Poll: Abortion, Roe v. Wade

[heeeed]

I would agree. I see people at the time they come in requesting them, and I assess them and sign the certificates for them as someone who can. Most it’s very very hard for and there are a tiny tiny minority where little thought is had by the woman. In those situations in my mind it would almost always have been a disaster for this women and any offspring.

Now, I’ll accept that may have my own prejudices in those thoughts, but it can totally destroy people lives especially some of the more chaotic peoples lives. My prejudices and thoughts though shouldn’t have any place in the decision process. Their call and I’ll sign it for them if that’s what they want

The thing is that those who chose eventually that a TOP wasn’t the right option for them had that choice, as they rightly should. Having that choice removed is so regressive a step it’s not true

 

[bigmike20vt]

Tough one for me.

I care about practically nothing in the world. But this one I did find out that I strangely enough had an opinion on.

The missus fell pregnant about 6 months ago at the age of 38. We decided that we're one and done after she had 4 miscarriages, and that's after she carried our little one to full term when she fell pregnant the first time. We though the 2nd time (and 2nd and last baby) will be just as easy but biology decided otherwise.

Long story short, she said that she wanted to terminate and asked how I felt about it. Couldn't go through with it. Not after seeing the heartbeat at 6 weeks. Turns out, nor could she. Sadly the pregnancy didn't work out and she miscarried again.

Funny really. Always though that it wouldn't be a big deal to me and when confronted with that very choice - massive deal. For both me and her.

I too wonder if I could have gone through with it when push came to shove despite both me and the Mrs having an agreement about what to do if there were issues with ours (he is fine). I absolutely see where you are coming from and sympathise. The thing that I do believe however is that it does not matter what you decided to do when it came too it. the important thing is you had the right to make that decision.
I can't even comprehend how hard it must be to go through what you did

 

[dlockers]

I think the point is chaps - we had 'choice'.

 

[regulus]

Sorry to hear about that regulus. I've been in a similar situation a couple of years ago. We were asked about terminations due to the risk to my wife (she had a terrible time in the birth of our daughter) but decided against it only for her to miscarry.

When we were weighing up the termination, I never thought we'd go for it anyway. There's something inherently wrong in it. The kid is alive, might only be a couple of weeks - what gives me or my wife the right to end it? Then again I could have lost my wife had she carried to term. Point I'm making is as with regulus's experience, it's difficult - a lot of people think these are snap decisions, I honestly don't think they are in 99.9999% of occasions.

Thanks man. It is what it is. Not a great time and the missus was extremely upset. So much so, we're not doing it again.

It'll just be a case of 5 little extra stars on the Christmas tree every year as a memory/reminder and getting on with life. About all you can do.

 

[the_dead_parrot]

About 9 years ago we made the difficult choice to terminate due to medical reasons. Unfortunately at the second scan it was picked up that they wanted a further look at the heart due to it not being clear enough to see. At that point we are thinking it's just a thing that happens. They are so tiny it must be hard to see what they need. We are booked into see a doctor to rescan. Then it snowballs from there. The doctor passes us onto a consultant/multi consultants.

As far as I remember he unfortunately had pretty much half a heart. With it also being plumbed incorrectly. There were other issues as well along with that. We were told there would need to be surgery near immediately after birth. Along with multiple surgeries through childhood. This would never be a fix, just making the best of what they could. He would never have a "normal" life. We were and still are heartbroken over it but we decided not to put him through that. Whether rightly or wrongly we had the choice. It wasn't an easy one to make, that period of my life was without a doubt the worst.

As people have mentioned we had a choice and we made it. We live in a country that would have supported us medically no matter what choice we had made. I couldn't imagine the extra heartbreak when not only are you forced into this but then also forced to pay if you are not medically insured.

We have two happy healthy children now but still wonder what could have been and if we made the right choice.

 

[Haggisman]

About 9 years ago we made the difficult choice to terminate due to medical reasons. Unfortunately at the second scan it was picked up that they wanted a further look at the heart due to it not being clear enough to see. At that point we are thinking it's just a thing that happens. They are so tiny it must be hard to see what they need. We are booked into see a doctor to rescan. Then it snowballs from there. The doctor passes us onto a consultant/multi consultants.

