h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It seems to me that the parents are the ones who should make this ultimate decision, since they are the ones who must live with it. While it is easy for politicians, lawyers, activists, priests, and bystanders to issue whatever opinions and ultimatums they like, they are not currently facing a decision that will drastically impact the rest of their lives.

The guilt of aborting a fetus due to social pressure (as in China), of giving a child up to a deeply flawed adoption system (some parts of the US), or of providing ultimately inadequate care for a baby (some parts of Africa) will be born by the potential parents -- not society as a whole. Only the parents will know all the advantages and disadvantages placed before them in light of their particular moral, financial, social, and psychological situation.

For that matter, only the potiential parents can guess whether they can reasonably love, support, and care for the child they might have. Only they can fairly assess whether medical conflicts present for the mother and/or child outweight the potential benefits to the child in being born. Only they can truly be said to have the best interests of the family in their heart. The rest of us must be excepted from the decision, as the consequences for us are not nearly as great.

While responsible members of society should indeed consider their ability to offer guidance to people trying to make a decision, strong-arm tactics like the law should never be used to force a single decision in all cases. I find all social systems that impose a one-size-fits-all solution on parents equally unconscionable.

Choice is an imperative when it comes to unwanted pregnancies. Of course, that's just my opinion.

While I do agree with you about the whole pro-choice argument, the thing that sickens me is that people are getting "late-term" abortions.
Aborting a baby at 7 and 8 months is just wrong! If they didn't want the baby (for what ever reason) couldn't they have figured that out earlier in the pregnancy? I mean how long does it take someone to figure out that they don't want or aren't ready for a baby? What kind of sick puppy would carry a baby for that long then just decide (a couple weeks before full-term)that, "Eeeh, I don't want it anymore"?

I guess what I am getting at is that there should be a cut off date for getting abortions. Say 3-4 months?

From what I've heard, several countries have limits as to when abortions are legal. In Germany, for example, I believe that it is technically illegal at all times, but cannot be prosecuted if done within the first trimester or such. Definately better than the situation right now in the U.S. But also not ideal either.

The whole issue is just so terrible.

I have to say that I believe that the mother HAS to have a choice (within reason -- late term abortion is unacceptable). I was once in the position of contemplating my "options", about 20 years ago. I was in a relationship (with my future husband) at a time when I felt I really did not know him well enough to start a family. The few weeks I waited to determine if I was pregnant caused me to crystalize my feelings on this matter: while I did believe in choice, I could NOT have taken this path myself. I can only liken the feeling of possibly having an unwanted pregnancy with what severe claustrophobia would be: trapped in a body which was no longer under my control, facing a responsiblity that I was in no way ready for. Fortunately, I was not expecting, and my husband and I were married about two years after this crisis. Unfortunately, we never did have any children.

I know I am going out on a limb here, and many won't agree with me, but I personally believe that even late term abortions should be allowed *by the law*.

In general, late term abortions are extremely rare because women are reticent to have them. By that point in the pregnancy, various hormones have kicked in that serve to make the woman feel attached to the life within her. Also, of course, most women who have abortions are perfectly capable of deciding to do so in a much shorter period of time than 7 months.

The majority of late term abortions occur because either the woman's health is in danger, or because a very serious birth defect has been discovered in the child. Such a birth defect might already consign the baby to an early death, or it might cause the child to suffer lifelong pain while simultaneously placing an incredible burden on the parents. Again, I maintain that the law should not force a single solution on people faced with such a tough choice.

Of the minority of late term abortions that remain, manny occur when the mother is very young and has hidden the pregnancy from her parents and peers. In some cases, they genuinely want the baby but fear their parents will force them to have an abortion. When the parents finally do find out, some do exactly that. They might force their will by threatening to throw the girl out, or by threatening physical violence. In other cases, the girl doesn't want the baby -- but they are so afraid of their parents' reaction that they put off telling their secret.

Ironically, the stigma attached to abortion and unwanted pregnancies serves to *increase* the number of these cases. Girls would be more likely to tell someone about their condition if they didn't fear being ostracized or thrown out of the house. And indeed, there are cases where a teenage girl has been murdered or horribly beaten after their parents find out they are pregnant. It's not as if these girls are just stupid and can't make up their minds.

I understand that some mentally handicapped people undergo this same phenomenon. In some cases, the likelihood of passing on their condition to the potential child is very great. But the biological urge to procreate continues. This can lead to cases where an adult under supervision finds a way to have sex, and then hides the pregnancy in hopes that they will be 'allowed' to keep a baby they know they are unable to care for.

Someone who isn't emotionally stable enough to be honest about her pregnancy is also not, in my opinion, ready to raise a child. I agree it is very sad when a late term abortion occurs. But I still we should not pass blanket laws against such abortions, as such laws are very likely to cause lifelong tragedies for the children who are born to parents that are clearly unable to care for them.

