makes a lot more sense.

It's as important to be careful how you state these things, as it is for the LGBT community to have their issues addressed correctly.

 

I don't think people very often have kids, then think they can go on just as before. But i often see women being blamed for it.

The selfishness I see as more common, is a couple having kids as an attempt to repair their relationship. Which, of course, is insane, since having kids is so hard that divorce levels sky-rocket in couples with kids age 0 - 2 years of age.

 

The blaming and vilification of women, both as parents and as sexual beings in the abortion debate, as well as most parental debates, is a deep-rooted facet of the bigotry against women that still remains in western society.

A facet like victim-blaming.

 

Both of these hurt women every day. Change our lives. Kill us.

 

[Kestra15]

So viability determines humanity?

Yes. After all, if something isn't viable, it can't live. And if it can't live, it cannot be alive, ergo it cannot be a human being. End of discussion.

[Svataben]

I didn't ask because I needed an answer. I asked to make people think. So viability determines humanity? A fetus is worth protecting at 28 weeks? Not 27? That's a little arbitrary, don't you think?

What would indicate that we haven't already thought?

Are you naive enough to believe this is our first abortion debate?

That we have never come across the topic before?

 

The only thing you managed, was to make me google a very clear and defining answer to your question, so as to show you how your insinuations about it being wrong is incorrect.

 

That done, you should no longer have an issue with it, and you should know full well that there is a very great difference between 24 and 30 weeks.

Have you learned the lesson? Thought the thoughts?

[Spelunker]

Yes. After all, if something isn't viable, it can't live. And if it can't live, it cannot be alive, ergo it cannot be a human being. End of discussion.

That is the best I think that could have been said. Well done, Kestra. :3

[KageSora]

I tend to see that behavior online in young women who aren't actually thinking through the idea of getting pregnant. I think it's part of the problem with society that implants the idea of "if you have a uterus you must have a baby, it's part of who you are to pop out a kid". That's a very dangerous idea that we're still needing to challenge and destroy.

 

I've seen it once in a male in a photoset. But I'm sure there ARE plenty of males who don't think it through either--I just don't encounter it. Which is likely just the circles I run in--it's harder to comment on something I rarely, if ever, see than it is something I've seen before after all.

 

I really hope that in those cases, they realize just what having a kid entails BEFORE they get knocked up (or, for men, before they knock somebody up). Or at least that they shape up during the pregnancy/after the child is born.

 

I think that, in terms of overall numbers it doesn't happen as often but in certain places it's more visible--but that's likely a visible minority effect. They're the most visible even if they aren't the most numerous.

 

I really think that this kind of attitude--and the women-shaming that comes with it--could really be helped if we actually had proper sex education.

 

Not just "babies come from sex", but "this is what having a baby entails. This is how much, on average, it costs--and it could be significantly more if your child has a complication or a disability." "These are all the things that could go wrong during and after pregnancy." Etc.

 

I think that would help with men, too.

 

Maybe everybody would be more keen on using proper birth control rather than just having unprotected sex if they realized how much work and money goes into a child.

 

And maybe proper education could help lessen the view of abortion as evil so that, if the BC fails, they're not shamed into having a kid neither of them is ready for. And that doesn't just go for young folks--plenty of holder folks aren't ready for a kid, either. Age doesn't always make you ready!

 

But I absolutely agree that having a kid to "fix" your relationship is insanely selfish and rather cruel to that poor kid.

[vintageandroid]

THOSE are the parents I find incredibly selfish. The ones who think that it's horrible to have to learn to budget your time so you can spend time with your kid and have time for yourself and your job (if applicable).

I gotcha--we're actually in perfect agreement, then, I think. I just jump at it 'cause moms returning to work are frequently vilified as not caring about their kids.

 

But yeah, kids are a HUGE commitment and an enormous lifestyle change--which is, of course, why having babies isn't for everyone, and I think it's much more responsible to be aware of that and to not have them if you're not willing to make that change.

[Svataben]

Yep, sex-ed, proper sex-ed including emotions, money, and future prospects, should be mandatory and conducted by teachers trained for that specific task.

 

Sadly, religion and old fashioned thinking (I'm looking at you GOP) would rather arm every child with a semi-automatic, than allow that.

 

 

[Syaoransbear]

What that man did was wrong because he was killing fetuses that were at the point in development where they were capable of surviving outside of the womb, and the whole point of abortion is to allow women to control what is happening within their bodies. Once the fetus is removed from the mother's body and no longer infringing on any of her rights, what would be the purpose of killing it? If it can survive, they should let it.

[Alpha1]

Once the fetus is removed from the mother's body and no longer infringing on any of her rights, what would be the purpose of killing it? If it can survive, they should let it.

 

They were illegal late term abortions. Seems like those women didn't want to take care of them.

[Starscream]

Mother regrets having her children.

 

As if we needed any proof that the "oh, you'll love it when it's born!" thing is BS.

