dagblog - Comments for "Debating Abortion"

Oh, that's OK. It is a very

CVille Dem — Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:11:34 +0000

Oh, that's OK. It is a very touchy subject.

I sympathize with your

PeraclesPlease — Sat, 14 Nov 2015 07:30:55 +0000

I sympathize with your opinion, and I think Hillary gave voice to the fact that abortion and unwanted pregnancy is often a markedly psychologically painful and twisting experience for many, and the "rare" was to signal that these weren't just running out, having irresponsible sex and then getting abortions,but in their universe they still had difficult situations to navigate so that making these tough abortion choices rarer through better contraception, fiancial supports, more responsible men, et al would be preferable. There is room for multiple attitudes and experience - that's why we talk about "choice"

Sorry to throw the reverse

PeraclesPlease — Sat, 14 Nov 2015 07:22:02 +0000

In reply to You have synthesized this

Sorry to throw the reverse wrench in (spanner for the Brits in the room) but lobotomies used to be legal and much more common, and we evolved from that awful state. Of course an embryo evolves into a foetus up to birth, and at some point in that scale we are talking about a real human being, but one inside another human being - drowning a newborn in a gunny sack wouldn't be kosher, so then it is a question of when in that process it's not kosher, depending especially on the health of the mother (physically and psychologically ) as well as tough decisions re carrying a disabled embryo to term. I think we've found a pretty effective compromise of 13 weeks unless complications - the foetus seems capable of feelings after 28 weeks but thats not the only physical or moral issue - and from the info on why abortions are delayed, medical abortions make that 13 week deadline much easier to meet.

You have synthesized this

CVille Dem — Sat, 14 Nov 2015 00:57:59 +0000

In reply to "What women go through in a

You have synthesized this very well. There is much in this world that is ugly. Frankly, an abortion is not any uglier than a shoulder replacement; the latter having a much longer recovery time (I can vouch for that).

But this whole thing about guilt and morality regarding a multi-celled, undifferentiated blob of tissue has become ridiculous. What is wrong with us? This is a legal medical procedure. Do we have discussions about the "guilt" of having one's tubes tied? Vasectomies? Boob jobs?

Oh, I am getting tired. PP: You are doing this very well. I will leave it up to you to finish.

I'm sorry if I mangled my

barefooted — Sat, 14 Nov 2015 00:53:09 +0000

In reply to Yes, my friend of 50 years

I'm sorry if I mangled my words badly enough to give you the wrong impression, C'ville. Without going into my own or others personal history, I'll leave it that I am now and always have been strongly pro-choice.

Yes, my friend of 50 years

CVille Dem — Sat, 14 Nov 2015 00:37:59 +0000

In reply to It's not exactly comparable:

Yes, my friend of 50 years had an abortion. Prior to that she had a baby and gave him up for adoption. Her only regret is that she didn't have two abortions.

How dare you say that everyone who has an abortion lies if they say that it was a relief?

I am a loving mother to three adopted children, and I am aware of what a generous gift I was given by their birth mothers. My twin boys just turned 26 and my daughter turned 30 last week. I cannot say how these wonderful people have made my life better in every way. But I will never judge women who make the choice to end a pregnancy early.

Maybe I should also mention that as a nurse I worked for 8 years in an Infertility Practice -- IVF and all that. If anyone realizes the desire and need to have a child, it is someone who adopted 3, and then worked with couples who chose IVF. The overwhelming majority of our IVF patients chose not to adopt because of wanting their own DNA, or to experience pregnancy and birth; things that I personally didn't care about, but I realize that people have different needs and expectations.

An early abortion is not the same as killing a child, and if it is heartbreaking, it is likely because of people giving guilt-trips that are inappropriate.

"What women go through in a

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 13 Nov 2015 09:14:39 +0000

In reply to Certainly we're beyond coat

"What women go through in a very personal way isn't caused by outside interference - that ignorance just elevates it." - well, we're saying much the same thing, though I don't know if "ignorance" is all-apt for the outside part.

