question for the pro-choice

[Gwen]

ok so didn't want to derail the pro-life thread but got to wondering about something.

the pro-choice argument seems to be very focused on the mother. the emotional impact of a pregnancy. the long term cost of caring for that child.... etc. having been through 5 pregnancies i can fully understand that perspective.

for those that are pro choice, if legislation were made to protect the "mother's rights" and allow elective abortion where would the lines be drawn? do we let any woman have an abortion? what about under age girls? parental notification/consent? what rights would the father have in the process?

what about the emotional impact of the abortion?

many pro-life think there should be lines drawn, "never" legislation would be bad because there is always the exception to the rule.

where exactly does pro-choice think the lines should be? is it advocating "free for all" legislation or are there rules to this "choice"?

[annamaureen]

what rights would the father have in the process?

From what I've personally seen, most pro-choice women believe the father has no rights when it comes to abortion.

[Gwen]

oddly that's where i take a lot of issue with it. i think a woman should be required to notify the father if she is planning on an abortion (if she is pregnant at all for that matter). it's not just her child or her problem. (the exception of course being rape, incest, etc. i think when a man commits such acts he loses a lot of rights, the right to be a father being one of them)

[rameumptom]

The idea that the father does not need notification is part of our world's problem with men abdicating their role and responsibility as fathers. In today's society, they are only useful for fertilizing a seed, and nothing more. And that will soon not be required, as cloning moves forward.

I think that most women who are "pro-choice" are actually closer to the concept of limited abortion, rather than leaving it open for any and all purposes. At least, the studies show that a large percentage of Americans (men and women) are for limited abortions (rape, incest, mother's health, etc). I've often heard national pro-choice people state that they seek to make abortion rare by other means than legislation. Why? Because they realize that the fetus is more than an object. It represents life.

Many fear any legislation at all, because they fear that it would be the first step in banning all abortions. And if some had their way, that assumption would be correct.

[ADoyle90815]

I'm pro-choice, but I do believe that the father should be able to offer his input in a decision like that, except in cases of rape or incest, as he's lost all rights when he committed that crime. When a mother's health is in danger from the pregnancy, especially if the embryo has implanted in the tube and she has other children who need both parents, then the father should definitely have a say. After all, if the pregnancy continued and the mother died, he'd be left raising those children without a mother.

I know personally, I would only abort in the event of a rape, which would mean that I would have had a rape kit done at the hospital right away, or if there was a tubal pregnancy, or other life-threatening complication.

Edited March 16, 2010 by ADoyle90815

[marshac]

I'm somewhat pro-life in that I think abortion for the pure purpose of family planning is pretty sick- there are lots of couples who would LOVE a baby...

In the case of things like an ectopic pregnancy where the mother's life is at risk, the kiddo has to go- no way it'll develop to term, and if the mother dies, both die anyways. In the case of rape, it should be the mother's choice IMO- I know the argument that the fetus didn't do anything wrong, but still- forcing the mother to live face-to-face with the aftermath of a violent sexual crime against her for the next 9 months is just evil. As for the common addendum of 'incest', either it's rape or it's not- if it's two consenting adults who happen to be related, then I fail to see why an exception should be granted- many many generations of royalty were the products of incest for example. As for the father in all of this- as you can see- there really isn't a place for him to have a say... in the first situation, she woman will die, and in the second/third situation, he is a criminal.

[Nikkie85]

I wonder how many cases there really are of a rape victim getting pregnant?

[Moksha]

While I personally do not believe in abortion, it I do not find it within my purview to force my beliefs upon others.

Nor do I think sensitive issues like this are best handled with a People's Court attitude. There are allowable circumstances as well as limits written into abortion law. These seem adequate.

[Gwen]

i can't speak for the quality of this source, just found it on a quick google search....

Robson said a woman is raped every five minutes in the United States. She added that out of the 300,000 reported rapes in this country, 25,000 women get pregnant as a result of that rape. If emergency contraception was available to women in hospital emergency rooms, approximately 22,000 of pregnancies as a result of rape would be prevented, she said.

The Badger Herald: News: State legislators introduce ‘Rape Victims Act’

[Guest]

In the case of rape, it should be the mother's choice IMO- I know the argument that the fetus didn't do anything wrong, but still- forcing the mother to live face-to-face with the aftermath of a violent sexual crime against her for the next 9 months is just evil.

