Poll: Abortion, Roe v. Wade

[Shocky-FM]

6 weeks, I wouldn't feel comfortable terminating at around 24 weeks, they have good chance of surviving if born at this stage (if given help, obviously)... Perhaps somewhere in the middle would more acceptable. 12 - 18 weeks.

Scary that 15% think abortion is acceptable until birth, in some states even after birth they can terminate, unless there's a very good reason for it, that's messed up.

 

[Pudney]

If you are that poor though, it is pretty easy not to have children, contraceptive is cheap and readily available. People are absolutely accountable for their life choices and some of you absolutely cannot stand that fact for some reason.

I'm assuming this is a US-centric discussion:

https://www.npr.org/sections/health...-to-women-except-when-its-not?t=1652790644069

 

[Haggisman]

If you are that poor though, it is pretty easy not to have children, contraceptive is cheap and readily available. People are absolutely accountable for their life choices and some of you absolutely cannot stand that fact for some reason.

No contraception is 100% reliable.

The only 100% effective contraception is to never have sex. Effectively what you are suggesting is that only rich people should be allowed to have sex, since they can a) afford to have children in the first place, and b) can afford to travel for an abortion if it fails.

What you seem to be failing to grasp is that we live in the real world, where sometimes things go wrong or not according to plan. People make mistakes. Should they and their unwanted/unaffordable child(ren) be forced to suffer because people like you can only see in black and white and think you have the right to look down on them and judge them?

 

[DrToffnar]

6 weeks, I wouldn't feel comfortable terminating at around 24 weeks, they have good chance of surviving if born at this stage (if given help, obviously)... Perhaps somewhere in the middle would more acceptable. 12 - 18 weeks.

Scary that 15% think abortion is acceptable until birth, in some states even after birth they can terminate, unless there's a very good reason for it, that's messed up.

You're not taking into account checks for fetal abnormalities that could be present but missed by care professionals such as Downs Syndrome or Edwards and Pataus. What if the patient has booked for care later then would be optimal and finds out after the termination window? What if she's a transfer of care from an another country? What if poor practice or indeed an accident causes severe cerebral damage?

You mention infant euthanasia as though it's a soft option but it never is, nor does the law allow it to be. Both the Phisician AND the parent(s) have to be convinced of no reasonable alternative. This is the least of it however. The law is enshrined in ethical and moral quandaries to ensure wrongful termination after the fact cannot happen.

I work with screening in an Antenatal clinic and my partner has done extensive work with BPAS. Trust me, abortion is very, VERY rarely the 'alternate contraceptive' method so many here seem to think it is for women, nor will it ever be. Allowing women the basic autonomy to decide for themselves preserves the respect we have for human life, it doesn't decry it.

 

[Shocky-FM]

You're not taking into account checks for fetal abnormalities that could be present but missed by care professionals such as Downs Syndrome or Edwards and Pataus. What if the patient has booked for care later then would be optimal and finds out after the termination window? What if she's a transfer of care from an another country? What if poor practice or indeed an accident causes severe cerebral damage?

You mention infant euthanasia as though it's a soft option but it never is, nor does the law allow it to be. Both the Physician AND the parent(s) have to be convinced of no reasonable alternative. This is the least of it however. The law is enshrined in ethical and moral quandaries to ensure wrongful termination after the fact cannot happen.

I work with screening in an Antenatal clinic and my partner has done extensive work with BPAS. Trust me, abortion is very, VERY rarely the 'alternate contraceptive' method so many here seem to think it is for women.

Nowhere did I suggest it was a soft option.

If there's a good medical reason, and parent(s) and doctor agree then that should be their choice, morally questionable perhaps..... But under no other circumstance should that be allowed.

 

[Haggisman]

I work with screening in an Antenatal clinic and my partner has done extensive work with BPAS. Trust me, abortion is very, VERY rarely the 'alternate contraceptive' method so many here seem to think it is for women, nor will it ever be. Allowing women the basic autonomy to decide for themselves preserves the respect we have for human life, it doesn't decry it.

Yes. Would be interesting to see how many of the "pro life" fanatics in here who are so flippantly brushing it off as being "like removing a mole" have actually sat in the waiting room at an abortion clinic and felt the palpable mood in the air?

