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

...is the number of MEN having the absolute answer that abortion is wrong and that it is best for the WOMEN if abortion is illegal.

I feel it must be up to the individual woman, with proper medical advice, to decide whether or not having a child is the right thing for HER.

A funny thing is that in America, the freedom of the individual is 'holy', don't you dare take it away from anyone, but let this subject enter the arena....

while i am vehemently pro-choice i can explain the freedom issue to you in a nutshell:

pro-choice advocates believe that the woman has the FREEDOM to choose what happens to her body and her life by choosing whether or not to abort a fetus that has already been conceived.

pro-lifers believe that the woman has already excercised her FREEDOM of choice by choosing to be put into a position that risks conception. after conception the fetus has a FREEDOM to live, and since it cannot make choices for itself we must act in it's better interests.

Even so, who is the person best suited to evaluate what is in the best interest of the fetus, a bunch of politicians and laywers and priests, or the woman carrying the fetus, knowing that she will, for whatever reason, not be able to give the child the upbringing it so rightly deserves?

Life is a gift, there is no denying that the most beautiful thing is a child growing up, learning all about life, but at times, life can be a burden that ruins more than it creates.

Mankind have learned to extend the life-expectancy for himself, doctors can do miracles with their skills, but I think it is important to focus on life quality more than just quantity.

and another thing:
People claiming they take the interest of unborn children, they have rarely any personal interest in the cases themselves, from my viewpoint it looks as if they only care about their own standing and clearing of their own consience with little regard to the feelings and view points of the people actually affected by pregnancy.

I don't think many people think lightly of having to take a decission on abortion, it is hard enough to do without having people telling you that you are evil and will burn in hell forever.

In my opinion, the skew between men and women reflects the social censorship placed upon women who have an abortion. According to the US's National Health Institute, one in four women will have an abortion sometime during their life. And yet, abortion is typically not discussed outside the immediate family. In fact, I would guess that husbands and children (if any) might know, but typically parents and siblings won't know.

I think that women who have had an abortion also feel more comfortable sharing their story and/or feelings about the event with other women. In a few cases, they may not even tell the man responsible for the conception. As a result, I would guess that the number of women who know somebody who has had an abortion is much higher than the number of men who do. I would guess almost nobody knows of more than a couple of women who have had abortions.

Honestly, I think many men walk around rather ignorant of the truth. They think abortion is more rare than it is, that a small number of women are having many abortions (not true), and that women who have abortions are heartless and employing a "cheap convenience." They never see the heartache and pain experienced by women who have abortions, so they assume there isn't any there. They have mistaken assumptions about what kind of women have abortions, because they don't know any of them.

Of course, they do know them. Lots of them. But since they don't realize they know them, it doesn't help much.

I can think of two solutions. First, I feel that men should always be called upon to make joint decisions about abortion when they are responsible for the conception. In my mind, it is unfair that unmarried women are placed with an incredible burden when unwanted pregnancy occurs while men are given the social freedom to ignore the problem. If more men understood the lifelong consequences of the decision, and if they shared their own guilt and pain with each other even a little, I think more men would feel compassion for people who have had abortions.

Second, both men and women who have decided in favor of abortion must be allowed to tell their stories. I have read a few, and they almost always make me cry. But the emotional roller coaster opens your eyes to whole facets of the decision making process that you wouldn't otherwise consider, and I think we are missing this in our public debates about abortion. These stories are mostly relegated to web sites that aren't afraid to cover the space where sex and politics collide. The huge majority of people will never read them.

And in our personal relations, I feel we should try not to jump up with condemnation whenever a woman attempts to come forward with the truth. We should reserve judgment until we hear the whole story. And we should allow the story to be told, if the woman is willing to tell it. If she is not, we should respect her privacy. She is right in worrying that friendship might be withdrawn. She remembers the abortion protesters outside the clinic she went to, right?

I think it is oversimplification to say that pro-life and pro-choice positions are based on understandings of FREEDOM. I feel that since there is so much ignorance about the real world causes and consequences of unwanted pregnancy and abortion, both positions are based at least partly on ignorance.

You make some excellent points. Abortion is NOT considered lightly by the parents - rather it is usually a decision arrived at via a lot of tears. The after-guilt can last for years. As you point out, abortion is far commoner than many people realize.

I notice that many of the anti-abortionists that I speak to have never been in a situation where they have to make the decision themselves.

That's not always true. Facing an unwanted pregnancy does change a lot of people's minds, but not always in the way you would expect. Some people who have an abortion later regret their action, and become pro-life -- arguing that if abortion were illegal, they would not be facing the guilt they now face.

But doesn't that strike you as a rather convenient way of placing the blame on someone else, to relieve their guilt?

