Closed Thread
Page 43 of 58 FirstFirst ... 33414243444553 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 430 of 579
  1. #421
    lambjam's Avatar
    lambjam is offline Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,177
    Thanks
    2,062
    Thanked
    4,956
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Ok, I've slept on it. It was important for me to be able to say I was pro-choice, but I'm going to have to say I'm not completely. That (medical conditions aside) I'm only pro-choice until the point of viability, and that after that time I acknowledge two people's bodily autonomy, not just the mother's.

  2. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to lambjam For This Useful Post:

    delirium  (02-05-2013),duckduckgoose  (02-05-2013),Kirst33  (02-05-2013),LaDiDah  (02-05-2013),TimeForWine  (02-05-2013),Turk EnJayDee  (02-05-2013),wannawannabe  (02-05-2013)

  3. #422
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Qld
    Posts
    26,930
    Thanks
    2,736
    Thanked
    6,743
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonja View Post
    So I'm lost on this last point. My position on this also depends on what happens after the "baby" is aborted. Lambjam contends the mother has no say once the fetus is delivered, but there were links on here a few days ago (which I couldn't bring myself to read tbh) saying if it is an abortion then life saving medication will be denied.

    Which is it? Does anyone know?
    I personally think that restricting life-saving medical care and actually murdering a baby that was born alive are two different things. Dying because you're too sick to survive without that medical assistance is a natural thing. Dying because someone decided to physically make your death happen right then and there is not really natural - that's murder.

    I think once the baby is born alive, then the mother has ZERO say in what happens to it. While it's inside her though... that's when she gets to call the shots because that's involving HER body in the process.

    I don't understand why anyone would terminate a healthy pregnancy after the baby could survive on its own if she just birthed it. I don't see why you would terminate when you could just have it and let it be put up for adoption instead. BUT... I know there's heaps of reasons why people perhaps wouldn't like that idea, and so I acknowledge that it's not really my call when it comes to another woman and her foetus.

  4. #423
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    10,495
    Thanks
    1,430
    Thanked
    9,003
    Reviews
    3
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/10/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by SassyMummy View Post
    I personally think that restricting life-saving medical care and actually murdering a baby that was born alive are two different things. Dying because you're too sick to survive without that medical assistance is a natural thing. Dying because someone decided to physically make your death happen right then and there is not really natural - that's murder.

    I think once the baby is born alive, then the mother has ZERO say in what happens to it. While it's inside her though... that's when she gets to call the shots because that's involving HER body in the process.

    I don't understand why anyone would terminate a healthy pregnancy after the baby could survive on its own if she just birthed it. I don't see why you would terminate when you could just have it and let it be put up for adoption instead. BUT... I know there's heaps of reasons why people perhaps wouldn't like that idea, and so I acknowledge that it's not really my call when it comes to another woman and her foetus.
    And because I can't seem to find an answer on how an LTA occurs I can't form a view. If an otherwise healthy and viable baby is destroyed in the process and that's what I have to support to say I am 100% pro choice than I guess I am not. If the only reason the fetus dies is because it is born early then I do take issue.

    As for the reasons for LTA, there are basically no reliable statistics on why they occur (at least since a far reaching study was done in the 80s by the Guttmacher institute in the USA, which placed fetal defects low on the reasons), so I don't think anyone on here can say they are usually because of fetal abnormalities (they may be).

    ETA: in that study LTA was defined as post 16 weeks, which is not what we're talking about here.

    I think for me the destruction of even one viable baby during an LTA is one too many.
    Last edited by Sonja; 02-05-2013 at 10:05.

