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

I couldn't resist

>>Please do not try to debate with me about capital punishment right now. I have supported capital punishment in the past, (except for the electric chair, which I think is not humane) but am currently rethinking my position due to corruption in the courts.<<
Good thing I read to the end! I was about to debate capital punishment with you - surprise, I am *totally* opposed. I am glad you are re-thinking it, Nerd42, for whatever reason...

The seriousness of the topic aside, this is an entertaining debate.

The new law says that; no prgnancy could be terminated by action of the mother or a third party unless:

In the opinions of three pre-natal specialists the feotus was not going to survive till term and that to continue with the pregnancy any further would put the mother at unescessary risk. This does not allow for D&X terminations as even though the feotus stands no chance of life past a week ouside the womb. The mother must still delivere live regardless of potential injury including disfigurement and infertility of the mother unless the mothers life is in the opinion of three pre-natal specialists definately at risk.



People like TWO BIT and his wife despite there stated wishes would have no option but to carry to term any pregnancy of a disabled child. Then possibly but the child up for adoption which is a shame because children with dissabilities are less likely to be adopted. Or if prior to one parent had emotionally bonded with the child they would as, TWO BIT told us, probably get a divorce.

Women and girls who have been raped would for nine months carry a constant reminder of their attack around with them. At the end of the pregnancy they could put the child into the already flooded abortion "market". Some of these chidren would have inherited defects that come from being the chidren of incest, we already know how children with birth defects get on in the abortion "market". Not to mention those who might be born with AIDS or other sexually transmitted diseases passed on during the attack.

There would be a large demand for housing from young couple and single mothers who demand their right to accomodation in line with the law or who need it because their parents have thrown them out. Ofcourse many of these people being young and not very qualified and having little or no training will be betterr off claiming state benefits. They may have qualifications and experience but the difficultie and financial demands of looking after a new baby may mean that it makes more sense in the short term to live off state benefits.

PROHIBITION DOES NOT WORK

Terminations would continue in the back room at hair dressers and butchers, basically anywhere that there is someone unscrupulous enough to make money out of someones elses miserable predicament. Rather than pay money to support a child or to finance a bact street termination some men who are not averse to being violent to women will as a-matter-of-course beat their wife or girlfriend till she miscarries.

Any benevolent doctor who took pity on women in any of the situations above would be liable to criminal charges and being struck off. Whilst backstreet abortionists would flourish protected by a code of silence by the high and mighty who they perform these services for and by bribing the police. At the less affluent end of the scale they would be protected by a wall of silence created by the communities that use them. Whilst the women they butcher would be left infertile even after proper doctors have tried to patch up the damage down by people who ONLY care about profits or worse still they will for shame and fear of prosecution hide their injuries and die from complications.

Heres your future Nerd42. Happy?

That is an unfair guess at what might happen I have left out that adoption is not always a sad story quite often it can turn out to be something wonderful from sad circumstances.

Also that babies do not always have to survive in the womb for nine months to survive.

My medical knowledge as you can probably tell isnt that hot nor are my powers of social clairvoyance, but my idea are based on what HAS happend in the past. In regard of terminations and the prohibiton of alcohol especially.

Much as the circumstances that come about may trouble the minds of religious fundamentalists who want such laws implemented they can atleast salve their consciences with the thought that they "have done the right thing".

Don't forget that doctors are fallible like anyone else, and the fact that they say a child will be born disabled doesn't necessarily mean it will. I have heard an expereience of a couple that were told their unborn child definitely had severe brain damage, and that they should have an abortion. Due to their religion, they refused. Their daughter is now 8 years old if I remember correctly, and there is nothing wrong with her. (Well, no more than is wrong with all of us!)

Hi

I have not contributed to this thread for a couple of months, and have been looking at the last few postings this evening, I will admit that I have not looked at all the postings since I was last here.

One thing I would like to say is that I am basically against abortion, however I would hate to go back to the days of butchering women who sought a back street abortion, more often than not resulting in horrific consequences.

To bring a child into the world is a huge responsibility, one that should not be taken lightly but unfortunately often is, and with the availability of fertility treatment today even women who should, according to nature,be becoming grandmothers become mothers, because they have a nice virile young lover and want a nice licckkle baby as a result of the union.

Not fair on the child.