~A~

It is certainly true that being in the situation can change opinions; it is also true that one can take the easy way for oneself and go right on holding the same beliefs when applied to others. The egregiously feckless American Congressman Barr, a leader in the Pro-Life crowd, financed his mistress' abortion and goes right on leading the hue and cry against the practice. My own opinion is that it is entirely up to the people concerned, i. e. the parents, and perhaps anyone they ask for advice (or for money), and certainly not to me. I would like, however, to see the folks who try to block abortions and who succeed, be forced to care for and pay for the child thus born. I bet it would take the 'unwanted' in 'unwanted children' up a good couple of notches! The real motive of many Pro-Lifers, I suspect, is to punish the mothers for their 'sin'. These seem to be the same folks who bitch about 'welfare mothers' and public aid to the poor.

Well, there certainly are a lot of good points there.
I think that a subject that is never ever addressed (usually, see above postings though) is the issue of the children. When a woman is pregnant, no matter how big the bump, nobody ever really sees a little snot-nosed kid who needs a "whole bunch of stuff" to get it through life. And this includes love & nurture as well as material posessions.
I imagine (I don't have any data to hand) that many many abortions are carried out on single mothers. And I imagine that mothers who already have 2 or 3 kids, and have to work to help support the family (in these oh-so-uncaring times) also bump up the statistics. No matter how much they might want a child, the simple fact is: women need to work to support their kids. Until we have adequate day-care, and recognition that bringing up the tax payers (and pension contributions) of the next generation is valuable but expensive work. Until this is addressed in an adequate way, abortion will remain a fact of life. And if it's not legal and in the relative safety of a clinic with a fully qualified doctor, we're looking at more women dying from complications. And when you think that many of these women are leaving motherless children in the world......
So, stop talking about abortion and talk about child care and the value of parenthood instead.
Where I live abortion is illegal. Many women travel to Holland to get them, I can only imagine how that makes them feel in an already awful situation.

I agree with all you say heartily. I was around when abortion was illegal in the USA. Naturally, the wealthy got them safely anyway, while poorer girls often died or were permanently damaged but this was also the era when a pregnant unwed girl was ruined (while the father was quite a stud!). If he did the 'right' thing and married her, often they embarked on an unhappy life of low income because pregnant girls or married guys were not allowed in public high schools. We went to Mexico, not Holland - not a real good choice in those days! Although many abortions are due to hardship, there are also those where the female uses it as her birth control method of choice or just doesn't want to be bothered. Children of such people are equally likely to be denied the benefits of good parenting. Someone above said 'life is a gift' - well, that means it is something given, not a right. The dead kid never knows he's dead, so isn't probably all that upset about it. But these horrible stories of abused, neglected and used kids of people who are incapable of caring about anyone but themselves, or whose parents are so worn and harassed by multiple jobs and no hope of anything better are FAR more horrifying than the mere fact of termination before birth. Lots of people miscarry, so 'God' does it all the time, why should man be any better?

Ah, someone on my wavelength.
I'm not sure you should be comparing miscarriage to termination. I recently miscarried a baby and, although it was an accident and I had never considered termination despite the financial struggle we would have had, and it hurts a lot. My rational self tells me it wasn't to be, and my compassionate self tries to understand women who have terminations (for whatever reason) do it in the best interests of everyone and it isn't a light decision. But there is no comparison. (even writing this is a bit choking, actually, but I think someone has to say it).
I'm a non-believer, but I think if there was a God and s/he was supposed to be so compassionate etc. s/he wouldn't let people who would be "bad parents" or consider termination get pregnant in the first place.
I believe that the ultimate decision should be the woman's. It is her body after all. But we need to get to the point where the pregnancies aren't occuring when they're not wanted, and that they are recognised early enough that a "simple" D&C can end it. I think that 16 weeks should be the absolute limit (that's when the kicking can start). After that: sorry, plenty of people want to adopt babies, there are alternatives.
The key to the whole unwanted pregnancy thing (especially amongst teenagers) is down to that old chestnut: education.

Well, this thread managed to start very little kicking and screaming and fighting.
Now, if everybody would just think like us....

It never ceases to amaze me how much kicking and screaming can be done over relatively trivial things (where a motorway will go, abolishing free school meals etc) when the big issues don't provoke much debate just "digging in" and an attitude of "my opinion counts, all the rest are wrong".
This is a serious moral issue, and must be thoroughly debated - but I fear there will never ever be a compromise that all sides can accept.
My own opinion is that we have to set the parameters of what is (just about) acceptable and what is not. We have to accept that, like taxes, abortion is a fact of (and I hesitate to say this) life. It will go on. We have to decide how we're going to make it less traumatic for all concerned, and that the situation doesn't arise as often as it does. It's a typically human paradox: half the world is starving, the rest are on a diet. So many people want children and can't, so many aren't prepared to have them (for whatever reason). We are supposed to be intelligent beings, so why can't we work it out?
Hm.
And we need a bit more "poke" in these threads. So.......
It's a short step from legal abortion on demand, to forcible abortion for "less desirable" sections of the community, to eugenics.... I think you know where this is going. Where do we draw the line?

