Abortion

[Princess Artemis]

I still don't understand why it has to be an internal device. Seriously, I don't.

That's why I was asking. Does it have to be? Is it? If it is, that's some serious hard-core freaky right there and I have nooooo idea why people aren't bringing that up more often in discussions.

 

Just to say, I know sometimes those are necessary, I had one once because it was the best way to see cysts, but holy God that is not something one does without medical need.

[prairiecrow]

That's why I was asking.  Does it have to be?  Is it?  If it is, that's some serious hard-core freaky right there and I have nooooo idea why people aren't bringing that up more often in discussions.

Since the point of the exercise is to make procuring an abortion as humiliating, unpleasant and invasive as possible, I'd say the people proposing this legislation WANT it to be necessarily a trans-vaginal ultrasound, which involves inserting a stiff plastic wand into the relevant part of the woman's anatomy.

 

(For the record, I've had one, and it's a thoroughly awful process. For a woman who's recently been raped it would undoubtedly be even worse and downright traumatic.)

Edited February 20, 2012 by prairiecrow

[WereJace]

That's why I was asking. Does it have to be? Is it? If it is, that's some serious hard-core freaky right there and I have nooooo idea why people aren't bringing that up more often in discussions.

 

Just to say, I know sometimes those are necessary, I had one once because it was the best way to see cysts, but holy God that is not something one does without medical need.

It does have to be, because the intra-uterine ultrasound is the only way to detect embryonic tissue at the earliest stages of pregnancy.

[Brite]

including one in Iowa that would make abortion a class A felony.

 

My goodness, godforbid if a woman had a miscarriage or reabsorbed the egg. They would charge her for serious mansluaghter and cannibalism. I see dark days for us but I hope I'm wrong if our people have a shred of intelligence. Maybe they'll get the point when the adoption systems are flowing out into the street with starving kids. Oh wait, some already are and they STILL don't care.

[xhunter]

My goodness, godforbid if a woman had a miscarriage or reabsorbed the egg. They would charge her for serious mansluaghter and cannibalism. I see dark days for us but I hope I'm wrong if our people have a shred of intelligence. Maybe they'll get the point when the adoption systems are flowing out into the street with starving kids. Oh wait, some already are and they STILL don't care.

they would not even if the women started committing suicide because they would figure, "O we saved a lot of lives though there was just too many extremists.,"

 

i know when i had my preg. scare i looked all over the internet for information to terminate a preg. though i could find none. though i figured out if you look for ways to prevent a miscarriage you could find what your looking for. i made shore not to share the scare with anyone else till i knew that i was not preg. just imagine if i had gotten a hold of something that did damage trying that. the same probably would be with rape victims and early preg. women if they voice there concern.

 

but hopefully people will open their eyes when it happens to them if their a female that voted to prevent abortion and the other problems that are caused.

[skinst]

That article makes me indefinetly glad I do not live in the US.

[LascielsShadow]

That's why I was asking.  Does it have to be?  Is it?  If it is, that's some serious hard-core freaky right there and I have nooooo idea why people aren't bringing that up more often in discussions.

 

Just to say, I know sometimes those are necessary, I had one once because it was the best way to see cysts, but holy God that is not something one does without medical need.

Transvaginal ultrasounds would indeed be required, since that's the best/only way to get an accurate picture of the embryo/fetus in the first trimester. (External u/s would not pick up the embryo/fetus at this stage, so it would not be useful, and no, neither are actually medically necessary at that point.) Doctors could/would face a fine of (I believe) $2500 for failing to comply with the law, and a woman who refused to have the ultrasound would be denied her abortion. (Edited for clarity here.)

 

Believe me, people are bringing it up (though, yes, probably not as often as they should and in all the places it's needed), but apparently, it isn't that big a deal to the people who approve of the idea. I suppose that that's because somehow, unwanted, forced penetration does not equal rape and forcing doctors to perform these ultrasounds does not equal forcing them to be rapists? We certainly need to keep bringing it up in discussions when we can, because there are two states currently considering this, and there is some seriously screwed up thinking about it. According to some (including a female CNN contributor) those ultrasounds should be a-ok with the women forced to have them because they consented to be penetrated when they got pregnant, and consensual sex is (evidently) similar to being forced to endure having a plastic wand shoved up your vagina. I just...I have no words that wouldn't be filtered.

 

It boggles my mind that there are people (not here, elsewhere, in discussions) who are going "Well, uh...I don't know if I'd call that rape. Maybe something like rape, but I don't know if it's exactly rape." Uh, what? Coerced consent=/=actual consent. Lack of consent=rape, therefore being coerced into having a transvaginal ultrasound by the threat of being denied an abortion=state approved rape, and making innocent doctors (who are trying to help people by providing a needed medical procedure) into rapists-by-proxy.