 

[DrToffnar]

Nowhere did I suggest it was a soft option.

If there's a good medical reason, and parent(s) and doctor agree then that should be their choice, morally questionable perhaps..... But under no other circumstance should that be allowed.

You're post suggested that it was an option outside of extreme circumstances which it isn't. There are only ever extreme reasons for infant euthanasia. There's no option for it outside of them.

On another note, I've always found the cross section of people who despise abortion yet venerate the idea of capital punishment quite fascinating. It reminds me of those who thought Shamima Begum was old enough and indeed responsible enough to have been held accountable for her actions in leaving to join ISIS but in the same breath would deny her the vote because she was under 18... but that's a different matter altogether.

 

[Kenai]

Scary that 15% think abortion is acceptable until birth

I was also surprised by this, considering the poll is framed specifically regarding elective abortions, rather than medically advised etc.

That being said, I can only imagine elective abortions that late in a pregnancy must be an exceptionally rare event in the first place.

 

[Chris Wilson]

I once asked my accountant in a big city centre practice what business made the most profit. Unhesitatingly he said "Abortion clinic chain". They made a staggering profit but had a very high initial set up cost. So big money as well as patient care and ethics is involved. My experience shows many women consider it a weeks after alternative to keeping their legs together and there are plenty of doctors who will accommodate their search for a medically unwarranted termination. Having said that the world's grossly overpopulated so I have no strong ethical or religious qualms if things are done correctly. I can understand others may well have very strong ethical and religious concerns, and i respect their feelings.

 

[Shocky-FM]

You're post suggested that it was an option outside of extreme circumstances which it isn't. There are only ever extreme reasons for infant euthanasia. There's no option for it outside of them.

You're talking specifically about medical exceptions, there should be no limit here and I hope most would agree with that.

Either way I stick by what Is said. I know friends with children with cerebral palsy, to think they could have been terminated is messed up.

Six US states have no limits at all..........

I was also surprised by this, considering the poll is framed specifically regarding elective abortions, rather than medically advised etc.

That being said, I can only imagine elective abortions that late in a pregnancy must be an exceptionally rare event in the first place.

You would hope it's very rare.. Imagine working in an abortion clinic and being asked to terminate a week, or days before birth..... I couldn't do that job, I'd refuse.

 

[Haggisman]

I once asked my accountant in a big city centre practice what business made the most profit. Unhesitatingly he said "Abortion clinic chain". They made a staggering profit but had a very high initial set up cost. So big money as well as patient care and ethics is involved. My experience shows many women consider it a weeks after alternative to keeping their legs together and there are plenty of doctors who will accommodate their search for a medically unwarranted termination. Having said that the world's grossly overpopulated so I have no strong ethical or religious qualms if things are done correctly. I can understand others may well have very strong ethical and religious concerns, and i respect their feelings.

In the US maybe, but I find that hard to believe in the UK where most are either NHS or charity funded

 

[DrToffnar]

I once asked my accountant in a big city centre practice what business made the most profit. Unhesitatingly he said "Abortion clinic chain". They made a staggering profit but had a very high initial set up cost. So big money as well as patient care and ethics is involved. My experience shows many women consider it a weeks after alternative to keeping their legs together and there are plenty of doctors who will accommodate their search for a medically unwarranted termination. Having said that the world's grossly overpopulated so I have no strong ethical or religious qualms if things are done correctly. I can understand others may well have very strong ethical and religious concerns, and i respect their feelings.

What 'experience' is that, may I ask? Also most abortions are 'medically unwarranted' I'd imagine, that doesn't by definition make the choice easy.

In the US maybe, but I find that hard to believe in the UK where most are either NHS or charity funded

97% are funded by the NHS or other government departments. BPAS is the standard in this country and you'd probably have go reasonably far out of your way to avoid them as a first choice. In fact ionically the only real competitor to BPAS here are the companies that will actively try to put you off termination, either through misinformation or moral duplicitousness.

 

[Haggisman]

What 'experience' is that, may I ask? Also most abortions are 'medically unwarranted' I'd imagine, that doesn't by definition make the choice easy.



