|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:I'm from the Internet and I say kill 'em all Confirm agreement. 78yo FtM
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 13:52 |
|
|
1) Rape is a crime, and if the woman does not wish to raise a rape baby, the state or right-wingers should not force her to. Incest has a much greater chance of genetic defects. Ultimate decision in the hands of the mother. No input from father allowed or considered. 2) If having an abortion would increase the chance of the saving the mothers life during extremely high risk pregnancy, yes. If father is in picture, they should discuss who will live. Ultimate decision made by parent(s) based on medical information. 3) If "Any reason" = she forgot to take the pill/use condom, then no after 1st trimester. Abortion should not be used as a form of late-term birth control just because you wanted to get your freak on and forgot to use any of the many forms of birth control, or you are worried about getting fat and not being sexy and having to buy a new wardrobe for when you got out clubbing again, you shallow oval office. Legitimate reasons could be low-income family that is unable to afford to comfortably raise a child, pre-existing genetic anomaly that runs in family, Single teen mom that is too young and immature to raise a child, or pregnancy caused by one-night stand and father will abandon mother and baby. "If I get pregnant, Billy won't bang me in the back of his SUV" is not a reason. However, it *IS* her legal right to do this. Her body, her choice. Of course, each individual instance is handled on a case-by-case basis. There is no hard rule or chart, like when to go for 2 in football. Each of the above situations has other factors involved and every available option/choice should be considered in each situation. Complete strangers who do not have any impact in your life, and don't even know you or your situation need to shut the gently caress up. If she wants to have 7 abortions a year, because she likes to gently caress, then she's a idiot, but that's her choice, not mine. I don't know her, never met her and never will, and could care less how she lives such a hosed up life.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 09:05
|
|
|
Li Dawny posted:I'm currently in school becoming a midwife and I'm doing a population survey on abortion. If you don't mind answering, please also post your gender and age. 1) Yes, it's not a wanted child. 2) Yes, if you can save the mother's life and she's okay with it 3) Well.. this one is tricky, but I'd say yes. Sometimes the woman doesn't want the baby for X reasons... Gender : M
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Li Dawny posted:I'm currently in school becoming a midwife and I'm doing a population survey on abortion. If you don't mind answering, please also post your gender and age. Are you becoming a certified nurse-midwife, or a certified professional midwife?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
29 m (U.K) Yes to all three, plus offer of free or heavily subsidised professional counselling.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Yes to all three, m/31. Legally, a fetus shouldn't be considered anything more than a tumor until it is born. I believe any abortion should be allowed at any time for any reason. Once it is born, it is a human and has a legal right to life, but not a second before.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
I would be a big yes for all three (30/F) if they were the only options, though obviously they are not! I.e. there's a lot of scope for sub-points between 2 and 3. For context I have had two voluntary terminations, both at 22 weeks, for sever fetal abnormalities. These could not be picked up prior to 20 weeks due to the nature of the problems. If I lived in a country where I was not legally able to have an abortion in the second trimester I would have had to wait for the fetus inside me to die of natural causes before I was allowed to have an induction of labour to birth the corpse (which would have most likely happened within 6 to 12 weeks of diagnosis or otherwise at full term labour - neither fetus would have been physically able to survive outside the womb). This "wait till it dies stuff" actually DOES happen to people who live in places with these types of laws and it is so loving horrific I don't even know what to say! For me these were both deliberate, planned pregnancies and I cannot imagine having to deal with paperwork or endless legal hurdles as well as the loss of a very much wanted pregnancy and dream of having a baby - it's horrific enough as it is. Thankfully I live in a civilized place where the decision was very much up to me and my husband with expert support from our medical team on options and potential outcomes etc (we also could have chosen to continue my pregnancies). The only legal hurdle is sign off by two doctors who confirm independently that I fully understand the decision I am making and that I have not be coerced in any way. [As an aside cause someone asked this earlier in the thread: yes past 19 weeks the "ejection method" for a fetus is the same all the way - i.e. induction of labour and delivery or C-section. Other termination options available earlier, are no longer possible after this time. In cases like mine the fetus is not killed prior to delivery they are simply not able to live on their own once born or more commonly they die from the force of labour. For cases where pregnancy is further advanced there is an option to inject a fetus prior to deliver to stop it's heart via a procedure similar to an amniocentesis (i.e. a painful and traumatic procedure for the woman).] I know lots of people have hang ups over abortions of fetuses at later stages of pregnancy but I have never seen any statistics from countries with fully-open abortions where women at 30+ weeks with healthy fetuses are lining up to get a termination cause they didn't want kids afterall - it's just a dumb red-herring. It would be like legislating that every house in central Asia must have a hurricane shelter to save lives when hurricanes just don't happen there. Here's the issue with viability limits blindly based on weeks after conception: What about the women whose fetus had a sudden haemorrhage in the brain at 32 weeks and has gone from healthy to "not compatible with life" due to brain damage? Is this fetus "viable" just cause there's a 32 week time stamp attach to it? What if it's compatible with life but severely brain damaged. Must the women (and family!) be required to up-end her whole life to look after a severely disabled child when she would have been legally allowed to abort at 12 weeks for chromosomal abnormalities with a low risk of severe disability? In my view the sensible alternative to this problem, and this is actually the legal situation here, would be a "viability cut off" for abortions were all parties are 100% healthy (it's 23w+6d here - before that all abortions are legal) and no cut-off where there are ANY medical complications which would have long term effects on the life of the mother or child (here this includes mental health concerns for the mother).
