5 ms·

Hospital stays for pregnancy complications is incredibly common in the US (and you have to pay for it!) Acting like this is coersion is disingenuous, especially

Hospital stays for pregnancy complications is incredibly common in the US (and you have to pay for it!) Acting like this is coersion is disingenuous, especially when pregnant women in the US are forced to go home without monitoring when they can't afford an extended hospital stay. Edit: I should also add that these complications are things that can cause both maternal and fetal death. No one wants to be further than arms-length from medical care when the risk is that high (note the use of "may" in the quote from the parent comment, as if this is a theoretical discussion because they couldn't actually find anyone who was begging to leave).

friedman23 8y ago
Why did you choose to gloss over the forced abortions?
- mayniac 8y ago
  The source does not go into the abortion side other than that quote, and it's hard to judge what actually happens. There's a big difference between "your child is going to require 24/7 attention until they likely die before adulthood, we advise an abortion" and "your child is unlikely to survive childbirth but is healthy otherwise, we're going to abort the foetus against your will". The only other source I can find from a brief Google is from a predominantly pro-life org.
  - friedman23 8y ago
    Politifact is a trustworthy source, if you want to argue that they are being disingenuous find a source that proves them wrong.
- gammateam 8y ago
  Because that wasnt what their reply was about? I dont really get this style of steering a discussion: the idea that every reply needs to include a disclaimer about every differences and some insight into how the poster agrees or disagrees with those things as if checking a box. “Oh darn we cant villify the messenger now what are we going to do... well we can discredit them by highlighting why we cant question their stance on anything”
  - friedman23 8y ago
    Their reply was about normalizing the Cuban government's behavior towards pregnant women. > Acting like this is coersion is disingenuous This is a quote from the person I was responding to. If you don't understand how this is trying to normalize the behavior of a government there is no way I will convince you.
    - gammateam 8y ago
      They didnt address it at all. They added an addendum distinctly about a US policy. Your concern is that they were normalizing something that they didnt even talk about, solely because it didnt join in villifying Cuba just so you would continue reading. I dont really get that train of thought
- rmrfrmrf 8y ago
  Because it was clearly bait meant to rile up Evangelicals in the US. Abortions due to fetal abnormalities are just and humane.
  - friedman23 8y ago
    So you believe that women should be forced to have abortions if their child will be born with some sort of abnormality?
    - babyloneleven 8y ago
      They shouldn't, and they aren't (not in Cuba at least)
    - rmrfrmrf 8y ago
      (For the sake of argument) Yes. Now you explain to me why we should allow pastors to force women to give birth to babies in chronic pain and suffering, using all interventions possible to maintain a heartbeat, even when there's no chance for the baby to experience life free of misery.
      - slowmovintarget 8y ago
        You're structuring forced carriage to term and forced abortion as two sides of a single coin. The argument isn't about forced carriage to term, it's about allowing the mother to choose to be a mother in spite of the chance of abnormalities. So, for the sake of argument, https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  Because women aren't forced to have abortions in Cuba. If that were the case, there would be no Cubans with birth defects. No Cubans in wheelchairs. Etc etc etc. I think the article definitely gave the impression that the abortions were "forced". But to be fair, the article never actually said that. I think the word they used most often was "pressure". It's been a while since I was last in Cuba, but when I was last there abortion was given on a list of the various options that could be taken in such cases. And just like everywhere, the option that the doctor would recommend would depend on the doctor and his/her motivations. For instance, some might recommend abortion, another might recommend an experimental treatment that he came up with etc. Again, in fairness, you see this in the US as well. Let's say you go in and they find a tumor. Doctors conversant with radio-therapy will likely recommend radiotherapy. A surgeon, nine times out of ten, will recommend surgery. Etc etc etc. So yeah, not much difference between the two systems in this regard. At least, when I was last there the doctors in the US and Cuba behaved similarly in this regard. I will say though, that abortion seems like the only option if, say, 9 out of 10 doctors are all advising the same thing. Or if 9 out of 10 doctors are all saying your child will need 24/7 care for the rest of her life, and her life will be short. So how you're presenting the option, even though it is only an option, can make the whole thing feel forced.
  - refurb 8y ago
    That's an awful lot of handwaving to explain away forced abortions.