As far as I remember he unfortunately had pretty much half a heart. With it also being plumbed incorrectly. There were other issues as well along with that. We were told there would need to be surgery near immediately after birth. Along with multiple surgeries through childhood. This would never be a fix, just making the best of what they could. He would never have a "normal" life. We were and still are heartbroken over it but we decided not to put him through that. Whether rightly or wrongly we had the choice. It wasn't an easy one to make, that period of my life was without a doubt the worst.

As people have mentioned we had a choice and we made it. We live in a country that would have supported us medically no matter what choice we had made. I couldn't imagine the extra heartbreak when not only are you forced into this but then also forced to pay if you are not medically insured.

We have two happy healthy children now but still wonder what could have been and if we made the right choice.

I think it's something that will stick with you forever, but when you weigh up the alternatives and the quality of life that child would have had, I think you definitely did make the right call.

My partner had a termination a couple of years ago during a very difficult pregnancy, and it was definitely not an easy decision for us, but while I think it was definitely the right one - I'm not sure if either my partner or youngest son would be here otherwise - there's always that nagging voice in the back of your head "what if?". As you say though, at least we live in a relatively forward thinking country which gives you that option.

 

[Deleted User 234324]

The problem with roe vs wade was that it essentially gave women a blanket right to abortion regardless of the reason or how far along they were in the pregnancy.

This was bad for a multitude of reasons and why I completely agree with it being over turned. On the flip side though the strict limits that some states have put in place like texas are just as bad being at the other end of the extreme.

If roe vs wade had stipulated a limit like 13 weeks or under extreme circumstances like risk to the mother or the likely hood that the baby would not survive due to medical complications, then I don't think anyone would have had a problem with it, except maybe a minority of religious fanatics. Of course if government chose to pander to that minority then the issue is in the voters hands as they clearly are not fit for office due to a complete lack of back bone.

 

[doodah]

Only last year much of the same people in America were screaming bloody murder at mask mandates, it's a personal choice. Only in America.

 

[Trig]

I've not read the whole thread, but having seen a few bits on the news, seeing various (all female) friends on FaceAche and having my 14 year old daughter ranting about it, I don't get the following.

Some are blaming RBG for dying, and then by default letting Trump put people in positions of power. She died, give her a break, also, the fact that some will blame a dead woman seems a touch out of whack.

Trump, the itch that never seems to go away.

Pro-life in America, seems odd, foetus has right to life, and they'll protect that because if you leave it alone, it'll become a baby, regardless of it being from rape and whatever risks it might pose to the mother, birth control isn't 100% effective, so what are you meant to do then? Also, the argument that it will become a life is you leave it alone, just hope paedo's don't start using that same logic, "Yeah shes 12 now, but if you leave her alone she'll be 18.."

Also, America, pro-life, but pro-gun, because, you know, the second amendment, yet they protect the life of an unborn baby but once they're born, ****'um, send them to school where they can be shot, let them be born into poverty or into single parenthood, because yay, America..

Looks like America has properly got its asshat on backwards right now..

 

[chroniclard]

Their distortion of religion into whatever they feel like rather than actually being Christian has a lot to answer for as well.

 

[bigmike20vt]

Only last year much of the same people in America were screaming bloody murder at mask mandates, it's a personal choice. Only in America.

Similar to the logic that if banning abortions is going to save lives due to stopping abortions, but the same people cant see the same logic that banning guns - esp military style long guns (I would start there 1st myself then wait a generation for that to be accepted before going further) will reduce deaths by gun fire.

 

[mburn_83]

Hopefully this issue will be decided in the political realm and not by politically compromised courts.

Each state should have to hold a referendum/election before changing any law imo.

But it is hilarious to see the bag of contradictions of people on both sides seem to have - hardcore pro choice all seem to have been in favour of draconian vaccine mandates and the other side seem to be all about freedom….

 

[bigmike20vt]

Hopefully this issue will be decided in the political realm and not by politically compromised courts.

Each state should have to hold a referendum/election before changing any law imo.

But it is hilarious to see the bag of contradictions of people on both sides seem to have - hardcore pro choice all seem to have been in favour of draconian vaccine mandates and the other side seem to be all about freedom….

vaccine mandates are different tho.