97% are funded by the NHS or other government departments. BPAS is the standard in this country and you'd probably have go reasonably far out of your way to avoid them as a first choice. In fact ionically the only real competitor to BPAS here are the companies that will actively try to put you off termination, either through misinformation or moral duplicitousness.

Yup, BPAS are who I have experience of, on both occasions they offered completely unbiased advice and support, were extremely on the ball about explaining any options and alternatives, and the care they provided was absolutely fantastic.

 

[Roar87]

No contraception is 100% reliable.

The only 100% effective contraception is to never have sex. Effectively what you are suggesting is that only rich people should be allowed to have sex, since they can a) afford to have children in the first place, and b) can afford to travel for an abortion if it fails.

What you seem to be failing to grasp is that we live in the real world, where sometimes things go wrong or not according to plan. People make mistakes. Should they and their unwanted/unaffordable child(ren) be forced to suffer because people like you can only see in black and white and think you have the right to look down on them and judge them?

I mean, you realise when contraceptives say 99% reliable or 98.7% etc, they're referring to them being used for 1 year? They're actually incredibly effective, you almost can absolutely rely on the combined contraceptive pill for example as long as it's taken each day as prescribed. Condoms are a little more prone to failure, but it's obvious when they do and there is the "morning after" pill for those cases. Essentially, abortions should be *extremely* rare for anyone who is sensible with their reproductive health.

 

[DrToffnar]

We'll have to start vetting those asking for abortions. If you don't smell like burnt rubber and your GF isn't £35 short then you ain't getting in!

Absurd.

 

[Haggisman]

I mean, you realise when contraceptives say 99% reliable or 98.7% etc, they're referring to them being used for 1 year? They're actually incredibly effective, you almost can absolutely rely on the combined contraceptive pill for example as long as it's taken each day as prescribed. Condoms are a little more prone to failure, but it's obvious when they do and there is the "morning after" pill for those cases. Essentially, abortions should be *extremely* rare for anyone who is sensible with their reproductive health.

I'm sure the fact it's "extremely" rare will be of great comfort to the thousands of women/couples who are facing the prospect of having to bring up a child they don't want/can't afford because their contraception has failed.

That's the problem when you start looking at entire populations - even very small percentages are still a large number of people.

 

[Irish_Tom]

If you are that poor though, it is pretty easy not to have children, contraceptive is cheap and readily available. People are absolutely accountable for their life choices and some of you absolutely cannot stand that fact for some reason.

One could argue that they're being accountable for their life choices by getting an abortion.

 

[Werewolf]

I mean, you realise when contraceptives say 99% reliable or 98.7% etc, they're referring to them being used for 1 year? They're actually incredibly effective, you almost can absolutely rely on the combined contraceptive pill for example as long as it's taken each day as prescribed. Condoms are a little more prone to failure, but it's obvious when they do and there is the "morning after" pill for those cases. Essentially, abortions should be *extremely* rare for anyone who is sensible with their reproductive health.

Re the pill.

Assuming you don't take any of the common medications that can render it ineffective, or any of the "herbal remadies" that can affect it ...
IIRC several common antibiotics counter the effect of the pill, as my sister found out when she became pregnant - fortunately she was in a stable relationship, and the rest of the family where happy to help out with the costs and care associated in her having a baby, and most importantly she was happy at the thought of it.

 

[Haggisman]

Re the pill.

Assuming you don't take any of the common medications that can render it ineffective, or any of the "herbal remadies" that can affect it ...
IIRC several common antibiotics counter the effect of the pill, as my sister found out when she became pregnant - fortunately she was in a stable relationship, and the rest of the family where happy to help out with the costs and care associated in her having a baby, and most importantly she was happy at the thought of it.

To be fair, the dispensing pharmacist should have warned her about that possibility!

 

[DrToffnar]

Re the pill.

Assuming you don't take any of the common medications that can render it ineffective, or any of the "herbal remadies" that can affect it ...
IIRC several common antibiotics counter the effect of the pill, as my sister found out when she became pregnant - fortunately she was in a stable relationship, and the rest of the family where happy to help out with the costs and care associated in her having a baby, and most importantly she was happy at the thought of it.

My partner said it was reasonably common to have patients come in and state they had been on Rifampicin, completely clueless as to the interaction with birth control as they where not made aware.