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:
What about sexuality selection?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:What about sexuality selection? I do not personally agree with this, but it should still be legal. The alternative is a lengthy and embarrassing investigation every time someone wants an abortion, because who is actually going to admit to a sex / sexuality / gender identity selection abortion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
Aleph Null posted:I do not personally agree with this, but it should still be legal. The alternative is a lengthy and embarrassing investigation every time someone wants an abortion, because who is actually going to admit to a sex / sexuality / gender identity selection abortion. You would be amazed. In the same way that parents who force their children to get married usually just straight up confess because they literally don't understand why torturing their child into getting hitched to their jerk rear end cousin is not legal, the people stupid enough to do sex selective abortion would also be stupid enough to not shut up about it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
My concern is when we start trying to determine when an abortion is or isn't legal, we'd find ourselves in weird grey areas the law wasn't designed to cover. Especially since doctors have their asses on the line, it means we will have situations where an abortion won't happen where people feel it should.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
The sex-based selection issue is really a wider social problem and it seems odd to me to chose to manage it at the pregnancy termination end, especially as repression of women's reproductive rights often goes hand-in-hand with other social and economic oppression of women. Communities in which it remains disadvantageous to the whole family to have a girl and where women are generally treated poorly need to have other higher level interventions to improve those conditions not anti-abortion laws. In addition people will get the abortions they want regardless of whether they are legal or not - they always have - so excluding gender selection would not only be an administrative nightmare, it would also not work and likely cause increased health care costs (and/or maternal death) as a result of illegal abortions. Needless to say this doesn't increase the value of women in those communities. This problem will only go away with large scale social change and full reproductive rights for women should be part of this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
fetuses aren't people, full stop. you should be able to kill them for any reason up to and including as a sacrificial ritual to bring about the second coming of Our Lord Satan 20/m also lol this site is full of old people icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 01:44 on Nov 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
Yes Yes Yes 26/m
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
1)Yes 2)Yes 3)Yes (but I have some personal qualms if the fetus is late term and not a product of questions 1 or 2. A little bit easier to snip if the thing is the size of a pea, not so much that its ready to come out tomorrow). m/23 Even though I have some hangups on 3, it wouldn't be enough for me to be pro-life. Will never know how it is to be a woman or deal with an inopportune pregnancy, so I naturally feel bad making a decision that really isn't mine. That, and if males had babies while keeping the societal benefits of being male, abortions would have been allowed decades ago and it might not even be a problem today. While personally I think theres some moral issues which make this so convoluted, its a political thing entirely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
Male 29. Yes, I believe all women should have the choice to get an abortion for whatever reason she wants or no reason. Fetuses aren't people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:Yes Exactly this. How smart are new born babies anyway? Are they smarter than chickens? Pigs? Pigs are pretty clever. Unless you're an ethical vegetarian, you should probably be ok with it being legal to kill babies, unless you believe in some sort of magic. Is there any neurological difference between a baby before and after it's born? I imagine it's suddenly getting a lot more oxygen and general stimulus. But I'm not a real biologist, I just play one on the anime forum.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 15:43
|
|
|
I guess it'd be pretty hosed up if you waited until labor to stick a probe in there and kill what will be a baby in a matter of hours. Otherwise,  This has been my contribution to a super scientific poll.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Answer my question, dammit, and then I'll answer yours.Bobbie Wickham posted:Are you becoming a certified nurse-midwife, or a certified professional midwife?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
42 F Yes Yes Yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
25, M I believe killing babies before they ever get a chance to draw breath is an upstanding and moral thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