  5. #424
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    10,495
    Thanks
    1,430
    Thanked
    9,003
    Reviews
    3
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/10/14100 Posts in a week
    Probably the saddest thing I found when I was reading about this was that (in the USA) many LTAs are thought to be carried out because of poor access to earlier abortion. I think that is a real tragedy - to limit a woman's access to safe and early abortion and then judge her harshly for having it done later.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Sonja For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (02-05-2013)

  7. #425
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonja View Post
    Probably the saddest thing I found when I was reading about this was that (in the USA) many LTAs are thought to be carried out because of poor access to earlier abortion. I think that is a real tragedy - to limit a woman's access to safe and early abortion and then judge her harshly for having it done later.
    That would really vary state by state and if a woman lives in a rural area and her income (ie ability to get to a larger town/city). It's actually held up by our Supreme Court that abortion is legal nationwide but left up to states as to how much they regulate it. Often the Supreme Court overturns a more conservative states attempts to restrict terminations as its seen as violating the woman's rights according to our constitution. My impression has always been that America in general (besides a few rogue conservative states) is much more lenient on abortions than Australia. Obviously semantics like finances and ability to get to a clinic if you live in a small town are going to get in the way sometimes but that would be the case anywhere in the world.

    Although my views on abortion are the same as yours I struggle with agreeing that tax payer money should pay for it if it is for something other than medical reasons. So if we're talking of somebody of lower income in the states being unable to afford a termination because they got pregnant accidentally, I'm not sure how I feel about my taxes funding that. But I know that's contradictory because they would then be a strain on our system in other ways if they had a baby they couldn't afford.

    It's all very complex!

    As I said very early in this thread the main way to prevent any type of termination (for reasons other than medical) is to put extensive efforts into preventing unwanted pregnancies, from unlimited access to birth control to much better education.
    Last edited by Kirst33; 02-05-2013 at 11:08.

  8. #426
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    This was a good article on RU486-2

    http://www.mamamia.com.au/news/ru486-2/

  9. #427
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    10,012
    Thanks
    14,124
    Thanked
    7,612
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    It is hard to get any real information on late term abortion, I did the same as you Sonja and just ended up finding pro life stuff all over the place, screaming statistics with nothing backing up their claims.

    I came across this article, and I have to say - reading the below reasons that some of these late term abortions have been done. I have now again done a complete 180 degree turn. I think all the below reasons are valid and I would hate to think what would happen to these women if they weren't allowed to access late term abortions.

    In relation to the opening post -I would be very surprised if it was just purely "because she wanted a boy" - I would hazard a guess that there was much more to the story than that.


    'In Victoria, the reasons women seek abortions after 24 weeks include the women not being a woman at all but a girl aged 11 to 15. They include the fact that the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest. Psychosocial indicators take in women who are victims of domestic violence and women with intellectual disabilities or psychiatric conditions such as paranoid schizophrenia and suicidal depression. Heroin and alcohol addiction also fall under the psychosocial heading, as do cases of women from religious migrant families that might, upon learning of the pregnancy, set them alight. Women who had planned to continue the pregnancy until they learnt an existing child or their husband had cancer fell into this category, as do women who have been delayed by medical incompetence (like failures to diagnose pregnancy) or obstructed by ignorant or pro-life doctors who wrongly advise that abortion is illegal or that they are too far gone.'

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/soc...#ixzz2S63LIMms

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to beebs For This Useful Post:

    onionskin  (02-05-2013),Stiflers Mom  (02-05-2013)

  11. #428
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by beebs View Post
    It is hard to get any real information on late term abortion, I did the same as you Sonja and just ended up finding pro life stuff all over the place, screaming statistics with nothing backing up their claims.

    I came across this article, and I have to say - reading the below reasons that some of these late term abortions have been done. I have now again done a complete 180 degree turn. I think all the below reasons are valid and I would hate to think what would happen to these women if they weren't allowed to access late term abortions.

    In relation to the opening post -I would be very surprised if it was just purely "because she wanted a boy" - I would hazard a guess that there was much more to the story than that.