 

 

I am so ashamed of my country right now.

Edited February 21, 2012 by LascielsShadow

[elderberrysyrup]

It does have to be, because the intra-uterine ultrasound is the only way to detect embryonic tissue at the earliest stages of pregnancy.

Oh.

 

...

 

Again, why are we doing this? Is there a medical need to see the fetus before aborting it? I really want to see the logic in this. I want to believe that the pro-life movement doesn't just scheme and think 'we're going to make abortions humiliating to the woman! Yeah! females!' and that they have at least a logic going on.

[LascielsShadow]

Oh.

 

...

 

Again, why are we doing this? Is there a medical need to see the fetus before aborting it? I really want to see the logic in this. I want to believe that the pro-life movement doesn't just scheme and think 'we're going to make abortions humiliating to the woman! Yeah! females!' and that they have at least a logic going on.

Not really. Even in cases where the abortion will be taking place at an early enough period that it would be chemically induced, it would be mandated. At the earliest stages of pregnancy, there's little medical need to do an ultrasound before aborting (at later ones, there IS, but those are done transabdominally AFAIK). The whole idea is to basically wave the ultrasound in the woman's face and make her change her mind about aborting because "Look, it's your fetus embryo baby! Look at that poor defenceless fetus embryo BABY, are you sure you want to kill it?"

Edited February 21, 2012 by LascielsShadow

[Princess Artemis]

Transvaginal ultrasounds would indeed be required, since that's the best/only way to get an accurate picture of the embryo/fetus in the first trimester. Doctors could/would face a fine of (I believe) $2500 for failing to comply with the law, and a woman who refused to have the ultrasound would be denied her abortion.

What I was asking, through my admitted aghast horror at this getting in the way of me being anything close to coherent, was, "are they medically necessary and is that the only way to get them if so"? WereJace answered about getting the ultrasound, but is it medically necessary?

 

Something tells me it isn't except in some cases.

 

And yes, it is rape (though I dunno about calling the doctors etc., rapists--the state maybe, but not them because they are caught up in the coercion as well). Reason I mentioned about it not being brought up enough is because I hear plenty in this thread about the ultrasounds, I hear about the ultrasounds all the time, but not the fact that they involve sticking foreign objects inside women to get them!!

 

Arrrrghhhh I need to say so many words I can't on this forum!

[LascielsShadow]

And yes, it is rape (though I dunno about calling the doctors etc., rapists--the state maybe, but not them because they are caught up in the coercion as well).  Reason I mentioned about it not being brought up enough is because I hear plenty in this thread about the ultrasounds, I hear about the ultrasounds all the time, but not the fact that they involve sticking foreign objects inside women to get them!!

 

Arrrrghhhh I need to say so many words I can't on this forum!

Yes, I think it would be more rape-by-proxy, which I probably should have said there. (The state, of course, being the actual offender.) The doctors involved would definitely be just as much victims as the women undergoing the ultrasounds, which is part of why I am so very, very angry. Yes, it's a damned brilliant idea to put a metaphorical gun to the head of innocent physicians to further a messed-up agenda against women's reproductive rights. I'm sure they'll all be perfectly fine with being coerced into performing unnecessary procedures on women who may already be traumatised. :/ I think some people don't get how not even remotely the same a transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound are, and no amount of explaining will cause them to grasp it.

 

Having one of these inserted into your vagina and moved around is not exactly equal to having some gel smeared on your abdomen and an ultrasound device run over it. (I wouldn't want one of these things anywhere near me at any time, for any reason, and certainly not for a frivolous one.)

 

I am very much with you on having words to say that I can't say here. It's becoming very hard to see these things happening and not dissolve into incoherent rage.

Edited February 21, 2012 by LascielsShadow

[skinst]

What makes me angrier than the laws themselves is that people support the laws. Like, ordinary people and not the morons in the government. THAT is what sickens me most of all.

[Rosedamai]

What makes me angrier than the laws themselves is that people support the laws. Like, ordinary people and not the morons in the government. THAT is what sickens me most of all.

They're the ones that put the morons in the government. What did you expect? *shrug*

[skinst]

Heh, good point. ~_~;

[elderberrysyrup]

Not really. Even in cases where the abortion will be taking place at an early enough period that it would be chemically induced, it would be mandated. At the earliest stages of pregnancy, there's little medical need to do an ultrasound before aborting (at later ones, there IS, but those are done transabdominally AFAIK). The whole idea is to basically wave the ultrasound in the woman's face and make her change her mind about aborting because "Look, it's your fetus embryo baby! Look at that poor defenceless fetus embryo BABY, are you sure you want to kill it?"

