poopinmymouth posted:

Could we get a TL:DW?

For example, I'm pro choice, but here in Iceland, it's not even possible to get a third trimester abortion (though we have epic reproductive rights in all other aspects) and I see that most of the scandinavian nations are similar. Why is it that the US needs late term abortions (outside of the health issues)? Is it purely because of the lack of reproductive rights and education early on?

Senethro posted:

I honestly can't tell what his point is but somehow just looking at these two panels makes me feel anxious. The kind that asks "Am I dreaming or did a real person actually draw this?"

Effectronica posted:

Lawl. You're redeeming yourself crowfeathers.

quote:

Planned Parenthood Opens $8 Billion Abortionplex

TOPEKA, KS—Planned Parenthood announced Tuesday the grand opening of its long-planned $8 billion Abortionplex, a sprawling abortion facility that will allow the organization to terminate unborn lives with an efficiency never before thought possible.

During a press conference, Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards told reporters that the new state-of-the-art fetus-killing facility located in the nation's heartland offers quick, easy, in-and-out abortions to all women, and represents a bold reinvention of the group's long-standing mission and values.

"Although we've traditionally dedicated 97 percent of our resources to other important services such as contraception distribution, cancer screening, and STD testing, this new complex allows us to devote our full attention to what has always been our true passion: abortion," said Richards, standing under a banner emblazoned with Planned Parenthood's new slogan, "No Life Is Sacred." "And since Congress voted to retain our federal funding, it's going to be that much easier for us to maximize the number of tiny, beating hearts we stop every day."

"The Abortionplex's high-tech machinery is capable of terminating one pregnancy every three seconds," Richards added. "That's almost a million abortions every month. We're so thrilled!"

The 900,000-square-foot facility has more than 2,000 rooms dedicated to the abortion procedure. The abundance of surgical space, Richards said, will ensure that women visiting the facility can be quickly fitted into stirrups without pausing to second-guess their decision or consider alternatives such as adoption. Hundreds of on-site counselors are also available to meet with clients free of charge and go over the many ways that carrying a child to term will burden them and very likely ruin their lives.

The remaining space is dedicated to amenities such as coffee shops, bars, dozens of restaurants and retail outlets, a three-story nightclub, and a 10-screen multiplex theater—features intended not only to help clients relax, but to foster a sense of community and make abortion more of a social event.

"We really want abortion to become a regular part of women's lives, especially younger women who have enough fertile years ahead of them to potentially have dozens of abortions," said Richards, adding that the Abortionplex would provide shuttle service to and from most residences, schools, and shopping malls in the region. "Our hope is for this facility to become a regular destination where a woman in her second trimester can whoop it up at karaoke and then kick back while we vacuum out the contents of her uterus."

"All women should feel like they have a home at the Abortionplex," Richards continued. "Whether she's a high school junior who doesn't want to go to prom pregnant, a go-getter professional who can't be bothered with the time commitment of raising a child, or a prostitute who knows getting an abortion is the easiest form of birth control—all are welcome."

Nineteen-year-old Marcy Kolrath, one of the Abortionplex's first clients, told reporters that despite her initial hesitancy, she was quickly put at ease by staff members who reassured her that she could have abortions over and over for the next decade before finally committing to motherhood. Kolrath also said she was "wowed" by the facility's many attractions.

"I was kind of on the fence in the beginning," she said. "But after a couple of margaritas and a ride down the lazy river they've got circling the place, I got caught up in the vibe. By the time it was over, I almost wished I could've aborted twins and gotten to stay a little longer."

"I told my boyfriend we had to have sex again that very night," Kolrath added. "I really want to come back over Labor Day."

SpiderHyphenMan posted:

What's the latest that an abortion can safely be performed without seriously risking the life of the mother?

SurgicalOntologist posted:

At no point is abortion any more dangerous than giving birth, although I would guess toward the end of the pregnancy they're more equivalent. But birth is fairly dangerous and abortion is, at worst, like birth but with fewer constraints on the procedure.

In any case, a first or second trimester abortion is one of the safest surgical procedures.

Xibanya posted:

Not to mention early first trimester abortions don't have to be surgery at all - they have pills for that.

Senethro posted:

I honestly can't tell what his point is but somehow just looking at these two panels makes me feel anxious. The kind that asks "Am I dreaming or did a real person actually draw this?"

Chamale posted:

Neither, it's an edit.

Senethro posted:

Thank christ for that. It was too plausible and yet impossibly vile.

Miltank posted:

toiletlord go to bed you drunk gently caress

Xibanya posted:

Speaking of eugenics, this attitude is pretty hosed up because it implies only the wealthy are worthy of passing on their precious genetic material.

Stottie Kyek posted:

Pro-lifers trying to ban abortion are going about it completely the wrong way.

Cockmaster posted:

When they go about it the wrong way, it's usually because their beliefs strictly prohibit them from going about it the right way. Either their religious ideology prohibits birth control, or their political ideology prohibits spending tax money to help the less fortunate, or they can't help themselves what they see an opportunity for some good old-fashioned slut shaming.

