4 ms·

Serious question: Besides risk to ones life from natural child birth because of some health issue of the mother, why is it that woman are so desperate that they

Serious question: Besides risk to ones life from natural child birth because of some health issue of the mother, why is it that woman are so desperate that they will risk dying by having a risky abortion rather than have a child?

pbowyer 4y ago
Because they're not meant to be pregnant and their parents will get mad? And the decision between a risky abortion or my life turning upside down looks very different in that situation?
bojan 4y ago
On top of my head: * There is something wrong with the child, due to which any semblance happy and fulfilled life will never be possible * The child is a product of an unwanted and traumatic sexual contact * The mother knows she can't support the child and will end up raising it on the street - until she can't any more
- rbanffy 4y ago
  > * The mother knows she can't support the child and will end up raising it on the street - until she can't any more The pro-life crowd should actively work to ensure every mother has maternity leave and comprehensive support services, including healthcare, for both mother and child. Otherwise, they risk being called on their hypocrisy.
SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
Well firstly, let’s stop spreading misinformation that abortion is inherently risky. Abortion is a safe practice, and medically induced abortion can occur at home. It’s safer than many routine procedures! Secondly, there is an uncountable number of reasons to have an abortion rather than carrying to term. I don’t know which reasons will meet your personal bar of acceptable, but we are talking about rape victims, children, mothers who cannot afford time off because there is minimal maternity leave and they need to provide for their already born kids, professionals who are building their careers, trans men with gender dysphoria, ectopic pregnancy, high-risk pregnancy, cannot afford to stop psychological medication that hasn’t been approved for pregnancy…
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago
  I want to preface my comments by saying this is a legitimate inquiry. I am not anti-abortion, I am pro-choice. > Well firstly, let’s stop spreading misinformation that abortion is inherently risky. I wasn't, other people are saying that this is what it would lead to , more women choosing these "risky" abortions. > ectopic pregnancy, high-risk pregnancy, cannot afford to stop psychological medication that hasn’t been approved for pregnancy… These are all self defense cases in my opinion and so I do not consider it immoral. > rape victims I understand this as something that would put the life of the mother at risk because of the trauma involved. So not immoral. > children, mothers who cannot afford time off because there is minimal maternity leave and they need to provide for their already born kids, Well this is a problem with society then, yes? Does your suffering give you the right to kill another being (Since we still have not determined when life begins you have to admit this is a possibility.) > professionals who are building their careers I feel this is unacceptable. People make decisions that affect their career everyday. Having sex is one of them. When do you think life begins? I really do not know. So how late in a pregnancy can someone determine that a fetus is going to interfere with their career? > trans men with gender dysphoria Just going to stay away from this one becasue I do not know enough about it.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
    That’s the thing though- abortion isn’t risky and it’s important to point out medically induced abortion is a safe procedure that can be done at home. The only time we enter risk is when folks aren’t informed of these options, and when the baby is so far along that the child is very likely wanted and the termination is in cases of tragedy. Frankly, I don’t think any of us get to pick and choose acceptable and unacceptable reasons to have a procedure on a body that isn’t one’s own. The problem with framing abortion as if the fetus is generally viable is that, generally, it isn’t viable. It’s actually normalized not to announce pregnancy until over 3 months in because spontaneous abortions are just that common. There’s no guarantee that any given pregnancy won’t result in an abortion anyways, and gatekeeping abortion will disproportionately harm everyone involved due to the intense trauma of having the choices of one’s body taken away from them for most of a year through no activity that is illegal or worthy of punishment.
DoreenMichele 4y ago
The US does a generally poor job of being family-friendly. US parents are generally much more stressed out than, say, European parents because the system here tends to say "Fuck you. You chose to have that baby. Raising it is your damn problem." If she got pregnant out of wedlock, it's vastly worse.
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago
  So that is a reason to abort a baby? Rather than fix the society? You see what I mean?
