Take a deep breath!

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-16-2008
Take a deep breath!
329
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 12:34pm
As you sit reading online I take it you cannot possibly dead. So I guess the question is how can someone who is alive be

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-26-2006
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 1:46pm

"As you sit reading online I take it you cannot possibly dead. So I guess the question is how can someone who is alive be

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 1:53pm

My position:

Mission Statement:
The short and long term risks inherent in gestation and childbirth, including but not limited to cesaerean sections, forms the basis for the woman's right to assess and choose those risks she assumes. These risks needs not be the basis for her choice, nor are her reasons for choosing abortion relevant. But as long as more than one option exists with regard to the future course of a pregnancy, no one but the woman has the right to choose the options and there attendant risks but the woman, and no one may force risks upon her without her express will and consent.

I believe the woman who is pregnant deserves the right to choose whether to continue the pregnancy, as no one else can assume those risks in her stead, thus they cannot make that choice. I do not believe the z/e/f has an inherent right that supersedes the right of the woman to determine the course of pregnancy, and thus the unborn's rights do not usurp the woman's until later in the pregnancy.

Until such time that viability can be reasonably established for the fetus, with a minimal of medical intervention (24 weeks), it is each woman's right to choose whether she continues the pregnancy or terminates it. No one else, including the father of the fetus, can assume the health and physical risks which can be fatal or leave long-term health problems. Additionally, in many cases, no one else assumes the risks to her employment or financial solvency. Therefore, the right to make an autonomous choice shall lie with the mother during this period of non-viability.

Exceptions can be made later in the gestation if there is a significant threat to the woman's health; meaning a risk to her health in the immediate period of pregnancy or a long-term problem being caused by the pregnancy, delivery and post-partum period. Each pregnancy also carries a 28% risk of the necessity for a cesarean section. This is major abdominal surgery that can cause life-threatening infection, thrombosis in the recovery period, adhesions that may cause abdominal problems necessitating surgery later in life. Whether health risks are cited as her reason to abort, they nonetheless constitute a reasonable threat to her well-being, and as such, no one has the right to force a woman to continue a pregnancy that may result in injury to her. Additionally, HER life supersedes the importance of the fetus, even up to birth.

"The surgery itself, as opposed to medical problems that might lead to a cesarean increases the risk of maternal death, hysterectomy, hemorrhage, infection, blood clots, damage to blood vessels, urinary bladder and other organs, postpartum depression, post traumatic stress syndrome, and re-hospitalization for complications. Potential chronic complications from scar tissue adhesions include pelvic pain, bowel problems, and pain during sexual intercourse. Scar tissue makes subsequent cesareans more difficult to perform, increasing the risk of injury to other organs as well as placenta previa, placenta accreta, infertility, ectopic pregnancy, uterine rupture in subsequent pregnancies and the risk of chronic problems from adhesions." http://www.ican-online.org/resources/faqs.htm

Also, if the fetus is determined by means of genetic testing (amniocentesis or chorionic villi sampling) to have a chromosomal abnormality, or is determined by proper ultrasound to have a significant deformity, the right to abort shall be her choice and thus is protected past the point of viability if necessary- as these conditions are not always detectible earlier in the pregnancy, as yet.

What you cannot do is force a woman to continue a pregnancy. It is about more than a baby- it's her body being pregnant for 9 months of her life, and the myriad of risks that go along with it. You cannot forcibly, legally, or morally take the autonomous choice over pregnancy away from the woman.

Regarding men & abortion:

Due to the unique process of pregnancy, whose risk can only be assumed by the woman, the freedoms and choices regarding the parenthood occur at differing times for each gender.
Each gender, though, has control over the choices of parenthood until their contribution leaves their body. For the man, this happens when he ejaculates and then places that sperm inside the woman's body. At this point, he has lost any jurisdiction over it and its by-products, because of the unique risks that either gestation or pregnancy present to the woman.
Likewise for the woman, she retains much choice until the product of her body- the egg which has evolved with the sperm into blastocyst, zygote, embryo and fetus, exits her body. In actuality- she has the LESSER of rights between the two genders- as her rights to choose abortion are curtailed in most states by gestational age and/or viability. The only guaranteed choice she has throughout her pregnancy is the right to choose to have her own life saved in lieu of that of the fetus.
Once a child is born, BOTH genders are held equally responsible for the financial upbringing of that child.

If it was JUST AS MUCH his BODY, that might be a point. But, since pregnancy and it's risks, both long & short-term, both acute and chronic, mild and severe, rest with the woman- he doesn't get a veto.

Regrettable it may be, that he does not have this veto power, and unfair it may seem- as long as the continuation or termination of a pregnancy directly impacts the woman's body, the only choice will be hers. So as a woman bears the brunt of the health & physical risks, she will be challenged to make the ultimate decision.

She MOST EMPHATICALLY has EVERY right to abort- even in the case of disagreement with the man. When the man grows a uterus and may gestate & give birth, then, and only THEN, does his vote actually weigh more than the woman's.
Face it: if a woman is pregnant, and there is a disagreement between the man & the woman as to whether to continue the pregnancy or have an abortion, there can NEVER be a fair & equitable solution. Never. In either option, one person's choice supersedes the other. In NO WAY should the winning vote come from the person whose body is NOT being used, whose body or life is NOT assuming the inherent short-term, as well as long-term, physical & psychological risks of gestation and birth.