I wouldn't use such a heavy word. For pro-lifers it is the exact same situation as a mother not having the option to drown her already-born baby in the bath-tub after she gets raped by her own husband (note: rape happened after baby was born). In that case, you would call the mother evil for killing the innocent baby who had no say in the matter. She would still have to continue to care for that baby even if he looks just like his father and is a constant reminder and cause for mental trauma.

[Guest]

The idea that the father does not need notification is part of our world's problem with men abdicating their role and responsibility as fathers. In today's society, they are only useful for fertilizing a seed, and nothing more. And that will soon not be required, as cloning moves forward.

I think that most women who are "pro-choice" are actually closer to the concept of limited abortion, rather than leaving it open for any and all purposes. At least, the studies show that a large percentage of Americans (men and women) are for limited abortions (rape, incest, mother's health, etc). I've often heard national pro-choice people state that they seek to make abortion rare by other means than legislation. Why? Because they realize that the fetus is more than an object. It represents life.

Many fear any legislation at all, because they fear that it would be the first step in banning all abortions. And if some had their way, that assumption would be correct.

The concept of Pro-Choice is that the fetus is not yet human prior to abortion. Therefore, at that point, there is still no concept of a Father. For a father to have a say in the matter, the woman will have to acknowledge that the fetus to be aborted is already human. That is not the case.

The argument is whether a woman is killing a human life or getting rid of a parasite. Totally different things there. According to the Pro-Choice camp, a woman's body is her own and no-one else's - especially, not a man's.

[wondering23]

I am pro choice mainly as I have some health issues which mean I can not carry a pregnancy to term. I have 2 family members who have the same condition and one lost the baby during the 3rd trimester and a distant cousin lost the baby and ended up with kidney failure.

There's a state in Australia, Queensland, where I used to live where a couple is being charged for arranging their own abortion with drugs smuggled from Overseas which through a loop hole in the criminal code came to reveal and doctor or nurse who assisted in a medical abortion could be charged. Hospitals and Doctors in Qld stopped all medical abortions and you had to go interstate if you needed one. There where women who had to drive 3hrs interstate to get an abortion after finding out their child wouldn't survive past birth. It's since been amended but it was still shocking to think that in this day and our age our laws could be so backwards.

I'm not pro death nor do I think any pregnant person "should just go out and get an abortion". I love kids and I would one day hope maybe there is a medical solution for my condition and I could have children, until then If I ever get married and by chance do fall pregnant I would be on birth control still but I would more then likely have to have an abortion and I don't want that option taken from me. Whatever man I marry will be made aware of this way before there's a ring on my finger and I would hope that they support my decision.

[wondering23]

I think as well with the father situation It goes both ways. Many times the guy is not around or he doesn't want a child or he won't support a child. I have a friend who's boyfriend demanded she get an abortion, she said no and he left her, she now has a beautiful baby boy who he refuses to support and she's on unemployment but she loves her child, and I support her decision. I have two other friends who both had abortions when contraception failed and both had been told by their boyfriends to "get it fixed".

[rameumptom]

I think as well with the father situation It goes both ways. Many times the guy is not around or he doesn't want a child or he won't support a child. I have a friend who's boyfriend demanded she get an abortion, she said no and he left her, she now has a beautiful baby boy who he refuses to support and she's on unemployment but she loves her child, and I support her decision. I have two other friends who both had abortions when contraception failed and both had been told by their boyfriends to "get it fixed".

And all those men should be forced to pay support for the children. They had a hand in the pregnancies, after all. I'm of the view that if men will not pay child support of their own accord, they should be grabbed by the state and work every evening and weekend for the state picking up garbage along the city streets, with all the money going to the child. Then the man can work for himself during the other periods.

[theoriginalavatar]

I wonder how many cases there really are of a rape victim getting pregnant?

The adult pregnancy rate associated with rape is estimated to be 4.7%. This information, in conjunction with estimates based on the U.S. Census, suggest that there may be 32,101 annual rape-related pregnancies among American women over the age of 18.17. (Statistics from 2000.)

[talisyn]

The idea that the father does not need notification is part of our world's problem with men abdicating their role and responsibility as fathers. In today's society, they are only useful for fertilizing a seed, and nothing more. And that will soon not be required, as cloning moves forward.

I think that most women who are "pro-choice" are actually closer to the concept of limited abortion, rather than leaving it open for any and all purposes. At least, the studies show that a large percentage of Americans (men and women) are for limited abortions (rape, incest, mother's health, etc). I've often heard national pro-choice people state that they seek to make abortion rare by other means than legislation. Why? Because they realize that the fetus is more than an object. It represents life.