  - DoreenMichele 4y ago
    "Put your own oxygen mask on first." If having a baby makes your life so harsh that your own survival is threatened, it's rather hard to take the high road and try to "fix society" so you can avoid an abortion.
    - FollowingTheDao 4y ago
      > If having a baby makes your life so harsh that your own survival is threatened Give me a break. This is not why the majority of women choose to have abortions and it is way over the top of na exaggeration. I know five women who had abortions. It was career for three, already had four kids for one who is wealthy, and the last did not like the guy she had the kid with but still dated him after. > it's rather hard to take the high road and try to "fix society" so you can avoid an abortion. But we have not addressed this the WHOLE TIME abortion was legal, and look where we are now. If we start dismantling capitalism we might be able to address why it costs so much to have a baby and why there is such an extreme divergence in wealth that makes it hard for so many people.
      - DoreenMichele 4y ago
        I'm not suggesting it's the explanation for "the majority." I'm tossing out another possible explanation for some women to add to a list of reasons. I have no idea why you seem so angry at me for noting that this is so for some people and those individuals usually are not in a good position to "fix society" much less both have a baby and also fix society.
spicyusername 4y ago
It is pretty well know how _expensive_ it is to birth and raise a child in the U.S. $5,000-$10,000 in medical bills to birth them. Another $200,000-$500,000 to get them to 18. It's imaginable some might want to avoid having a child for the cost savings alone.
projektfu 4y ago
A couple movies that touched on the abortion question include "Dirty Dancing" and "A Place In The Sun". I could say that it can feel like a life-ending situation to become pregnant but you might not really get it without some emotional connection, hence the movie references. Alternatively, you could imagine a situation where you'd want to punch someone in the face for saying "why don't you just live with it?" and substitute that for how some women feel when they're unexpectedly pregnant. Certainly with legal and safe abortion, many more abortions are performed than would have been in the previous regime. But just like some people will risk their career or commit suicide rather than accept a life changing event, women were willing to risk it all to avoid becoming a mother at that point in their life.
rwalle 4y ago
Abortion: pay a few hundred to a few thousand dollars, one medical procedure, done Giving birth to that child: stay pregnant for a few more months, go through labor, and ACTUALLY raise that child by buying the food, paying for and sending them to school, paying for a lot of other stuff, and spending time with them for TWO DECADES which you may not be mentally or financially prepared for Why is this even a question? You think a mother gives birth to a child and it's done business, like abortion?
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago
  So your determination of the value of a life is only monetary? And if so, who determines when the cut off is? If the fetus is still attached to the mother after it leaves the birth canal, I still consider it her body, so is i still her choice?
  - candiodari 4y ago
    The problem is that, as per usual, both extreme positions don't work. You cannot reasonably totally disallow abortions, and of course there needs to be some limit. So we agree where the cutoff is. As in, we discuss in congress and find some point we can agree on. Perhaps using European democracies as a guide, where things range from up to 12 weeks after conception to 6 months after conception. We could perhaps work "from first principles". Obviously abortion needs to happen after a woman knows she's pregnant. So, you should allow at least 1-2 female periods' worth (1 period = 4 weeks) + some time to schedule the procedure, which comes to that same minimum of about 12 weeks. An exception is medically necessary abortion, which is even legal (and a fact of life) after the baby leaves the birth canal (a baby without lungs will stay alive as long as the umbilical cord is intact, for example. When you cut it, and you have to cut it, baby dies. Not much can be done. And this is not the worst example by far. Though it's natural, so you might say "Approved by God", by republican logic). I must say this is one thing I don't understand about the religious position. Several abortion procedures are built into our genes (one relating to the immune system, one relating to the heart, one relating to the brain, and I doubt we've discovered all of them). Either those systems work to a minimum standard, or your own cells (or the mother's cells) will abort you. So there are very practical reasons that "God" does abortions. The theory is that these systems exist, because it vastly lowers the time it takes to produce another child, increasing the rate at which your DNA spreads. This also exists in animals (most famously male lions' post-natal abortions when they take over a troup).