You do make a good point about people being 'allowed' to keep a baby they know they are unable to care for. I personally think people should have to pass a competency test before they breed, and if they fail they should be rendered sterile (simpley put, stupid people should not breed). But that will never happen.

Not to pick a fight here but I don't think that there are very few times (if any)when a baby needs to be aborted to save the mother (I'm talking about babies in the third trimester). But in that case I would think that it would be OK, but the mother would have to be in REAL danger.

Birth defects, you're right I think that should be up to the parents to decide. And that would be one hell of a hard choice.

As far as the girls hiding the baby due to the fear of their parrents beating/killing them, we should 'abort' the girls parrents with a 45 caliber slug to the forehead. Same goes with any one who would hit/beat/kill a pregnant woman!

> You do make a good point about people being 'allowed' to keep a baby they know they are unable to care for. I personally think people should have to pass a competency test before they breed, and if they fail they should be rendered sterile (simpley put, stupid people should not breed). But that will never happen. <

Oh, but it has. More than once. One of those times, being stupid was the same as being mentally or physically handicapped, being Jewish, being Slavic, being Asian, being African, being Latino, being anything but a healthy Germanic. Fortunatly Nazi-Germany was beat in a big squabble and had to change it's views on humans. Norway practiced the same up until around the 60s, but then being stupid meant belonging to the Gypsy population. I don't know if we want that to happen again. Where do you draw the line for stupidity?

No I mean really stupid. Not being Jewish, being Slavic, being Asian, being African, being Latino, I don't care what race, creed or color people are. There are stupid people in every race.
I have seen countless times when I see a parrent doing something stupid with their kid. I've seen people driving down the highway with their kids hanging out of the window, I saw a mother give her baby a full peanut to suck on then left the baby alone (the baby could have very easily choked on it). One woman in the mall gave her two year old a pair of scissors to play with. What about the guy that forgot to drop his baby off at the sitters, and went to work for 8+ hours with the baby still sitting in the car (the baby died). I just think that there are people out there that should not have the responsibility of looking after a child (let alone two, three, four, eight, or ten children). Just because people can have kids dosen't mean they should.

While I agree that many people should not get kids, at least not in their current situations, it's extremely hard to tell who will master the fine art of upbringing, and who will not. It's even harder to pass laws on the subject. It all becomes scaty when society must have laws to regulate who can breed. It's close to genetic hygine, and that's a dangerous path to walk down.

Where is the line between stupid and really (unfit for procreation) stupid? Who draws the line?

And that's why I said "that will never happen".

Yeah, ok.. You got a point there.

the test could just be a lengthy "what would you do if.." type short essay test. anyone who fails it, well,.... This could be given after a course on safety, health, etc. to make sure that people would not just fail the test because of honest ignorance(no one ever told them any of these things). but it could be mostly common sense.

And then people who are not good at exams or are terrified of taking them, but are lovely-natured enthusiastic parent material could be banned. Yeah, great idea.

Parents learn by being parents, and no amount of 'knowledge' can prepare you for what it is like. Likewise, intelligence is entirely irrelevant to the experience of rearing children.

But then only someone with no experience of parenting could make such a wide-sweeping and idiotic statement as 'stupid people should not breed' and suggest they should be 'rendered sterile'.

~A~

Oh, your right. The Crack-Whores that have sex for drugs should be able to have as many babys as they can pop out because they are so good at caring for them. Leaving them in dumpsters, addicting them to drugs as soon as they are born, not feeding them or changing diapers because that costs money and they can't spare any because all the money they get goes to drugs.
What I was trying to say is not everyone is fit to care for kids, even if they do want them.

Fight on Zorpheus. I suspect that the only way we will ever get a society intelligent and compassionate enough to stop unfit parents from raising children is by preventing unfit parents from raising children. Catch 22.

Or maybe every prospective parent should be checked out by those wierdos at social services who prevent adoptions because the prospective father smoked a joint while he was at college, or the mother is too fat, or they have the wrong colour carpets.........

The demise of the family unit has lead (imo) to the rise in child neglect/abuse/call it what you will. A society which places more value on things than people, doesn't give mothers (and potential/prospective) and fathers enough time/support to raise their children properly. "back in the good old/bad old days" the extended family served as a check on bad parenting. OK, it wasn't perfect, and it's not ideal to leave small children in the care of an elderly grandmother (who has, after all, earned her rest) but it's better than leaving the poor little mite at home while the mother goes out to earn the food/rent/crack money.

And if (as has been said already) we can reduce the stigma of abortion, they will be carried out earlier. This isn't great, but it's an improvement. And nobody has mentioned how traumatic it can be for a doctor to perform one of these late abortions. (I know many of them refuse, but not all of them). We have to think what is the worse scenario: a late (7-8 month) termination or the prospect of some bloke walking his dog finding a dead newborn baby in a rubbish bin? Sophie, Hobson, they had their choices and they weren't easy. They never are.