I don't think it is a 'short step' from legal abortions to forced abortions. Not at all. Both forced abortions and the criminalization of abortions share the same seed. That seed is society attempting to force its decisions down the throats of individuals. Eugenics too is about society overpowering the needs and desires of the individual citizen.

Well, you're right of course. Perhaps I should have said "relatively short step". After all, it is within living memory (especially here) when people were spat at and physically abused in the streets for just having dark hair and a big nose. It's no joke to hear the neo-nazis here going on about how many foreign kids there are here, and that something should be done about it.
To get back to the subject, I think we have to accept that a certain amount of abortions will take place, illegal or not. And go on from there.

Sigh

A good friend of mine teaches high schoolers in a public school in Australia with a low socio-economic demographic. She has told her class time after time that if they are having sex, to at least have it safely. She even said to come to her for condoms, KY jelly, etc, etc if they were embarrassed to go to the chemist.

However, even though all this open discussion and education was happening, a girl from her class recently told her "I think I'm pregnant"!

She is 16.


I think for younger adults, perhaps the cause-effect or consequense does not actually sink in until the consequence actually happens to them. That is, the syndrom of "it won't happen to me" is still fairly strong.

The moral question is: Should society withhold abortion in an attempt to make these kids face up to their responsbilities (which smells like punishing them for their "sins"), while allowing abortion on demand trivialises the whole procreation thing.

In an attempt to provoke a meaningful debate, what do others think?

*sits back to watch the sparks fly*

Abortion. not a subject to be taken lightly. My overiding sense of the situation is pro-life protesters outside clinics harrasing already emotional women and men. While I could be wrong, as I frequently am, but I tend to get the idea that most of the protesters are women. I did say most.
I personally feel that a persons rights should not be invaded for anyhting where there is a viable, legal choice to be made. For what ever reason, the couple, or single female should be allowed to terminate thier child. In an already overpopulated world, the inabilty to abort would cause environmental havoc. There are many points for abortion, health grounds (of mother or baby) the situation the mother and/or father is in and so forth. what it comes down to is choice. In Britain, our choices are being erroded every day, and the day when we are no longer in control of our own persons, our own bodies, is the day I move country.
I am not even going to use the word catholic. not once.
R+.

First, let me say to SHO, that I am deeply sorry to hear of your loss. It is easy to be flip on subjects without having actually had the experience.
As to the Abortion to Eugenics issue, every form of moderation in the US (where I am) is pointed to by the opponents as the first step on the slippery slope to what ever. If we prevent people from screaming the 'f' word at kids in the street, it is the first step towards the end of freedom of the Press, if we take away assault weapons it is the first step to taking away hunting rifles and so on ad nauseam. I still maintain that anything inside one's body is one's to keep or otherwise decide about. Why not say it is God's will that you don't have a cancer cut out? I think the point at which someone has responsibility to another is when they DO have a child. At that point I truly feel one has given over the right to party endlessly and do just any old thing s/he wants. If you know you are going to keep up the drinks (I am not talking about moderation) and partying and what-the-helling, then having a kid is really rotten. To the kid. As to adoption, I agree it seems a great solution (god forbid they end up in an orphanage (especially Catholic! - I WILL mention the word!). With all the people paying thousands to get kids and all the others wanting to neglect, abort and dump them, it DOES seem that there is a logical answer here... But let a person, couple, anybody say they WANT a kid (and can't have their own) and all Hell breaks loose - do you go to church, make a fortune, work 8 hours a day, no more no less, etc. etc. etc. Meanwhile any old slag can HAVE one and keep it - the courts here regularly return kids to homes so abusive that there have been prior child deaths at the hands of the parents. I never make the mistake of expecting the best of people, particularly en masse. As Miss Marple said, "I always think the worst. It is so often the truth!" People always say the kid could have been an Einstein. Wonder how many Attilas we may have lost? I'd say an unwanted kid is far more likely to be one of the latter

Social services the world over seem very quick to deprive families of their children under the most spurious of circumstances, whilst letting others return to violent deaths. That says more about them than it does about these socially inadequate families.
One of the threads here concerns what governments should do or not do. I think that governments should give more support to families (especially the "wobbly" ones) and encourage a society where nobody is penalised for having kids. Children are, after all, our future (on a purley fiscal level: they are the taxpayers of the future) it is in our own best interests to nurture them, and give them an environment where they feel secure and loved. What has this to do with abortion? This: if a child is not going to be wanted, loved and nurtured..... better not to be born. (since adoption is a stupidly convoluted process and also needs to be radically changed)
And in case anyone was wondering, I'll out myself as a pro-choice supporter. I would choose (for myself) to have any child I conceived, but for my daughters? I think they should be allowed to choose not to, and I will always give them the support they need for this.