friedman23 8y ago

Why did you choose to gloss over the forced abortions?

mayniac 8y ago
The source does not go into the abortion side other than that quote, and it's hard to judge what actually happens. There's a big difference between "your child is going to require 24/7 attention until they likely die before adulthood, we advise an abortion" and "your child is unlikely to survive childbirth but is healthy otherwise, we're going to abort the foetus against your will". The only other source I can find from a brief Google is from a predominantly pro-life org.
- friedman23 8y ago
  Politifact is a trustworthy source, if you want to argue that they are being disingenuous find a source that proves them wrong.
gammateam 8y ago
Because that wasnt what their reply was about? I dont really get this style of steering a discussion: the idea that every reply needs to include a disclaimer about every differences and some insight into how the poster agrees or disagrees with those things as if checking a box. “Oh darn we cant villify the messenger now what are we going to do... well we can discredit them by highlighting why we cant question their stance on anything”
- friedman23 8y ago
  Their reply was about normalizing the Cuban government's behavior towards pregnant women. > Acting like this is coersion is disingenuous This is a quote from the person I was responding to. If you don't understand how this is trying to normalize the behavior of a government there is no way I will convince you.
  - gammateam 8y ago
    They didnt address it at all. They added an addendum distinctly about a US policy. Your concern is that they were normalizing something that they didnt even talk about, solely because it didnt join in villifying Cuba just so you would continue reading. I dont really get that train of thought
rmrfrmrf 8y ago
Because it was clearly bait meant to rile up Evangelicals in the US. Abortions due to fetal abnormalities are just and humane.
- friedman23 8y ago
  So you believe that women should be forced to have abortions if their child will be born with some sort of abnormality?
  - babyloneleven 8y ago
    They shouldn't, and they aren't (not in Cuba at least)
  - rmrfrmrf 8y ago
    (For the sake of argument) Yes. Now you explain to me why we should allow pastors to force women to give birth to babies in chronic pain and suffering, using all interventions possible to maintain a heartbeat, even when there's no chance for the baby to experience life free of misery.
    - slowmovintarget 8y ago
      You're structuring forced carriage to term and forced abortion as two sides of a single coin. The argument isn't about forced carriage to term, it's about allowing the mother to choose to be a mother in spite of the chance of abnormalities. So, for the sake of argument, https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque
bilbo0s 8y ago
Because women aren't forced to have abortions in Cuba. If that were the case, there would be no Cubans with birth defects. No Cubans in wheelchairs. Etc etc etc. I think the article definitely gave the impression that the abortions were "forced". But to be fair, the article never actually said that. I think the word they used most often was "pressure". It's been a while since I was last in Cuba, but when I was last there abortion was given on a list of the various options that could be taken in such cases. And just like everywhere, the option that the doctor would recommend would depend on the doctor and his/her motivations. For instance, some might recommend abortion, another might recommend an experimental treatment that he came up with etc. Again, in fairness, you see this in the US as well. Let's say you go in and they find a tumor. Doctors conversant with radio-therapy will likely recommend radiotherapy. A surgeon, nine times out of ten, will recommend surgery. Etc etc etc. So yeah, not much difference between the two systems in this regard. At least, when I was last there the doctors in the US and Cuba behaved similarly in this regard. I will say though, that abortion seems like the only option if, say, 9 out of 10 doctors are all advising the same thing. Or if 9 out of 10 doctors are all saying your child will need 24/7 care for the rest of her life, and her life will be short. So how you're presenting the option, even though it is only an option, can make the whole thing feel forced.
- refurb 8y ago
  That's an awful lot of handwaving to explain away forced abortions.