31m 1) no (I don't agree with abortion at all unless the mother's life is at risk) 2) yes 3) yes (not my body, and not my call. Even if I disagree with it, I respect the choices others make based on their own situations and circumstances that I do not have the ability to fully comprehend and would likely sway my opinion if I was in that position myself) In an ideal world where rape, incest, poverty, and social stigmas regarding pregnancy no longer exist, abortion wouldn't even be considered a rational option. Unfortunately, this is not the world we live in.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Avalanche posted:In an ideal world where rape, incest, poverty, and social stigmas regarding pregnancy no longer exist, abortion wouldn't even be considered a rational option. Unfortunately, this is not the world we live in. No? Just not wanting a child isn't a "rational" reason? Not wanting to raise a child with significant birth defects isn't "rational"? Knowing that a pregnancy will significantly affect your mental health? Even if you eliminate rape, poverty, and gender discrimination, those situations will still arise.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Male Age 27 1)Yes 2)Yes 3)Yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
ahleeshaa posted:No? Just not wanting a child isn't a "rational" reason? Not wanting to raise a child with significant birth defects isn't "rational"? Knowing that a pregnancy will significantly affect your mental health? Even if you eliminate rape, poverty, and gender discrimination, those situations will still arise. Some people think pregnancy is "punishment" for a woman if they have sex. Hence the mental or physical state of the mother doesn't matter. She had sex, she needs to accept the consequences. The ONLY reason this line of thought is acceptable when it comes to men and pregnancy is that the pregnancy does not happen in their body and physically does not affect them. A man can't argue that he didn't want to have a baby to push the mom to abortion (or force her to not get one), but he still has to pay the piper when it comes to the woman wanting to continue (or end) the pregnancy. I used to think sex-selection abortion was horrible until I thought about the other side of it: if a couple wants a girl and they keep having boys, they end up with lots of unwanted children. We aren't exactly an endangered species at this point, I see no issue with an abortion if it keeps unwanted children from being born/
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 10:56
|
|
|
Male, 54 1) Yes 2) Yes 3) No.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 03:39
|
|
Cat Army
|
I can't help but wonder how many goons would accept post-birth abortion since newborn infants are stupid as dishrags and can't be considered a person any more than a fetus by any rational definition
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
Li Dawny posted:Incest meaning a pregnancy that has a higher risk of birth defects or lower cognitive ability. Maybe you should include women who are pregnant over 30 in the first question, since there is an increased chance of birth defects then as well. M/31 1) No 2) Yes 3) No
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:I can't help but wonder how many goons would accept post-birth abortion since newborn infants are stupid as dishrags and can't be considered a person any more than a fetus by any rational definition The correct term is PNA or "Post Natal Abortion", and no that's Reddit not us.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
1) Yes, I agree with abortion in all cases. 2) Yes, I agree with abortion in all cases. 3) I believe a woman should be encouraged to have an abortion, even if she doesn't really want one. You are welcome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 08:14
|
|
|
26/M 1) Yes 2) Yes 3) Yes That said, these answers are conditional on access to abortion being a net good for society, as it's trivially easy to construct a scenario that would be abhorrent to even the most pro-choice advocates. Should these sorts of scenarios ever outweigh the positive impact of abortion access, it would be worthwhile to revisit the abortion question.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
Li Dawny posted:I'm currently in school becoming a midwife and I'm doing a population survey on abortion. If you don't mind answering, please also post your gender and age. I'm not going to answer these questions because 1) your original post was six weeks ago so I assume you've already handed in the assignment and 2) this is a terrible place to discuss abortion. But I can't help myself from commenting because I'm a registered midwife and I really hope I can persuade you to take your education more seriously. This survey isn't well-thought-out or well-constructed. I don't know what the assignment is, but I assume it's something about either data gathering or public opinion on topics related to maternal health, and what you're doing isn't going to support good learning about either of those topics. For your next assignment, I want to really encourage you to think about what you should be learning and how it's going to apply to your future practice. Please be more conscientious than this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 13:52 |
|
|
Yes to all three. f/29
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 20:46
|
|