I never supported holding people down and forcing them to be jabbed...... but at the same time if an airline / bank / shop / bar / country wants to say if you want to enter our premises I would like you to be vaccinated & / or wear a mask unless you have a specific exemption then that should be their choice....... Their house... should be their rules..

it isnt simple tho, because the flip side would also be true i guess, which may make staff feel forced to put themselves at risk (a bit like conceptually i was all for having smoking pubs and non smoking pubs.... but practically it didnt work because in a group of say 10 people it would always be the 2 smokers in the group who would get to demand where to go, and possibly the same would happen there.

but i digress.

 

[Ahleckz]

The problem with roe vs wade was that it essentially gave women a blanket right to abortion regardless of the reason or how far along they were in the pregnancy.

This was bad for a multitude of reasons and why I completely agree with it being over turned. On the flip side though the strict limits that some states have put in place like texas are just as bad being at the other end of the extreme.

If roe vs wade had stipulated a limit like 13 weeks or under extreme circumstances like risk to the mother or the likely hood that the baby would not survive due to medical complications, then I don't think anyone would have had a problem with it, except maybe a minority of religious fanatics. Of course if government chose to pander to that minority then the issue is in the voters hands as they clearly are not fit for office due to a complete lack of back bone.

Well that’s just not true.
Roe v Wade ruled that abortion was lawful in the first trimester for basically any reason due to the right of privacy. They however didn’t claim this was an absolute right and made a distinction based on time. Your first paragraph is just wrong. Roe v Wade did not permit women to have an abortion at any point, it just ruled that states couldn’t prevent them in the first trimester.

The fact remains that being pregnant is often more dangerous than abortion and women will die that wouldn’t have because of this decision.

Women’s rights should be at the front of everyone’s mind with these discussions, but they aren’t. People making these decisions don’t care for the women, they care about their religious fundamentalism.

 

[Deleted User 234324]

Some are blaming RBG for dying, and then by default letting Trump put people in positions of power. She died, give her a break, also, the fact that some will blame a dead woman seems a touch out of whack.

RBG had terminal cancer, it was known about for years in advance, people are blaming her because she could have stepped down during Obama's presidency at any point, but she chose to continue on to her dying day, which happened to be during Trumps time so he got to pick another supreme justice.

So not only did he get to replace 2 of his, he got to take one of theirs also which is why the republicans have the majority now.

 

[Deleted User 234324]

Well that’s just not true.

Fair enough I stand corrected, just need to vote for the same measures on a state by state basis now, sure it sucks at the moment but mid terms are happening soon and no doubt this will be a hot topic for voters.

Women’s rights should be at the front of everyone’s mind with these discussions, but they aren’t. People making these decisions don’t care for the women, they care about their religious fundamentalism.

Except when it's a trans women right, because then women's rights don't matter.

 

[Hagar]

Trans women don't need abortions, but nice deflection.

 

[bigmike20vt]

Except when it's a trans women right, because then women's rights don't matter.

Of course they do............. I am all for trans rights and i am all for womens rights............ but it is blinkered to suggest that sometimes trans rights dont sometimes encroach on biological womens rights (or vice versa i guess but men never seem to get mentioned in this).

it is really hard to get your head around and I dont claim to be an authority on it............... but i think the simplest way to look at it is that a female in the legal sense is not always the same as a female in the biological sense.

for the most part both legal and biological rights can sit side by side without issues, but where there is a problem IMO biological trumps legal when a distinction has to be made.

but bringing in things like this is a deliberate attempt to muddy the problem at hand imo

 

[Deleted User 234324]

Trans women don't need abortions, but nice deflection.

What about trans men, or do they have no rights also?

 

[Ahleckz]

Fair enough I stand corrected, just need to vote for the same measures on a state by state basis now, sure it sucks at the moment but mid terms are happening soon and no doubt this will be a hot topic for voters.



Except when it's a trans women right, because then women's rights don't matter.

It shouldn’t be a political issue though, that’s the point.
We’ve already seen 9 (I think) states say they will ban it. And some have said they want to outlaw travelling to other states for the procedure. Polling has been done on this and most support the right to abortion. This has been politicised and is being pushed through by religious extremeists. The rights of women are too important to be bogged down in political debate. And, women will die because of this. Pregnancy is more dangerous than abortion - up to 150x more in some states!