    'In Victoria, the reasons women seek abortions after 24 weeks include the women not being a woman at all but a girl aged 11 to 15. They include the fact that the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest. Psychosocial indicators take in women who are victims of domestic violence and women with intellectual disabilities or psychiatric conditions such as paranoid schizophrenia and suicidal depression. Heroin and alcohol addiction also fall under the psychosocial heading, as do cases of women from religious migrant families that might, upon learning of the pregnancy, set them alight. Women who had planned to continue the pregnancy until they learnt an existing child or their husband had cancer fell into this category, as do women who have been delayed by medical incompetence (like failures to diagnose pregnancy) or obstructed by ignorant or pro-life doctors who wrongly advise that abortion is illegal or that they are too far gone.'

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/soc...#ixzz2S63LIMms
    Wow Beebs. It is such a complex issue.

    I think a lot of us are saying we're not comfortable with terminations used as birth control and a woman who would have a LTA because she didn't want it anymore (where my mind goes, you had weeks to decide that, so why so late?!).

    But then you get into that grey area and you're more understanding as to why it would happen.

    I know I contradict myself a lot on the issue as its very hard to not let your emotions dictate your views. I read stuff like that and think to myself that obviously we need to keep abortions safe, legal and accessible.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Kirst33 For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (02-05-2013)

  13. #429
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    6,095
    Thanks
    399
    Thanked
    747
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    I remember seeing a based on a true story movie/documentary about a situation where a pregnant woman involved in a car accident ended up in a long-term coma, and her husband had to go to court and fight pro-life activists for the right to terminate the pregnancy.

    The husband had researched to discover that a long term coma patient allowed to progress to term with a pregnancy typically resulted in a live baby and a dead mother. So even though the child was very much wanted, and the parents had actively TTCed to get pregnant, he chose to terminate the pregnancy for the hope that it wife would recover. The pro-lifers were using the court proceedings (with repeated appeals) to delay the procedure until it was too late and could no longer be legally performed.

    The husband and hospital finally received the go-ahead on the last day it was legal to do so. And the followup at the end of the movie showed footage of the mother on a home visit with her husband and three prior children, two years later. She was still residing in the hospital and undergoing rehabilitation therapy, but was able to be a real and cognitive presence in the lives of her family.

  14. #430
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,848
    Thanks
    6,202
    Thanked
    16,895
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post
    I know I contradict myself a lot on the issue as its very hard to not let your emotions dictate your views. I read stuff like that and think to myself that obviously we need to keep abortions safe, legal and accessible.
    I also go back and forth as it is a very emotive subject. I'm trying to keep in mind that LTA 'just because' is very rare and that those that do happen, however sad it is, are for a good reason. I'm glad beebs linked the reasons from that article, I tend to be quite emotional on the topic and reading that has brought me back down to ground that there are some very valid reasons..... but I still stand behind my opinion that gender is not a valid reason. When you look at that article - rape and incent, severe mental illness. Misdiagnosis. I simply cannot put gender in an even remotely close basket as these reasons. Of course, that's JMO.

  15. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to delirium For This Useful Post:

    atomicmama  (02-05-2013),BaronessM  (02-05-2013),beebs  (02-05-2013),Kirst33  (02-05-2013),lambjam  (02-05-2013)


 

Similar Threads

  1. Curious about gender selection
    By Lozie in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-01-2014, 09:21
  2. Xanax + alcohol *possibly distressing*
    By AndrewTheEmu in forum Battling addiction?
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-08-2012, 21:46

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Bamboo Lulu
Unique, non-toxic wooden eco toys for babies. Water-based paints, saliva-resistant & baby safe. Super soft, prints & basics for baby, made from bamboo & organic cotton. Hypoallergenic - great for eczema relief. FREE gift with purchase. Code BUBHUB
sales & new stuffsee all
Bub Hub Sales Listing
HAVING A SALE? Let parents know about it with a Bub Hub Sales listing. Listings are featured on our well trafficked Sales Page + selected randomly to appear on EVERY page
featured supporter
Ro and Co
Ro and Co kids cooking classes and parties are a fantastic way for children to experiment with food. The classes and parties are designed to be both educational and fun, giving your child the skills they need to be confident and creative in the kitchen.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!