Anyone finding themselves pregnant with a much longed for child who is discovered to be less than perfect is in a terribly difficult situation, my heart goes out to them, no-one has a right to judge the decisions of anyone experiencing this, I think definitely it is a matter for the couple involved whether they terminate the pregnancy or continue, without being made to feel guilty about the decision they make.

Jane

Reasoned comments all, and on that note I would like to rant a little.

The researchers here on this thread and elsewhere on Hootoo are a varied mix, everything from young people to old codgers, from educated to being educated to not educated and not interested in being educated. I find that a lot of researchers find fault in the young, or those whose beliefs are based on faith rather than logic, or those who have become ingrained in their ways and thought patterns. Everyone has the right to an opinion, and if we want to point out the fallacy (in our individual eyes) of that opinion, can't we just stick to logical trains of thought and not get personal?

Just a thought, logical or otherwise.

(Most of this post was ignored by Nerd42 earlier, so please forgive the repetition.)



Nerd42,

We have shown how Intact Dilation and Extraction, renamed in more emotive terms by the anti-choice lobby as 'Partial Birth Abortion', is used in the most extreme circumstances to save the mothers life.

One example is (and I'm repeating a quote from [now much] earlier here):
'If a fetus develops hydrocephalus, the head may expand to a size of up to 250% of the radius of an adult skull, making it impossible for it to pass through the birth canal. In such a case, the physician may elect to perform a D & X procedure by draining off the fluid from the brain area, collapsing the fetal skull and withdrawing the dead fetus. Allowing a woman to continue in labor with a severely hydrocephalic fetus is not an option; attempted birth would kill her.'

So there you have it. It is gruesome, unpleasant, and deeply harrowing for all involved, but it happens to save lives.


Nerd42, I have a direct question, to which I would love a direct answer:

Which is better:

- The mother surviving and a foetus, which would not survive anyway it is so deformed, dying.

Or,

- Both mother and foetus dying.

That is the choice. From your stance on D&X/PBA, you seem to prefer the latter, I would love to hear otherwise.





Latter posting have also put the abortion issue as a stark choice in my mind. Women will want and seek abortions whether they are legally available or not. That is a fact of life. It sucks, it's horrible to think about but it is something we have to deal with. With this in mind the choice is clear:

Women getting 'butchered' by non-sanctioned 'backstreet' amateurs,

or,

Women getting the best medical and psychological attention that society can offer?

Making abortion illegal will not stop abortions. It will only cause Women to die and suffer. Abortion is a horrific thing to do to both mother and foetus, but it happens. Step into the real world.

Thanks, I look forward to a reply this time, Nerd42.

Ste

hi Ste,

Nerd 42 ignores my postings as well, but maybe you will have more luck.

az

Hi az nice to speak to you again.

I'm not holding my breath, but perhaps a little persistance will pay off and get him to think what his stance on abortion would mean for women and society.



Ste

Ste, the situation you mention comes within *my* personal zone of acceptability of abortion - to save the mother's life - I don't know what nerd42 would say.

Of course the D&X procedure is horrific and should only be performed when it is obvious that the mother's life is seriously in danger. I don't think anyone (except perhaps Nerd42) would argue this point.

But in terms of women seeking safe medical abortions within the first trimestre of pregnancy, I would argue that there are many ways a woman might feel her life is 'in danger'. Perhaps she is very young or very poor (or both) and has no way of supporting a child. Well, I could list many different circumstances, but the bottom line is that if a woman does not feel capable of going through a full-term pregnancy then she should not be forced to.

I can well imagine that a woman may feel her life is in danger (even if not physically) by having an unwanted child. And yes, this *is* a sad fact of life. But burying our heads in the sand and pretending it doesn't exist will not help. Also, so much of this issue comes down to personal beliefs. Which *should* remain personal. The point being that as a society we should deal with facts and not feelings when it comes to offering proper medical care to people who need it.

Oh, am I repeating myself again?

Well, nobody else is saying anything!

az

I am storing myself up for a big post

"The head of health and social services in the US is against all abortions, even in cases of rape and incest."

No shock there, the head of health and social services in the US is a political appointee. The current occupant of the White House (the de facto, if not de jure, head of state) is also an opponent of all abortions, and he appoints to cabinet level positions.

The fact that "The head of health and social services in the US is against all abortions, even in cases of rape and incest" does not in and of itself speak against or for the availability of abortion. Rather, it illustrates that ideological purity is required for appointment within political entities.