Surely people have a more logical reason than this? After all, it can simply be brushed aside with a 'so why're you making me do this anyways', which still isn't addressed. Having a plastic thing shoved up your vagina simply is invasive. I don't know why this is okay, especially if there's no medical reason. Is there some kind of petition one can sign?

[xhunter]

Surely people have a more logical reason than this? After all, it can simply be brushed aside with a 'so why're you making me do this anyways', which still isn't addressed. Having a plastic thing shoved up your vagina simply is invasive. I don't know why this is okay, especially if there's no medical reason. Is there some kind of petition one can sign?

and they will never address it because they have no logical answer, that would not settle well on either side. the reasons i think that most people vote for abortion ban and these; how do i say it, Useless, feared, religious supported, and problem causing devices that will support women from killing something that has no idea of the horrible world, not developed, and most of all dependent on a host for so many months. these pro-life and others like that vouch that everybody should consider both sides but they don't even do that. their propaganda shows only one side and they will not listen to logic, or the other side, of abortion. lack of Questions considered like 'Is it necessary' 'What type of procedure is it and how does it work' 'How much do i really know one this subject, do i need to learn more, is there more sides than what i'm hearing'

and these are the ones that really amuse me

'WHO should be allowed their rights, the woman or fetus'

'WHAT happens after this unwanted child is born? Should we even care'

'WHEN Is it really needed to have a abortion and judge it accurate'

WHERE should the abortions take place and where are the logical supported answers for questions that we have that are not adressed'

'HOW much money would go into supporting unwanted children and poor women and their unwanted child. how does a ban on abortion affect everyones lives and the health of foster homes, finding jobs, ect'

'WAS there a reason that the fetus would be aborted'

 

if people would consider these questions and their many answers then we would not have so many people blind diving for the against box when they are asked 'do you support abortion'.

 

shinst: Now, Now we all know that those representatives are their to see how they can further mess up our country and to laugh at.

 

[Edited for miss use on words]

Edited February 21, 2012 by xhunter

[Princess Artemis]

Surely people have a more logical reason than this? After all, it can simply be brushed aside with a 'so why're you making me do this anyways', which still isn't addressed. Having a plastic thing shoved up your vagina simply is invasive. I don't know why this is okay, especially if there's no medical reason. Is there some kind of petition one can sign?

Ignorance before malice. The pro-life movement is only interested in institutionalized rape as much as the the pro-choice movement is interested in not talking about it. I honestly have no clue how anyone can talk about institutionalized rape and only concern themselves with the matter of whether or not the resulting picture will be traumatizing, so I choose to believe that most people don't know. There is real evil involved somewhere, but I don't think it's in most of the individuals involved.

 

There appears to be an assumption going on that when one side says, "They make woman look at ultrasounds!!" and another side says, "What's so terrible about that?" that conveys all the information when it does nothing of the sort. The side saying, "What's so terrible?" may be assuming that the ultrasound needed to be done anyway and that it was of an entirely different sort, since that's what most people think of when they think 'ultrasound', and most people believe that doctors won't do anything unnecessary. The side saying, "They make women look at ultrasounds!!", apparently, are under similar assumptions as the other side. If they are not arguing out of ignorance, then it's hard to believe both sides aren't arguing in malice, where the subject of a picture is more important than the subject of how it got taken.

 

I would like to think a whole lot more people would care about this aspect if they knew, but it seems it's all arguments about the picture, not how it got taken in the first place.

 

I don't know if there is a petition. One thing you can do, though, is talk about it when the subject comes up.

 

ETA: The fact that women are 'supposed' to be A-OK with the medical establishment sticking foreign objects inside their sex organs from the age of 18 onward probably plays a role in this as well.

Edited February 21, 2012 by Princess Artemis

[LascielsShadow]

Surely people have a more logical reason than this? After all, it can simply be brushed aside with a 'so why're you making me do this anyways', which still isn't addressed. Having a plastic thing shoved up your vagina simply is invasive. I don't know why this is okay, especially if there's no medical reason. Is there some kind of petition one can sign?

There are these, soullesshuman:

https://www.change.org/petitions/stop-sb484...ion-in-virginia

http://www.change.org/petitions/us-senate-...ginal-probe-law

http://www.change.org/petitions/governor-b...-ultrasound-law

 

There may be more, I'm not sure. You can search for more on the site. There definitely need to be more, and massive ones, and for all three states where this is happening. Texas and Iowa don't seem to be getting as much attention despite having similar bills in the works.

