What if we assume pregnancy to be trivially invasive and admit the real issue is that the woman just doesn’t want the financial responsibility of raising a (or another) child?
I’m still pro-choice. Anyone else?
I believe I was explicit earlier that there is a gray area. Drawing a bright line is not possible (currently and perhaps ever).
That however does not deny there being a black and white area on either side.
As mentioned if a zygote is a “person” then so too is a tumor by that definition.
An 8.5 month old fetus is definitely a person. It can survive outside the womb at that point and is distinctly human in every meaningful way.
Where in the middle you say not person/person is indeed fuzzy.
Out of interest, what about a situation where instead of a fetus being dependent on the mother, you have two beings dependent on each other? Suppose we have a pair of conjoined twins, each of which is dependent on the other. Presume that the dependency cannot be substituted; one killing the other is also suicide. What are the rights of each person in such a situation? Does it make a difference if one twin can, through medical means, survive a seperation where the other twin cannot?
In the first trimester sure.
After that the woman has made a choice and should deal with it only allowing abortion in the case of medical necessity.
The only abortion I’ve ever had was several years ago, at 5 weeks. My late husband was already sick and on disability from the disagnosed at 30 genetic condition which killed him a few years later at 45 (and for which there is a 50/50 chance of passing on, sometimes in an even more severe form…both our 2 kids managed to test free of it, as it turns out. Talk about lucking out). We were struggling financially, personally, and had 2 children. My health wasn’t all that great at the time, nor was I a spring chicken at nearly 40. We had no health insurance and were on food stamps.
Yeah, being able to terminate that accidental conception (birth control failure) quickly, affordably, and SAFELY was pretty fucking important from my/our perspective.
Years before, one of my co-workers, a woman who’d been a lawyer in her home country of Iran, agonized over the early-term abortion SHE had; her 13 yr old son was a hemophiliac and dying of HIV/AIDS. She and her husband had a 14 year old daughter as well. Both of them needed to work full time to break even and she’d been on bed-rest for 7 mths with both of her pregnancies. She wept on my shoulder over it, knowing it was, at her age, probably her last chance to have another child, but she did what she knew was in the best interests of her existing children/family (and she also considered the odds of passing on the hemophilia).
Yeah, it was pretty fucking important to HER as well.
Every situation differs. These are just 2 of them. No-one but the woman and/or her doctor and the father should have a goddamned thing to say about it, imo.
I’m in!
I know a woman who was carrying conjoined twins, with one of them basically living off the other. She was told that when they were born she could have them separated and the parasitic twin would die.
The healthy twin died when she was 6 1/2 months. The doctor said she could carry to term, but the alive twin would die shortly after birth. She chose to have an abortion and try again.
Today she has a healthy son and daughter.
It’s not at all hard to find the need for exceptions to that, of course, where making her “deal with it” creates more problems than it solves.
A line needs to be drawn somewhere.
No rule will be perfect.
Yes, it’s like Elmer Fudd used to say, you don’t want to have wegwets. Wait, don’t do anything wash.
Then when the expectant mom drops dead of pregnancy-related complications or the infant is born with the fatal wasting disease, at least you were vewy, vewy careful.
I am 100% pro-choice because 1. I think women have a basic , “God given” or “natural” right to control their own fertility and bodies and 2. I do not think it is possible to “draw a line” that adequately addresses every situation.
I’m not some fan of abortion…it’s a messy, uncomfortable, invasive procedure I doubt any woman finds pleasant, physically or emotionally. Better to PREVENT conception (DUH! Doesn’t always work) or be able to greet the big news with happiness (also can’t always be the case).
Personally, I would have serious issues with having a later-term termination. But that is my PERSONAL view, for MYSELF. I would never dream of seeking to impose my personal feelings or views on anyone or everyone else!
This is a personal, religious/spiritual, PRIVATE issue that must be left up to the woman (“the people” of the Constitution…not the state or the federal government or even the courts…screw THAT!)
I tend to trust women to make their own decisions and be, as nature made them, the “deciders” re’ these issues. As Ann Richards, former Gov. of Texas, said at her innauguration (which I attended) re’ the issue, “I am SO tired of explaining the functions of the female body to a bunch of MALE legislators.” Right.
Why do I feel increasingly uninterested in what those without a uterus have to say on the issue of what goes on in mine? :dubious:
Why?