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

SedanChair posted:

I feel like I should say something but I can't imagine what.

Xibanya posted:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar

Also note that most late term abortions are due to severe birth defect. The people who are getting them are not those who lack "reproductive rights and education" as you imply. They're those who wanted to have a baby and then discovered something went horribly wrong. People who get abortions because of birth control failure overwhelmingly get them as early as possible.

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

poopinmymouth posted:

It was just a hypothetical guess on my part. I'm honestly curious why countries with otherwise superb reproductive rights still ban third trimester abortion and it doesn't seem like many people mind. I want to know if that is a problem and it should be allowed without question, or if other more effective solutions make it so many less are even needed.

Plus this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_termination_of_pregnancy

seems to suggest it is indeed poor reproductive rights and education stateside:

In 1987, the Alan Guttmacher Institute collected questionnaires from 1,900 women in the United States who came to clinics to have abortions. Of the 1,900 questioned, 420 had been pregnant for 16 or more weeks. These 420 women were asked to choose among a list of reasons they had not obtained the abortions earlier in their pregnancies. The results were as follows:[2]
71% Woman didn't recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation
48% Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion
33% Woman was afraid to tell her partner or parents
24% Woman took time to decide to have an abortion
8% Woman waited for her relationship to change
8% Someone pressured woman not to have abortion
6% Something changed after woman became pregnant
6% Woman didn't know timing is important
5% Woman didn't know she could get an abortion
2% A fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy
11% Other

poopinmymouth posted:

So... no response for this?

A big flaming stink posted:

all i can think of is the super fat women who dont realize theyre pregnant until a kid pops out of them

poopinmymouth posted:

So... no response for this?

SedanChair posted:

I don't understand why late-term abortion would need to be banned while we wait for reproductive health education to improve.

poopinmymouth posted:

So... no response for this?

More recent survey posted:

74% Having a baby would dramatically change my life
73% Cannot afford a baby now
48% Do not want to be a single mother or having relationship problems
38% Have completed my childbearing
32% Not ready for another child
25% Do not want people to know I had sex or got pregnant
22% Do not feel mature enough to raise another child
14% Husband or partner wants me to have an abortion
13% Possible problems affecting the health of the fetus
12% Concerns about my health
6% Parents want me to have an abortion
1% Was a victim of rape

Xibanya posted:

The list in your quote is from 1987, at least use the more recent one, where defects found later in pregnancy is 13% rather than 2% (quite a jump!) I imagine part of the difference is accounted for with advances in prenatal screening. It's also unclear how many late-term abortions were reported total from 1987 and how many there were in 2004. I'm aware of the sample size of each survey, but without the total population they are meant to represent it is difficult to compare the two surveys. The same wikipedia article also says that the number of abortions total has been decreasing dramatically since 1990.


The results do not necessarily suggest that poor sex education causes late-term abortions. (To be clear, I am most certainly in favor of improving sex education.)

Your original question was essentially "Why does the US need late-term abortions when European countries don't?" The question implies banning late-term abortions is desirable, but I'll set that aside for now. It looks like the top results involve social and economic situations that would create a suboptimal environment for raising an additional child. My argument would be we need to permit late-term abortions because it is bad to force people to have babies they know they aren't capable of supporting (financially, emotionally, etc).

OwlFancier posted:

Not really seeing a significant difference between early and late term abortions myself.

I guess early term abortions would be easier but people are silly and indecisive.

OwlFancier posted:

I can understand the importance if they're state funded, as more complex and preventable medical procedures can drain the already limited funding available to national healthcare programs. If they are privately funded or not drawn from the healthcare budget in general, that becomes a bit less of a problem though obviously still, it is better to encourage people to try to minimise the expense of their healthcare where possible.

If you want to make the case for banning late term abortion I guess you would need to conclusively prove that people do just get them earlier when they aren't available late. Rather than simply delaying until it's too late and then ending up without much in the way of options. Some people obviously will get them earlier but you'd really need some statistics either way I think if you're trying to decide whether or not the financial benefits of banning late term abortion are more worthwhile than the social and financial benefits of allowing it.

OwlFancier posted:

If you want my personal opinion as it applies to babies, they don't magically become valuable humans upon birth, but at the same time, why would you want to kill one after it's been born? The justification for abortion is usually medical risk to the mother or that the pregnancy wasn't intentional and the parents are not in a position to support a child. Both of which make sense but neither of which would generally apply suddenly, after the birth has taken place. Also actually trying to judge whether it's OK to kill any particular child would obviously never produce a result that many people would be happy with, so abortions serve as a point at which more people can agree that life doesn't have value yet. With things that have a legal component such as the acceptability of taking human life, it is usually necessary to draw the legal line a good distance into the generally acceptable side of the debate.

Talmonis posted:

They're alive and can dream and think. Sure, it's basic, but it's still human life. I understand if it's not enough for you and for others, but it is for me. Maybe human life has no inherent meaning or value, but honestly I don't think I want to live in a world where that's the prevailing view.