While I feel empathy for any man in this situation, that empathy will NEVER outweigh my firm and unequivocal conviction that the woman, and the woman ONLY, must be the one who makes the final choice in the course of a pregnancy.


.
.
.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-06-2008
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 2:44pm

>>>A fetus can not feel pain or experience emotion (like fear) during an abortion.>>>

how do you know? their brain is developed, they might feel their bodies being ripped apart by suction. With that said...I agree with everything else you said to that man. You go. I have learned that you can be pro-choice but be absolutly disgusted with abortion. And he is talking in a religious sense, doesn't GOD give us the right to choose do to right or to do wrong? God is pro-choice, about EVERYTHING. We know what right and wrong. But we don't do right 100% of the time. Killing is wrong. Abortion is killing. But we have the right to choose to do it or not. Just like lying, stealing, cheating, sex, whatever. We make choices everyday, sometimes good and right, sometimes bad and wrong, and those choices are different for everyone too.

mommy to Devin 2-27-05 and Josiah 8-31-06 and expecting little one 8-19-08
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-26-2006
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 3:39pm

how do you know?


I know because it is a that fact has been proven by science.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-16-2008
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 4:32pm
I agree with everything you have stated. I believe that most people even those who are very prolife would agree in the termination of a pregnancy when a womans life is in danger. You seem to know alot and
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2006
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 4:34pm

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-03-2007
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 4:40pm

Early abortion is around ten times less likely to cause death than pregnancy, when you look at the entire population of American women lumped together.

A different issue is morbidity - the side effects or sickness associated with a condition. Term pregnancy is much more morbid than abortion, both in terms of frequency and severity.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2007
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 4:55pm

"Term pregnancy is much more morbid than abortion"

(Taking the term morbid in a different direction) Especially when you consider how messy it is.




Powered by CGISpy.com


Thanks

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 5:51pm

<>

Each and every pregnancy & delivery carries inherent risks; both short and long term, that may impact a woman's body, health or even life. The existence of those statistical risks for EVERY woman, form the foundation for her rights to choose the option and the attendant risks that she wishes to undergo. And you are seven times more likely to die in childbirth than abortion.
Now, on to her reasons. Her reasons are actually ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT to her right to choose abortion or continued gestation and childbirth. Her right exists totally independently and separate from her reasons.

<>

Could be. But that's HER call, not mine or anyone else. Because to make a choice as to which course she takes imposes the attendant risks upon a woman who is not willing to make that choice and subsequently assume those risks.
On a personal level, there are a LOT of reasons that I consider poor ones for abortion. There are just as many for women who choose to continue the pregnancy and have the child in my own opinion. But they are not my choices to make.

<>

Sure it is! All surgeries carry risks. But those risks are substantially lower than childbirth.

<>

Here are the data I have:

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/248/2/188

Mortality from abortion and childbirth. Are the populations comparable?
S. A. LeBolt, D. A. Grimes and W. Cates Jr

Critics have challenged previous comparisons of mortality from legal abortion and childbirth for contrasting population groups with different clinical characteristics. They allege that most women dying from abortion were young, white, and healthy, while those dying from childbirth had serious underlying conditions. To address this question, we calculated standardized abortion and childbirth mortality rates between 1972 and 1978. We also adjusted independently for preexisting medical conditions. These adjustments for demographic and health differences between the two populations actually widened the difference in the mortality risk between abortion and childbirth. Thus, between 1972 and 1978, women were about seven times more likely to die from childbirth than from legal abortion, with the gap increasing in the more recent years.

http://www.guttmacher.org/in-the-know/index.html
"The risk of abortion complications is minimal when the procedure is performed by a trained professional in a hygienic setting; fewer than 1% of all U.S. abortion patients experience a major complication. (The risk of death associated with abortion is one-tenth that associated with childbirth.) "
Gold RB, Henshaw SK and Lindberg LD, Abortion and Women's Health: A Turning Point for America? New York: AGI, 1990

FROM the CDC:

http://www.cdc.gov/od/oc/media/pressrel/fs030220.htm
Pregnancy-Related Mortality Surveillance -- United States, 1991-1999
"During the study period, about 12 pregnancy-related deaths occurred for every 100,000 live births. "

"Maternal mortality in the United States declined dramatically throughout most of the 20th century, from about 850 maternal deaths for every 100,000 births in 1900 to 7.5 in 1982. Since then, no further decrease in maternal mortality has occurred."

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0CYD/is_19_38/ai_109025358
<and
The maternal mortality rate in U.S. black women, for example, was 30 per 100,000, compared with 810 per 100,000 white women (MMWR Surveill. Summ. 52:1-8, 2003).>>

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5103a1.htm
<> see table: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5103a1.htm#tab19
Don't know WHICH CDC you are using, but mine concurs with my original stats.

http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications/press_releases/nr03-29-04-3.cfm

<

The death rate from legally induced abortion was 0.6 per 100,000 abortions in 1997, compared to 4.1 per 100,000 in 1972 -- a decline of 85%. Researchers found that the greatest rate of decline in mortality rates occurred at the earliest weeks of pregnancy. >>


.
.
.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-16-2008
Sat, 02-16-2008 - 6:42pm

This may come as a surprise to you but I am not very religous. What I said in my original post was a higher power, however I was not referring to god. I dont attend church regularly, I believe science plays a much larger role in what we are and how we have gotten to where we are as opposed to a GOD that waves a wand and what he commands happens. SURPRISE!

Pages