That actually is an interesting article. Because it speaks to me on a number of levels.

 

Here are my thoughts on not having/having children

 

I consider children parasitical, and they would rob me of my freedom that I value so much. Yet I think if I had some, I would be much like my mother and give them my left arm. However, my temper is my main point of fear. Where she says she could not harm them, I am not sure I wouldn't. Its not that I wish ill harm on anyone or anything, I just have a horrible horrible temper that can flare faster than I can realise what is happening.

 

I am 37 and I still have no children, and I do not think it will happen now. My husband seems quite contented to say no to them as well.

 

Few other factors we have considered.

 

Monitary: we don't have the funds to raise children.

Where I have the benefit of being a good cook, and I can make anything from cakes to cured meats, as well as inedible such as soap from basic raw ingredients, there are times where money is SO tight that if it means one of us eats that night, I will give that food to my husband.

 

Transportation: Neither of us have an auto-mobile license in canada. He held one in south africa and I never got one because I decided that the world is safer if I am not on the road with that aforementioned bad temper. I kid you not, it's bad.

 

Space: My space is riddled with sharp pointy objects, small bodies of water, we do not have money for a larger apartment. as it stands this one is getting too costly at nearly 1000 a month for a single bedroom, and its one of the cheapest.

 

New Trade: I just about to graduate with a certificate for chef training at a collage. It would be bad timing for me to toss that work aside to start a family when I need to get a job to practice the skills I have learned and get my red seal.

 

Doubt: I strongly doubt my abilities to be a good mother, a good parent with the faults I have. I would not want to break a child's heart if I flared in anger. I would not want to realise I hurt a person if I lashed out. I do not trust myself in so many ways. I am being treated for the anger issues, PMDD is what they call it, but I would regret hurting someone innocent so terribly. I may call myself "evil decepticon" at times but I have my own personal set of rules, of laws that I go by and these rules and laws I must never cross under any circumstances. I may say, I'm not gonna hold that door open for that crotchety old woman, but I swing that door open with a bright cheerful smile "here let me help you out" I have a big heart, but I also have some serious demons. Its better for those souls I do not bring into being if I don't.

 

Although I am questioning my thoughts now, since my time is running out. Is remaining childless good? My 13 year old niece is a well behaved, respectable child, but the 5 year old niece I have is polar opposite. I wonder, what would I get, the polite quiet child, that I could easily adore, or the screamer that would set my migraines into fits of hell.

 

Freedom: This is a huge one for me. Freedom is so valuable that I cannot imagine being chained down and not doing what I want when I want. I collect transformers toys which I could imagine would get broken in every conceivable way. I remember how I was as a child, sneaking into stuff that I should not have. My collection is valuable and is under lock and key for the most part. I know when the two year old (now 5) niece came to stay, I said to her in the most clear manner. DO NOT TOUCH MY STUFF. Oddly she did not. I left her with enough toys to play with mine never came into her targeting sights.

 

But freedom includes what do I want to cook? Am I going ot get one of these finicky eaters who will only eat green veggies on a friday after 3pm if served on a spiral pasta. And dear primus should anything touch each other. I'm a chef, and My first knee jerk instinct is to purée everything and make them eat that until they get over it. I will not be my like sister and cook chicken fingers because the child dislikes what the rest are eating. I was never raised like that. I was raised "if you don't like it just eat a little." It's taken me 37 years to enjoy Brussels sprouts, but I tell you, I ate two every time they were served. My rule: "Try it again just in case it was done badly" and I tell you, I found foods I hated supremely better in the hands of competent cooks.

 

Fear: I fear that any young I have will go down the wrong path as a young adult. Fear that they will be taken away from me: if by authorities or what befell a childhood friend (kidnapped and never seen again) Fear I could hurt them, fear I just don't do enough.

 

Strict: I am very strict. Where I do have a good sense of humour, I will not tolerate misbehaviour of any sort if the time is not right. I am thinking of a friend who shocked me not three days ago with behaviour not suitable for the location. I am strict about being out in public (that 2 year old now was a prime example) Being in a sushi restaurant (the child is raised in Japan) but the child was stomping all over the seats jumping around. I told her to sit down, the mother la-de-dah didn't seem to care, until the child slipped and whacked her chin on the table I simply said "you'd have not got hurt if you sat down like we asked." Her mother said "Strict auntie" Damn right I am strict. No person wants to have their evening meal spoiled by some uncontrolled child.

 

The other niece who I barely mentioned is raised in a strict but loving family. There are rewards for good behaviour and she does well even to the point of owning a rather large welsh pony. She is not spoiled, she understands that everything has value and responsibility and she works hard to keep her horse, to get her grades in outstanding levels, and she knows that you can't have everything. Her passion is for hunter jumping.

 

I just... doubt my abilities.

 

I may not have children myself, but I do have maternal instincts, which the woman in that article lacked. I just tend to get all motherly on the poor IRC members. They may fear me, or even hate me, but all I got in mind is their general well being.