pbowyer 4y ago

Because they're not meant to be pregnant and their parents will get mad? And the decision between a risky abortion or my life turning upside down looks very different in that situation?

bojan 4y ago

On top of my head: * There is something wrong with the child, due to which any semblance happy and fulfilled life will never be possible * The child is a product of an unwanted and traumatic sexual contact * The mother knows she can't support the child and will end up raising it on the street - until she can't any more

rbanffy 4y ago
> * The mother knows she can't support the child and will end up raising it on the street - until she can't any more The pro-life crowd should actively work to ensure every mother has maternity leave and comprehensive support services, including healthcare, for both mother and child. Otherwise, they risk being called on their hypocrisy.

SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago

Well firstly, let’s stop spreading misinformation that abortion is inherently risky. Abortion is a safe practice, and medically induced abortion can occur at home. It’s safer than many routine procedures! Secondly, there is an uncountable number of reasons to have an abortion rather than carrying to term. I don’t know which reasons will meet your personal bar of acceptable, but we are talking about rape victims, children, mothers who cannot afford time off because there is minimal maternity leave and they need to provide for their already born kids, professionals who are building their careers, trans men with gender dysphoria, ectopic pregnancy, high-risk pregnancy, cannot afford to stop psychological medication that hasn’t been approved for pregnancy…

FollowingTheDao 4y ago
I want to preface my comments by saying this is a legitimate inquiry. I am not anti-abortion, I am pro-choice. > Well firstly, let’s stop spreading misinformation that abortion is inherently risky. I wasn't, other people are saying that this is what it would lead to , more women choosing these "risky" abortions. > ectopic pregnancy, high-risk pregnancy, cannot afford to stop psychological medication that hasn’t been approved for pregnancy… These are all self defense cases in my opinion and so I do not consider it immoral. > rape victims I understand this as something that would put the life of the mother at risk because of the trauma involved. So not immoral. > children, mothers who cannot afford time off because there is minimal maternity leave and they need to provide for their already born kids, Well this is a problem with society then, yes? Does your suffering give you the right to kill another being (Since we still have not determined when life begins you have to admit this is a possibility.) > professionals who are building their careers I feel this is unacceptable. People make decisions that affect their career everyday. Having sex is one of them. When do you think life begins? I really do not know. So how late in a pregnancy can someone determine that a fetus is going to interfere with their career? > trans men with gender dysphoria Just going to stay away from this one becasue I do not know enough about it.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
  That’s the thing though- abortion isn’t risky and it’s important to point out medically induced abortion is a safe procedure that can be done at home. The only time we enter risk is when folks aren’t informed of these options, and when the baby is so far along that the child is very likely wanted and the termination is in cases of tragedy. Frankly, I don’t think any of us get to pick and choose acceptable and unacceptable reasons to have a procedure on a body that isn’t one’s own. The problem with framing abortion as if the fetus is generally viable is that, generally, it isn’t viable. It’s actually normalized not to announce pregnancy until over 3 months in because spontaneous abortions are just that common. There’s no guarantee that any given pregnancy won’t result in an abortion anyways, and gatekeeping abortion will disproportionately harm everyone involved due to the intense trauma of having the choices of one’s body taken away from them for most of a year through no activity that is illegal or worthy of punishment.

DoreenMichele 4y ago

The US does a generally poor job of being family-friendly. US parents are generally much more stressed out than, say, European parents because the system here tends to say "Fuck you. You chose to have that baby. Raising it is your damn problem." If she got pregnant out of wedlock, it's vastly worse.

