Abortion: Is it Absolutely Despicable, or are there Situations Wherein It's Okay?

Discussion in 'THREAD ARCHIVES' started by Malkuthe Highwind, Aug 18, 2012.

  1. Not that I mean to start a flame war or anything, but I've recently read a News Article that has set the gears in my mind turning about the whole morality of the abortion situation.

    When I say okay, I don't mean it's completely acceptable and should be embraced, but rather, okay in a sense that the benefits outweigh the cost. Like, it'll still be disappointing and heart-rending, but it would be okay because it saves the life of the mother.

    Personally, I think if it's because of medical reasons and the mother has a potential to die because of the baby, it's better to get an abortion because if the mother does die, the widower might be left with permanent psychological trauma and the baby would probably grow up without a mother.

    What do you think?
  2. Looking at this particular article I wouid say that the doctors made a very poor judgement call based on the situation. Based on the definition I've been given of abortion, I wouldn't consider the use of chemotherapy to save the life of the mother to be considered an abortion at all. The death of the fetus is a secondary effect of the procedure. I would have imagined that saving one rather than letting both mother and child die would have been a more desirable outcome from an ethical standpoint in medicine. Of course, I'm not a doctor living in the Dominican...

    From a moral stand point I don't think there is anything wrong with the procedure of abortion itself. I believe that there are a variety of different situations beyond medical complications which would be perfectly acceptable situations for a termination of pregnancy. For instance, in situations where the mother was a victim of sexual assault.

    Another consideration would be where young woman do not have access to adequate resources in order to provide for the child. Some would argue "what about turning over the child to the state?" and to this I would respond with the fact that there are many countries where even the state lacks the resources to provide for children in it's care. A perfect example of this is the current situation with the Chauchescu children in Romania where children are locked in cages, naked for 23 hours out of the day and are fed out of troughs on mass like farm animals.

    When it comes to abortion at home, I also have a very firm belief that women have the right to choose if they want to bring a child into this world.

    However, one issue that I do have with how abortion is governed in my country. In Canada there is currently a vaccuum in the law surrounding this procedure. What i mean by this is that after the right for abortion was fought for here, no politician wanted to touch the issue with a 40 ft pole. This means that an abortion can be performed an abortion at ANYTIME which makes the process very dangerous for those desperate individuals who decide they want to terminate their pregnancy at 8 months and were unable to find a competant doctor who was willing to conduct the operation.
  3. ^----- I agree with pretty much everything that guy said!

    A woman should be able to choose what she does with her own body. I don't care about reasons, ethics, etc. Her body. Her choice. Her life. Her consequences. Nobody has the right to take away a person's ability to choose what happens to their body.

    With that said, personally I would never be able to get one myself. >< My heart would hurt too much. But I whole-heartedly believe that people shouldn't bring babies in to the world that they can't take care of. Birth control is best, but abortion is a legit option for people who find it necessary.

    The only thing I have a very grey-feeling about is the late-term ones. :/ That just FEELS wrong for me, cause the baby is almost fully developed by then. If a woman carried the child for that long, I don't see why she couldn't go the extra months and then do adoption. If it was a medical issue, totally understand. But for any other reason. eeeh...
  4. I agree with pretty much everything said here, so I don't feel much need to add anything more. On the subject of late-term abortion, I don't think that any woman who has carried the fetus for that long would abort lightly. It's not one of those things where it's like "Oh, shit is getting real now. I think I'm just going to cut and run." Or at the very least I hope it isn't. It seems like the decision to abort late term is more often than not a life-and-death situation and one that is not taken lightly. It's a private situation with any number of varying factors that make it very difficult to decide.

    There are also instances where the fetus could unfortunately die in the womb where a late-term abortion may be necessary. I think I would rather go through with this than have to endure the psychological and physical trauma of carrying a corpse until my body rejected it. An icky thought, but it's something that happens.