 

 

Yeah, it's really, really not so much about being forced to look at the ultrasound, for me. It's pretty much about women being forced to submit to this kind of ultrasound and PAY for having it done. That's what the "They make women have ultrasounds!" side needs to focus on, that those ultrasounds are invasive and potentially trumatising (the procedure itself, not the resulting image) to the women being forced to have them. I've seen people from the "What's the big deal?" side saying really stupid things like "Well, you don't think the fetus is a person and already decided to kill it, how/why would you find having to look at an ultrasound traumatic/unpleasant?" Yeah, that's not the issue here. A vast number of them evidently really do not get that for this kind of ultrasound, it isn't about the image, it's about how it was taken.

Edited February 21, 2012 by LascielsShadow

[diannethegeek]

Some good news, perhaps. Virginia's governor is no longer in full support of the proposed ultrasound bill. It could still be signed into law, but hopefully it's a step in the right direction.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-pol...ry.html?hpid=z2

[xhunter]

(Youtube link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ_S-d68zxo) now this guy i respect. there need to be more opened minded males in this world that respects females rights. i respect him more each of the videos i watch that relate to abortion.

[SoundFury]

I guess I haven't told anyone on this forum. Darn I forgot. According to doctors and ultrasounds (i think) I killed my twin in the womb. It was no accident. I've actually watched the records of me being a fetus and physically "bullying" my twin. My mum said that she knew I was acting up when her stomach spazzed a bit. Then she said when she woke up one morning, she felt pain. doctors discovered that I had kicked in her sleep until something from my twin broke and was miscarried. I don't exactly what, I'm not an expert on fetal growth. But according to my mum, she said that after I was alone in the womb, I didn't kick or spazz out anymore until my birth. I think this proves fetuses aren't so innocent I wonder if I'll ever get handcuffed if these bills pass.

 

To those who think I sound heartless, I actually do feel bad. I always wondered what it would be like if my twin was born with me. Probably fun, but I always think if he would be deaf like me..

[Aeriaa]

Going to add in my two cents, as someone who has been raped and chose to not abort (rather glad I didn't, the child makes my world go round).

 

I am pro-choice-- My first child was born from rape. I heavily considered abortion with her. The moment I learned I was pregnant from the ordeal? Yeah, words don't even come through to describe the feelings I was having about it. I had endured a traumatic event only to learn that I was pregnant from it while still in high school, which is a pretty judgmental place to be in in the first place.

 

The process I went through? I paid $25 to hear about fetal development, have a plastic wand shoved into my vagina, look at the fetus, and then be told how far along I was by their measures. (I was 8 weeks, so I wouldn't be able to have done the chemical abortion if I had wanted to).

 

Do I think women should HAVE to look at the embryo? No. They certainly should not. Overall, I think that and the fact that my grandmother herself had been raped and yet raised children born to the rapist are what kept me from aborting. (Opted for adoption, I thought, until the baby got here and I fell in love with her.)

 

The only issue I can see with it is when women start using abortion as birth control... I have a friend who, since she was 19, has been getting abortions rather than using condoms. That bothers me because I feel that if someone is making an adult decision to have sex and NOT use any sort of protection/birth control, they should man up and have the child. Yes, ACCIDENTS (not mistake, no life is ever a mistake) happen, handle that as you will.

[Brite]

I feel that if someone is making an adult decision to have sex and NOT use any sort of protection/birth control, they should man up and have the child.

 

Forced to have the child? Even if that means that the child ends up being hated and neglected?

[gistofeverything]

Abortion, in my opinion, should be left up to the person with child. I personally don't consider a cluster of cells LIVING until it's self-supportive. Say this person is a rape victim? What would she do? Would she want to live with the haunting memory of that trauma forever?

[Princess Artemis]

Abortion, in my opinion, should be left up to the person with child. I personally don't consider a cluster of cells LIVING until it's self-supportive. Say this person is a rape victim? What would she do? Would she want to live with the haunting memory of that trauma forever?

Two posts above yours is a rape victim saying she is glad she kept her child, for the baby makes her world go 'round. So "what would she do?" is, apparently, a very good question with no obvious, easy answer.

 

Forced to have the child? Even if that means that the child ends up being hated and neglected?

 

Maybe these two very particular people should be forcibly banned from having sex until they stop being irresponsible about it and wasting money on medical procedures when they could spend a lot less on contraception. No one ever died from keeping it in their pants. When they prove they are capable of scraping two neurons together, then they can be allowed to do things with real life responsibilities again.