Many fear any legislation at all, because they fear that it would be the first step in banning all abortions. And if some had their way, that assumption would be correct.

This is my opinion, actually lol.

This world is so messed up. If more people had access to good, affordable birth control (and yes sometimes 'affordable' means 'free'), and using birth control became a regular societal behavior, then abortions would decrease substantially. This would probably take a generation but I think it would change the idea of abortions as easy birth control.

Babies should be born into loving families. I don't know why a lot are not, except that maybe Heavenly Father has more faith in His children than we do.

[rameumptom]

Talisyn,

I'm not sure we want free birth control. I have no problem with birth control in a marriage for specific reasons. However, in regular society, it gives men and women less of a reason to commit to a serious relationship. Men tend to think on the lines of, why buy the cow when the milk is free? True intimacy dies, and we end up with a society that does not prize the important things, like family and children.

[talisyn]

Ram, while I agree with you not everyone in the world is LDS or has LDS standards. Until that happens people will have sex outside of marriage and a bunch of them will get pregnant. I'd rather have a billion people on birth control than lose millions of babies to abortions.

[applepansy]

Babies should be born into loving families. I don't know why a lot are not, except that maybe Heavenly Father has more faith in His children than we do.

Heavenly Father WILL NOT infringe on our Agency. Its not a matter of His having faith is us.

[talisyn]

Apple, I think He does have faith in His children, otherwise He would have never given us our agency

[lost87]

The concept of Pro-Choice is that the fetus is not yet human prior to abortion. Therefore, at that point, there is still no concept of a Father. For a father to have a say in the matter, the woman will have to acknowledge that the fetus to be aborted is already human. That is not the case.

The argument is whether a woman is killing a human life or getting rid of a parasite. Totally different things there. According to the Pro-Choice camp, a woman's body is her own and no-one else's - especially, not a man's.

Thank you for telling me what my concept of pro-choice is. But unfortunately, you are making a ridiculous assumption and generalization of the thoughts of all of us pro-choicers despite the several responses from others who explain that what you are summing up here is incorrect. I think it is best that people explain their own thoughts and ideals rather than explaining the thoughts and ideals of others, it gets far less messy that way.

[Guest]

Thank you for telling me what my concept of pro-choice is. But unfortunately, you are making a ridiculous assumption and generalization of the thoughts of all of us pro-choicers despite the several responses from others who explain that what you are summing up here is incorrect. I think it is best that people explain their own thoughts and ideals rather than explaining the thoughts and ideals of others, it gets far less messy that way.

I apologize if I wrongly spoke for you. I spoke for the side of Pro-Choice legislation and its supporters, a lot of whom I've had this similar discussions with since I was a teeny teen-ager.

Perhaps you should explain why Pro-Choice legislation in all its forms through the decades has never included paternal consideration. I'd be interested in your side of things.

[lost87]

The concept of Pro-Choice is that the fetus is not yet human prior to abortion. Therefore, at that point, there is still no concept of a Father. For a father to have a say in the matter, the woman will have to acknowledge that the fetus to be aborted is already human. That is not the case.

The argument is whether a woman is killing a human life or getting rid of a parasite. Totally different things there. According to the Pro-Choice camp, a woman's body is her own and no-one else's - especially, not a man's.

Yes, as a pro-choice individual I firmly believe that a fetus is not at all human, but rather a little bug growing inside the uterus of a woman. How it got there, we do not know, we just know that bugs must be exterminated at all costs. And of course there is no father in the picture, because everyone knows that if a male human and a female human had sex, they'd make a little human, not a parasite which we have already established as the case with pregnancy....There it is, the truth about the entire pro-choice campaign.

[Guest]

Yes, as a pro-choice individual I firmly believe that a fetus is not at all human, but rather a little bug growing inside the uterus of a woman. How it got there, we do not know, we just know that bugs must be exterminated at all costs. And of course there is no father in the picture, because everyone knows that if a male human and a female human had sex, they'd make a little human, not a parasite which we have already established as the case with pregnancy....There it is, the truth about the entire pro-choice campaign.

According to the Pro-Choice movement as evident in Rowe vs. Wade a fetus is not human life until it is VIABLE. I'm not the one who came up with this. YOU guys did.

And like I said, if you have a different opinion than that, I would be interested in your opinion, especially your opinion on why pro-choice legal proceedings never had any consideration for the father.

Sarcasm is fine but make a point so we can learn from you. Do not speak unless you can improve the silence.