    And yes, birth control is the bestest. I'm excited that soon insurance companies will start covering it AND that there appears to be a pill for men in the works.
  5. Going to say some things here that might be offensive, you have been warned.

    arguement (open)
    More or less the fact is that abortion was never really considered morally wrong until the churches got their hands on it. Things came up like the question of whether or not the child has a soul at a certain stage. Overall you can't even tell if you have a soul, yet. And to be perfectly honest a soul really consists of memories, experiences, and personality. When those are gone you are actually considered clinically dead. In the case of this baby it has no memory yet or capacity for it there for no experiences and the frontal lobe (where personality is developed) is not yet developed. In other words the baby has no "soul" by clinical standards. Then again the medical field changes their decisions so much you never know at what point the baby is technically conscious. But outside that it is definitaly a choice a would-be mother should be allowed to make rather than forcing her into this agreement which has a large impact. That impact is most dramatic in the finnacial portion. Just like those shows where people go out to find bad dog owners why would you have the baby in the first place if you have no way to take care of them?

    Being male I cannot accurately judge the stress of loss on such a thing but I do know it would be like losing a member of the family. Although talking from a logistical stand point and something we need to consider as a species, we really don't NEED that child born. There is far more than enough humans on the planet, we are already the dominant specie and we live in every corner of the world. Remember that film Soylent Green? Overpopulation will become a problem at some point and there will be no easy solution like Soylent Green because cannibalism kills. And fun fact the only reason we've stayed at a low enough population is due to large scale wars throughout history. You could argue that wars cause a burst in population like the baby boomers but the fact remains far more people were killed in WWII than were birthed.

    So to sum it up. It is a CHOICE and must be considered one. Each job has something someone does not like and for Doctors it might as well be abortion/loss of patient. We can't save everyone and I do not mean we do not have the eventual ability to do so, rather we cannot keep saving everybody without a food source that has the same growth rate as our consumption rate.

    Hope you can take into consideration those facts and look at them objectively.
  6. I'm not going to get real into this. I hate this subject with a passion. I tend to be the outlier on this subject, the one no-one else agrees with. And that's fine with me. Everyone has their own opinions, and the right to do what they want. So I have my own opinions and the right to do as I want. I am not a Christian (I am the opposite of a Christian if you must know, and I don't mean atheist), I am not conservative (I am an independent voter, and quite frankly I don't think my vote or anyone else's vote matters to the politicians), but I am pro-life in regards to myself, not anyone else. Let me explain.

    Personally, I do not agree with abortion except in cases where the baby or mother would die, as in medical complications. I would never get an abortion even if raped, because I would say that child deserves a right to be born and possibly a happy life. Just because their father was a rapist, just because they could grow up in a bad home, does not mean they could never find happiness and that they would have wished their mother killed them.

    I feel that murdering a human is murdering a human regardless of the stage in development. That's why I get angry, and I hate this subject...people like to assume it is somehow not human, dragging souls into it when souls have nothing to do with it. Like another above me said, how do we even know if we HAVE souls at any stage in our lives? The point to me is that a fetus is a human. A fetus is not a monkey, it is not a cow, it has human dna and it's own developing brain/heart. Thus it is human. I don't get how that is so difficult to admit.

    Killing a human without their permission is the definition of murder, killing it with their permission is assisted suicide. Is it right to murder a human under certain circumstances? Sure it is.

    This whole subject wouldn't bother me so much if people didn't skirt around it and admit they are killing a developing human. Like it or not, that's what is happening. A human life is being killed, the end. No need to make it sound fancier than it is.

    Pro-choice people are correct. I DON'T have the right to tell you what to do with your body...even though the body inside you is not your body, it is another's body attached to yours, I guess you can get rid of it if you want. Just don't expect me to support you. *shrugs* People can do whatever the hell they want. What gives me the right to stop them even if I don't agree with them? Nothing. As long as they don't try to stop my opinions, I won't try to stop theirs.

    Really, as much as I hate it, I don't care. Too much stress. I let people do what they want and don't get involved... I don't like anyone telling me what to do, especially when they don't even know me. If the government told me I needed to get an abortion, because there was a new law limiting the amount of children I could have, no, I would not respect their law, I would tell them to stuff themselves...That doesn't apply to our society (yet), but it illustrates why I hate this subject: You can't go around preaching free choice, then turn around and say I have to do this or that to conform, or still like you even though I don't like you for having an abortion I feel you didn't need. I don't have to like you or respect you. You don't have to like me or respect me. Very easy to do.