Whack, are you very seriously arguing that you’re *okay *with unwanted children being born into poverty, just to make some woman “deal with it”? Because that’s the sad, frustrating, vicious-cycle result of your logic: it’s punitive. Not to mention, some states already have such tight restrictions on abortion that there have been cases of women being unable to access an abortion provider until juuuuuuuust past the date they start their 2nd trimester. You’re OK with those states essentially screwing the pregnant woman (ha!) into being forced to carry to term?
The perfect rule with abortion is actually quite simple: every woman decides for herself what to do with her own body. (Boy, that wasn’t so hard, now, was it?)
but
but
but
what if she’s about to go into labour,
and we already know the baby is going to be a genius
and the perfect family has already signed up to adopt
and the price of rice in China is $2 per pound!
Sure then my opinion is more important than her’s???
To be ethically consistent, the anti-choice position should include strong support for birth control of all varieties, as well as whatever variety of sex education has been demonstrated to work best. One would think that everyone would agree that the prevention of a pregnancy would be better than either abortion or carrying the child to term.
Pro-choice people in general support birth control, demonstrating that we are not pro-abortion. Anti-choice people often do not. It is no wonder some people may get the impression that something is going on here besides protection of a fetus. Hell, “pro-life” churches should have a bucket of condoms at the door. I’m sure they’d say that while premarital sex is a sin (assuming the condoms somehow encourages this) but it must be less of a sin than an abortion. Right?
Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others?
Some of the most astute analysis of the most pressing issue in American politics.
Kang 2012
Remember to always twirl towards freedom
Clearly there is a human being there the day before the woman gives birth at full term (9 months). Should she be allowed to kill the fetus then? If yes why can’t she kill it 10 seconds later once it has been born?
Presumably you are not ok with aborting a baby at 8 months, 3 weeks, 6 days of gestation.
What about at 8 months, 3 weeks and 5 days? No?
We can keep doing this. Where do you draw a line?
No doubt the line drawn is arbitrary but I am cool with abortion not being ok after viability is reached (which is about 6 months). Given that there is not a bright line on when the unborn gains personhood I think it wise to err on the side not killing something if it might have a consciousness to speak of.
So we walk it back a little further. After the first trimester the woman has had ample time to consider whether to carry the unborn to term. I’d be fine with going some beyond the first trimester, there is wiggle room to be had there I think.
There is nothing punitive about this. The woman has ample time to make a decision for herself on whether to carry to term or not. Why someone would think she has no responsibility for her decisions regarding the unborn till the moment the it is born is beyond me.
To be fair, those are only ethically consistent positions if the only consideration is an anti-abortion one. It’s not necessarily ethically inconsistent if there are other concerns which end up overuling or at least interacting in some way with an anti-abortion position. If you held that sex should only happen as a means of conception, for example, then it would not necessarily be ethicially inconsistent to both be against abortion and against birth control or sex education other than abstinence-only.
What if I was?
Anyway, you say a line must be drawn. I’m just asking what would happen if it wasn’t. What is your expected outcome if all abortion restrictions were eliminated? Something bad, I assume. Such as?
Same reason I can shoot an intruder that intends to do me harm, but I can’t shoot him when he’s off my property and running away.
To be honest, I’m not okay with any abortion, but that’s not the point.
The answer to your question is easy though because a late term abortion is an exceptionally difficult and risky procedure. So the mother may be okay with the abortion, but she’ll need to find a doctor that is okay going along with. Here we have a natural safeguard, chances are the doctor is going to say that having the baby is actually less dangerous than a DnC. At this point there isn’t a need for an abortion.
Again, very easy to answer. The further from 9months we go, the less likely the infant would survive outside of the womb. If I remember correctly, at 6 weeks premi the chances are less than 20%, and is there for non-viable. If the mother doesn’t want to carry it, that’s not for me to decide. And again, it’s going to require a physician to go along with it.
Now, to go the other way and start from conception, we need to give a woman at least a month’s grace so she can actually know she’s pregnant. Given the irregular nature of the menstrual cycle, I’d grant her at least one more. At this point she can go, “holy shit I missed two periods, maybe I should pee on a stick.”
From this point, I’d get her at least another month to think things through. Consider other options. Talk to friends and family. Scrounge together enough cash for the bus out of South Dakota, for the procedure, and for the bus home. And get time off work.
Then I’d give at least another month for scheduling and what not.
So now we’re at 4 months, and that’s just elective. Do you want to be the one to tell a woman that even though her blood pressure was fine last week, this week she’s showing signs of preeclampsia. But it’s too late for an abortion so she should start making arrangements for her death.
How about instead, we just stay the fuck out of it.