FollowingTheDao 4y ago
So that is a reason to abort a baby? Rather than fix the society? You see what I mean?
- DoreenMichele 4y ago
  "Put your own oxygen mask on first." If having a baby makes your life so harsh that your own survival is threatened, it's rather hard to take the high road and try to "fix society" so you can avoid an abortion.
  - FollowingTheDao 4y ago
    > If having a baby makes your life so harsh that your own survival is threatened Give me a break. This is not why the majority of women choose to have abortions and it is way over the top of na exaggeration. I know five women who had abortions. It was career for three, already had four kids for one who is wealthy, and the last did not like the guy she had the kid with but still dated him after. > it's rather hard to take the high road and try to "fix society" so you can avoid an abortion. But we have not addressed this the WHOLE TIME abortion was legal, and look where we are now. If we start dismantling capitalism we might be able to address why it costs so much to have a baby and why there is such an extreme divergence in wealth that makes it hard for so many people.
    - DoreenMichele 4y ago
      I'm not suggesting it's the explanation for "the majority." I'm tossing out another possible explanation for some women to add to a list of reasons. I have no idea why you seem so angry at me for noting that this is so for some people and those individuals usually are not in a good position to "fix society" much less both have a baby and also fix society.

spicyusername 4y ago

It is pretty well know how _expensive_ it is to birth and raise a child in the U.S. $5,000-$10,000 in medical bills to birth them. Another $200,000-$500,000 to get them to 18. It's imaginable some might want to avoid having a child for the cost savings alone.

projektfu 4y ago

A couple movies that touched on the abortion question include "Dirty Dancing" and "A Place In The Sun". I could say that it can feel like a life-ending situation to become pregnant but you might not really get it without some emotional connection, hence the movie references. Alternatively, you could imagine a situation where you'd want to punch someone in the face for saying "why don't you just live with it?" and substitute that for how some women feel when they're unexpectedly pregnant. Certainly with legal and safe abortion, many more abortions are performed than would have been in the previous regime. But just like some people will risk their career or commit suicide rather than accept a life changing event, women were willing to risk it all to avoid becoming a mother at that point in their life.

rwalle 4y ago

Abortion: pay a few hundred to a few thousand dollars, one medical procedure, done Giving birth to that child: stay pregnant for a few more months, go through labor, and ACTUALLY raise that child by buying the food, paying for and sending them to school, paying for a lot of other stuff, and spending time with them for TWO DECADES which you may not be mentally or financially prepared for Why is this even a question? You think a mother gives birth to a child and it's done business, like abortion?

FollowingTheDao 4y ago
So your determination of the value of a life is only monetary? And if so, who determines when the cut off is? If the fetus is still attached to the mother after it leaves the birth canal, I still consider it her body, so is i still her choice?
- candiodari 4y ago
  The problem is that, as per usual, both extreme positions don't work. You cannot reasonably totally disallow abortions, and of course there needs to be some limit. So we agree where the cutoff is. As in, we discuss in congress and find some point we can agree on. Perhaps using European democracies as a guide, where things range from up to 12 weeks after conception to 6 months after conception. We could perhaps work "from first principles". Obviously abortion needs to happen after a woman knows she's pregnant. So, you should allow at least 1-2 female periods' worth (1 period = 4 weeks) + some time to schedule the procedure, which comes to that same minimum of about 12 weeks. An exception is medically necessary abortion, which is even legal (and a fact of life) after the baby leaves the birth canal (a baby without lungs will stay alive as long as the umbilical cord is intact, for example. When you cut it, and you have to cut it, baby dies. Not much can be done. And this is not the worst example by far. Though it's natural, so you might say "Approved by God", by republican logic). I must say this is one thing I don't understand about the religious position. Several abortion procedures are built into our genes (one relating to the immune system, one relating to the heart, one relating to the brain, and I doubt we've discovered all of them). Either those systems work to a minimum standard, or your own cells (or the mother's cells) will abort you. So there are very practical reasons that "God" does abortions. The theory is that these systems exist, because it vastly lowers the time it takes to produce another child, increasing the rate at which your DNA spreads. This also exists in animals (most famously male lions' post-natal abortions when they take over a troup).