    I am not calling anyone here out on this. I am simply explaining my opinion in the hopes others would understand.

    (Edit: LOL it looks like I'm capable of getting in depth with a topic I hate after all.)
  7. Rape.
    Possible Death.

    Those are the only reasons I would accept abortion. I don't think I would ever be able to get one myself, but I would never be able to live with myself if I allowed the seed of a rapist live and cause me more pain when giving birth to it.
  8. Would you add "Disability" to that list?

    If you knew the kid was going to have Downs Syndrome, cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, fragile X, or even conjoined twins?
  9. But who is to say that people with those disabilities still don't live a good quality of life? Some conjoined twins still enjoy life. I've been around kids who have Downs, and they still enjoy things. I was on a roller coaster this past weekend with a kid who had Downs, and he LOVED it. Should a disability really be a reason to kill a child? Or does that mean you don't have the strength to deal with it?
  10. I wouldn't add Disability to that list, just because they are disabled doesn't mean they can't live a normal life. Like I said before, I wouldn't want to have the kid of a rapist be it a random person or family member.
  11. If you have the strength to raise a disabled child, then why not have the strength to raise a child of rape or incest? Prove to the world that nurture is stronger than nature, and that sin and evil are in the choices we make and not the seed that was sown?
  12. ^ This is a topic I'm not sure about. I'll try to explain it, but it's best to say I have no opinion yet.

    I want to share a very short story about this. About my cousin Brenna. Her case is not one to go by when making judgments, as it is rare, but maybe it could be found interesting.

    It probably doesn't matter to anyone but me, but it matters to me a lot. It really made my heart quicken and my brain spin when I heard it.

    When my aunt was in the beginning of her pregnancy, the doctors told her that her daughter had developmental problems and would probably die. They recommended that she get an abortion immediately. My aunt refused. She was fine. Every time she came back, they claimed my cousin's defects were getting worse, and it wasn't too late to have an abortion to spare my cousin from a life with defects. My aunt refused and carried through with birth.

    My cousin had no defects. She was perfectly healthy. To this day, she is perfectly healthy.

    This scared me, having to stop and imagine what life would be like without my best friend, my cousin, if my aunt had made the choice instead to abort her, but I didn't learn a lot from it that would be helpful besides this: Whether or not you believe defects are something to terminate over, is it worth gambling? My cousin's case is surely not the only misdiagnosis in history. Doctors are capable of misdiagnosis.

    While (if I had a doctor), I would take their judgement into consideration, I would never believe something instantaneously just because a doctor told me it, and put my life in their hands without considering other options or doing my own research. Doctors are integral to society, but not all of them are always right and not all of them are "moral."

    The same applies to disability outside the womb. Doctors can say that someone has no chance of getting better, then that person does end up getting better. For me, this subject is a cointoss.

  13. I think the psychological stress of raising a child with a developmental issue would be very different than raising a child concieved out of sexual violence. Though I admire and fully agree that great miracles can come out of terrible experiences (I'm living proof), I'm not sure that I would want my sister to force herself to raise a living reminder of the trauma she faced out of the hope that some day she will feel alright with it because she has a great relationship with a daughter or son.

    It certainly has happened, but in the event that she wasn't psychologically resilient enough to cope or was unable to access the proper treatment to help overcome the trauma I can think of several disorders which could develop as a result.
  14. So a child of rape would be a living reminder of trauma?

    Wouldn't a disabled child be a living reminder of how you're not like other parents and your life will never be normal again?

    And why does a chid have to be a symbol of something? Isn't that bad parenting - projecting shit onto your offspring?
  15. Quite possibly, yes. We've had mothers in child services hurt themselves and drink/drug themselves into oblivion over similar issues. Is it because they are intentionally being bad parents? I don't think so.

    Parents are people, and people do the best with what they can given the coping mechanisms they understand and the support they have at their disposal.