 

TLDR: I have strong doubts of my abilities as a parent so I choose not to.

[Spelunker]

Well said, Starscream.

[Obscure_Trash]

Nobody here has claimed any of these, that I know, and I haven't looked into Gosnell yet, but here was a post on tumblr that might be of interest?

 

Let’s get a few things straight about this whole Kermit Gosnell thing.

 

1. He was committing infanticide, not performing abortions.

2. Late-term abortions are, for the most part, illegal (exceptions include risk to the life of the pregnant person) in this country. In other words, he wasn’t operating within the law. (Shocker!)

3. His ‘clinic’ didn’t abide by any health and safety laws like actual (read: licensed) abortion clinics are required to do. Further, none of the staff were medical professionals.

 

And despite the unsanitary conditions and very obvious health risks, WOMEN WERE STILL DESPERATE ENOUGH TO GO TO HIM TO TERMINATE PREGNANCIES. Let’s think about that for a second. Do you honestly believe that the issue here is ‘abortion is evil SAVE DA BABIEZ’? Because if you do, you’re a numb nut. Gosnell was killing already born babies. That’s not abortion — that’s infanticide. Do not conflate the two things. And do not try to say that Gosnell is representative of all abortion providers in this country.

 

Mostly the points, not the name calling.

 

And this:

 

Obviously I am very pro-choice. But with this news of the Kermit Gosnell case, there is absolutely no defending him. I, personally, do not view abortion as murder. However, when I say this, it’s assuming abortion means an abortion prior to viability. In the case of Gosnell, his abortion practices were 150% illegal. Completely. He was an unlicensed med school graduate who performed illegal abortions. And by illegal, I don’t mean he disregarded a strict abortion law.

 

He delivered viable fetuses and murdered them by severing the spinal cord with scissors. This resulted in the death of one woman and seven babies.

 

For those who may not know, abortion pass viability in very state is illegal. And the type of abortion that he performed, intact dilation and and extraction (or “partial birth abortion”) , is also illegal in every state. Regardless of the maturity of the fetus. (But it is assumed that this type happens around the time of viability.) However, in this situation, Gosnell didn’t just perform an illegal D&E. He FULLY delivered the viable fetus, and then murdered the baby. It was not partial birth. It was post birth. Post viability. And he deserves to sit in prison for life.

 

The whole reason I’m even blogging about this is because I KNOW that the conservative media will go insane about it. And releasing news like that will be one step back for reproductive rights. What a lot of people don’t realize, practices like Gosnell was overwhelmingly common before Roe v. Wade, and thousands of women died by seeking abortions. This is going to call for stricter abortion laws when, in reality, it is an example of why it is so important to provide more access to safe, legal abortions in licensed medical facilities. And I hope everyone, especially anyone who identifies themselves as pro-life, stop to think about that. Don’t jump to “Oh well we need stricter abortion laws.” No. Don’t even TRY to think that way. Because our abortion laws now are the reason why these babies and women are still dying, 40 years after the Roe v. Wade.

 

There’s something wrong with that people. We need safe, legal abortions. And we need them now.

 

Also:

 

Joffe noted, as others had, that the Gosnell horrors demonstrated what happened in the pre-Roe days of back-alley abortions. But she made a further, crucial point that these horrors occur even when abortion is legal, but difficult to afford or access for many women:

 

   

So why did Gosnell’s patients not go to a better, i.e. safer, abortion clinic, for example, the Planned Parenthood in downtown Philadelphia, no more than a few miles from Women’s Medical Society? One very poignant answer to this comes from a statement that one of Gosnell’s patients made to the Associated Press. The woman had initially gone to this Planned Parenthood for a scheduled abortion, but “the picketers out there, they scared me half to death.”

 

    Another reason women came to Gosnell’s clinic is that he undercut everyone else’s prices. As numerous abortion clinic managers have told me over the years, for very poor women—who are way over-represented among abortion patients—differences of even five or ten dollars can be the deciding factor of where to go. The price list at Women’s Medical Society, listed in the Grand jury report, shows that in 2005, a first trimester procedure was $330.00, while the average price nationally then was about one hundred dollars higher. For a 23-24 week procedure, Gosnell charged $1625.00, while the relatively few other facilities in the Northeast offering such abortions would have charged at least one thousand more.

 

    Still another reason drawing women to this clinic was that it became widely known that Gosnell was willing to flout the law and perform post-viability (i.e. post-24 week) abortions even in cases where women did not meet the very strict legal guidelines of a life-threatening or serious illness or were carrying a fetus with a lethal anomaly.

 

From here: http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatch...et_s_talk_about (comments and links may contain language)

 

But I really do need to look further into this myself so I can actually know the full story. Been too busy with school. D: I've merely skimmed stuff I've seen but haven't read any of the articles on him.

Edited April 14, 2013 by SockPuppet Strangler