The ill-named procedure "Partial Birth Abortion" has become a publicity tool for the anti-abortion movement.

The whole issue is one sure to stir up ill feeling, even though abortion and abortifacient methods were available and in use long before Roe v Wade. Roe v. Wade simply affirmed the right to privacy in access to legally-sanctioned, medically-supervised abortion.

Can anyone provide a list of countries where abortion is not legal?

Or, in the case of the USA, the states where it is not yet legal?

I assume that abortion is legal in parts of the USA, all of Canada, most of Europe. But I don't know about the rest of the world.

Yes, I know, I could be Googling all of this info if it weren't 2.30am and I should have been in bed ages ago. I just wondered about this - if anyone had this information available.

thanks,
az

In the US, as far as I can tell, abortion is legal in all states - it's doctor availability that makes all the difference. There aren't any doctors willing to perform 'unnecessary' abortions in my area, for example. If I wanted the procedure, I'd have to travel to a neighboring state or 300 miles to the south. What makes this even more complicated is the fact that it is, last time I hear, a felony for a non-parent (including sisters, friends, boyfriends, grandparents) to take a child under 18 out of state for an abortion. So, say a 17 year old in my town wants an abortion and is afraid of her father beating her over it. She can either try to get all the way down to southern Idaho or drive a mere 90 miles to Spokane, WA but risk the person driving her going to prison. Absurd. A person old enough to exercise her sexuality should be allowed full reproductive rights.

As far as I know abortions in Europe are illegal in Eire and 'unavailable' in Northern Ireland. Hence the continual flow of women across the Irish Sea to England to obtain such a procedure.

I'll begin by saying that I haven't read all of the posts on this thread, but I've read the first couple of pages from the start and the recent ones. The first subject I'd like to address is the link between pregnancy and domestic violence. I can provide some interesting research that shows that pregnancy may be the stimulas for the first episode of domestic violence or may prompt escalation of violence, domestic violence appears to be a more frequent occurrence that other obstetric complications such as pre-eclampsia, placenta praevia (don't know what that is?), twins, or gestational diabetes. On average pregnant teenagers experience higher levels of domestic violence, and adult pregnant woman suffer greater severity of abuse than do younger woman.

Now for some interesting (but greatly disturbing) statistics.
- Pregnant woman between the ago of 18 and 24 years are twice as likely to be abused as non-pregnant woman.
- As many as one in fifty pregnant woman will be beaten during pregnancy. (DK Bohn, 'Domestic Violence in Pregnancy: Implementations for Practice', Journal of Midwifery. vol 3, no 2 1990, pp86-88)
- Another study found that 68% of pregnant woman at an emergency department were victims of domestic violence. (A Kerr 'Domestic Violence: Treat it Seriously' Australian Family Physician, Vol 18, no 11, 1989, pp1362-69)

So Nerd violence other than abortion does indeed happen "inside the womb". As for your comments on child abuse, I feel that they over-simplify what is an important issue. There are many contributing factors towards child abuse, and maybe there is a link between child abuse & the parents desire to have children. However I have not heard the argument used before & I fail to see how your reference provides a substantive correlation between the two. More importantly like Badger, I fail to see how it supports your case.

Well, I remember when doing some crisis training learning that pregnancy often triggers higher levels of violence in the male because he feels less in control of the situation, and he realizes at some level that he has to compete for her attentions and affections. The amount of rage a man is capable of leveling against the child -i.e. the violent directed at the abdomen area - is staggering. Men with other psychological problems allow them to be cool and calculating enough to exert punishment and control over his female partner whilst sparing the child (his precious progeny). I'm not sure which sort of man is more frightening

Placenta previa has to do with the placenta implanting on the uterine wall close to or completely covering the cervix. This poses obvious obstacle dangers as childbirth nears and the potential for the loss of a great deal of the mother's blood among other complications. Preclampsia is also known as Pregnancy-induced hypertention, and is typically related to problems that already existed in the body of the mother, though being stressed out can indeed raise blood pressure to dangerous levels. Gestational diabetes occurs when the hormones produced during pregnancy interfere with insulin in the body. Knocking a mother about is not going to cause implantation problems, nor can it turn one baby into two, or create hormonal inbalances or organ problems of the type that would cause these problems. I'm curious what your sources are.