A Question for the Pro-Choicers

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-05-2008
A Question for the Pro-Choicers
138
Mon, 09-22-2008 - 12:35pm

After lurking on these debates for a while, I've come to the conclusion that there would be little I could say or do to change anyone's mind, however I AM interested to know some more information of Pro-Choicers reasons for their beliefs.

So, after reading a lot of the posts, I've noticed that there have been a lot of pro-choicers who bring up the issue of women's health, and the subsequent termination of the pregnancy (i.e., baby is potentially putting mamma's health at risk by her carrying it to full term).

My issue is not with this. I am a pro-lifer, and were I to conceive an ectopic pregnancy, I would sadly have to abort it because there is very little chance the baby would survive, and I most likely not survive as well. This view is supported by my religion, so these are not the circumstances I am talking about.

We all know that there a lot of abortions happening all the time. I'm not gonna pretend I know the numbers, but I'm gonna throw the idea out there that a lot of these abortions happen to viable pregnancies because of other concerns of the mother (assuming that the risks of carrying the fetus to term would be no more than an average pregnancy for an average woman).

So my question is this: If people are speaking of the woman in question, who decides to abort her average pregnancy for whatever reason (there are multitudes of reasons she might, I'm not even gonna try to throw in some examples) and saying that "it is her right, after all, her health could be endangered", what about all the risks of abortion itself?

Here is a link I found, that lists quite a few possible complications from abortion:
http://www.deveber.org/text/whealth.html
I'm sure there is more out there, I just thought that this could be a place to start.

The complications preceding from an aborted fetus COULD far outweigh the risks of carrying the child full term. In fact, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that a lot of the complications women have with their pregnancies could be avoided if they'd never had an abortion to begin with! (Incompetent cervix, pre-term birth, higher risks of ectopic pregnancies, to name just a few). This is of course an assumption on my part. Of course there will be always risks in pregnancy, but I almost wonder if women really are aware of all the risks when they do have one?

depression, possible suicide, infertility, cerebral palsy in your future children, cervical cancers, actual death... wow, these factors may be the woman's individual right to choose, but it is a strain on our health care system nonetheless. When your current and future children are at risk as well, abortion goes far beyond simply impacting the woman's health. It affects her partner, kids, and her country. So yes, she has a choice, but should it be so easy and socially acceptable given all the risks? People have been having babies in far greater numbers to abortions in the past societies leading up to this one, and it's gotten us to where we are today. Do we have an issue here or don't we?

Photobucket

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-31-2004
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 8:23am

I'm not sure what the procedure is called, but they can do this thing where they basically sear the inside of your womb. No tubal, no loss of hormones, but no more periods ever again. Obviously you'd have to wait until you were done having kids, but it might be an option for you.


baby siggy
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-14-2003
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 9:01am

"Actually, some people do say exactly that. When my friend was raped, someone told her it was her own fault. She had slept with two guys in this particular circle, and that apparently gave her rapist the idea that she was common property."


Your poor friend.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-14-2003
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 9:05am

Thanks, I'll do a google search on it.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-31-2004
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 9:10am

baby siggy
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-31-2004
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 9:11am

This was an option they offered my mum, who is entering her 13th year of menopause. I'll ask her if she knows the name of the procedure.


baby siggy
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-14-2003
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 9:22am
Thanks!
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-19-2006
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 9:24am
Were you adopted? I am allergic to spermicide as well as cant take hormones. I have a condom baby so I dont trust those either. Trying seems to be the best birth control for me lol

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-19-2006
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 9:25am
I think it is called uterine abalation but don't put money on that

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-15-2008
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 9:36am

""Were you adopted? I am allergic to spermicide as well as cant take hormones. I have a condom baby so I dont trust those either. Trying seems to be the best birth control for me lol""


I know a LOT of people who are allergic to things like that, have problems with hormones, etc.

** Lori **

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-19-2006
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 9:45am

LOL probably. I "quit trying" but I never went on Birth control of any type so I think I was technically "still trying" I get so confused. All I know is when it comes time to take drastic measures DH is getting fixed because I think the hospital here has seen enough of my insides.


Photobucket

Pages