A surgical abortion involves "a small suction tube", and this is involved in 3/4(?) of US abortions, so not "beyond" that, though the vacuums are probably a ton better and quieter from 20-30 years ago, while the other apparatus and procedure involved aren't that fun. We are beyond coat hangers in practice, though I think it's still part of the ethos and bad memories and scare around the topic. I suspect medical abortion is a game changer in that regard.

Just as I've known women who are strippers, hang themselves from hooks, who are rather psychologically complicated and frigid about sex, some who were strict interpreters of the Bible, and more who fit possibly a perceived "standard" degree of sexual attitude and activity, I don't pretend to know what the "personal" effect of abortion is and how extensive - I knew a girl who drank heavily up to the day of her abortion and after too, didn't seem to give it a thought, and a woman who was rather upset at the prospect of her 3rd abortion with a boyfriend who was ignoring her/maybe fucking around, and a bisexual younger activist who seemed to more or less accept her 3 or 4 abortions as a natural result of being quite active. I also don't presume I knew all of their feelings just from what they told or showed me.

I didn't say women are "choosing" between methods of birth control when they decide - the woman in the Vice article I quoted knew within 3 seconds she wasn't keeping the baby, so the method wasn't part of the decision. But the ease and comfort of the method *likely* plays a part in how traumatic the whole experience is - lying exposed in stirrups with a vacuum tube is *likely* more distressing than a pill or 2 or a shot, no? Especially if there are complications. And if someone tells me they're going through the former, my reaction is "oh you poor dear" and a shudder, while the latter is, oh, okay - kinda like B-complex supplements aside from the *personal* side which I think can vary tremendously.

And politically, the GOP would have gotten little traction off a video of a woman taking a pill or getting a shot and going to the toilet to have her induced miscarriage. The shock and awe and slut-shaming is what they live for.

Better?

Certainly we're beyond coat

barefooted — Fri, 13 Nov 2015 08:15:01 +0000

In reply to The most common (I think)

What remains? Perhaps everything you've tossed aside in the name of logic, science and general assumption.

Certainly we're beyond coat hangers and vacuum pumps (though, well, Republicans), but using those examples of why women don't hurt as much is disingenuous. What women go through in a very personal way isn't caused by outside interference - that ignorance just elevates it.

When a woman makes that kind of a decision, she's not choosing between methods of birth control. If you, or anyone else assumes so, you're not only misunderstanding the difference between prevention and dealing with reality, you're also downplaying the humanity involved.

The most common (I think)

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:40:32 +0000

In reply to It's not exactly comparable:

The most common (I think) contraceptive messes with women's hormones drastically, and typically that means over the course of years taking them - not as a 1-shot to abort pregnancy. Yes, you can choose condoms, but they're also much less reliable/more risky. IUDs have some danger of uterus puncture, not sure what else.

Pregnancy of course changes hormones furiously over the course of 9 months (plus after, including post-partum depression for many), and medical abortions function by reversing some of those hormones, though obviously a much shorter timespan.

The mental stress and guilt re: abortion is certainly there - how much of it is related to society's message that you've just done something very horrible, vs. a natural inner feeling, I can't say, but without coat hangers or vacuum pumps or waiting periods & state-ordered lectures on pregnancy or lines of shouters & sign-holders outside abortion clinics or presidential candidates reciting Old Testament admonitions, I think I can safely presume that the feelings of guilt, mental stress and heartbreak would be significantly less - i.e. much about that guilt is external societal pressure, not a natural feeling. What remains? you tell me.

It's not exactly comparable:

barefooted — Fri, 13 Nov 2015 06:50:15 +0000

In reply to Debating Abortion

It's not exactly comparable: contraceptives vs abortion as means to determine female autonomy.

Contraceptives come in many forms, some more effective than others, and certainly some safer over time - all choices that should be determined as best by the woman and her doctor.

Pregnancy does, indeed, change a woman's hormones. Even in early stages, her life is affected - regardless of whether it's "noticeable" to others - both biologically and psychologically. The mental stress, the guilt, can be life changing if she ultimately decides to abort. Afterwards, it's seldom a "relief" without heartbreak. Have you spoken to a woman, personally, who told you it was? If so ... she lied.