    As for your question my reply would be an unfortunately yes. Thats just the way people's brains work. Based on our experiences we catagorize things we see and associate them under schemas. A violent experiences such as rape can scramble that schema and cause the individual to associate the sight of their own child with pain knowing the history behind the situation. Those who suffer from post traumatic stress from the incident may also subconciously respond to the child as a trigger. There are a variety of treatments available for trauma related mental health complications, however we do not yet live in a society where they are available to everyone wh could benefit. Thus the mitigation of trauma to the individual upon their request is something health professionals must consider.

    Does that make the child evil? Nope. Are the parents bad parents? I wouldn't say so, just ill equipped to care for the child. Of course, the other possible alternative would be for the mother to give birth and put the child in the care of the state. In either event I would advocate for my client based on what she is more comfortable with.

    I hope no one misunderstands what I am saying here, I totally respect everyone's opinion. I do not support abortion, I support choice.
  16. That's a highly medicalized way of slicing the pie, there. All children are perceived as emblematic of something. Should we draw a line in the human experience and say "This child can represent this, but not that".

    I do not agree with abortion based on what the child stands for or what it could remind you of, no matter how much "trauma" may be involved in that. There are a million things in the world that can drive you crazy if you think about them for too long. Life is about choosing how to respond to things, and how to make things better.

    If someone in my life was raped and impregnated, I would vote they keep their baby, and prove to the world that the best things can come from the worst.

    I wouldn't force anyone to do this, though. The freedom to choose must be safeguarded, not because of any inalienable right or wooly ideas of sanctity, but because Choice is fundamental to the human experience, most notably the choice to destroy or preserve life.

    What is needed, above all else, is education. The political and religious agenda must be separated from the abortion issue. We can't keep dancing around the misty concepts of souls and moral choice. We need to look at the concrete evidence of parenting and life-coping skills.

    Educate mothers on what mothers are capable of. Then let them decide for themselves if they are ready to walk that path.
  17. I think this point made is sort of something of contention.

    After all, it's either you carry the child and let him/her live a life that would probably be far from normal. Needless to say though, it could still be a fairly happy one, or just don't go through with it and spare the child all the extra suffering.

    In my opinion, no, abortion isn't the answer for disability. Suffice to say, I don't think going through with a natural pregnancy without medical intervention is not the solution either. I think negative eugenics is the most ethical solution to this one.
  18. What Asmo said...life is about choices. Even though what I said earlier might have been more geared toward the religious and political agenda my point still stands earlier that a choice is relevant and the ability to have that choice preformed. I'll say this I'm not sadistic, evil, or even 100% pro abortion. But I'd like to say that under circumstances today abortion is something of a very important topic as we are living in a time when with one scenario of bad blood the entire population could ride on the lives of 10,000 individuals that might not be here today.

    Although as given my rights a a self concsious being; I know that I am not the greatest thing to happen on earth and I know the human species are a remarkable species. Yet, the value we put on life just seems so intensely great that it just ridiculous. Like any other specie on earth that has ever existed we will go on if we deserve it. We have the ability to assess ourselves as individual and as a group and with that we have had the power to live for so long, but still not as long as a specie like the dinosaurs. We haven't even come close to even living 10,000 years and we are already contemplating apocalypse. So life is as life does, your aunt decided to keep the kid, I decided to speak in this thread, and the world has kept going. No amount of quantum realities will change this one and trying to figure out what would happen if... is just a waste of time.

    So what I do? I celebrate life but I don't worship it. After all life has over a few billion other people to party with.
  19. You misunderstand, I'm not restricting what an individual's schema of their child could and couldn't include they could very well be both.

    Regardless, the point that I was making is that the experience of a victim of sexual violence is very different than someone who may give birth to a child with developmental delays and I think it is ethically wrong to treat both situations with the same lense.
  20. This sums up my views on this issue pretty well. I'm all for choice, but people deserve to have access to fair, unbiased information regarding this procedure. Information that isn't contaminated or twisted by political or religious positions.

    That's all I can really say on it. This is an area I've never looked into enough to really be able to comment further.