Yes, I think abortions that late should be illegal. I consider a frivolous reason: "He and I broke up, so I ditched the baby." Situations like that should not be legal IMO. Maybe this wasn't the reason the woman mentioned in the OP aborted her child, but I'm basing all my responses off situations in which that is the only reason the child is aborted. I'm also only talking about abortions that occur in the 2nd trimester or later.
I believe a "frivolous abortion" can be defined. If there is no medical reason for the woman to receive the abortion (such as the child having some condition, the mothers life/health in danger, fetus is unhealthy and will have a low quality of life, etc) this is an example of how you can seperate abortions because of Downs and abortions because of break-ups.
And the issue with children being adopted into terrible homes is a completely different issue.
I couldn't agree more. Oh, and everyone who is defending late-term abortions (which would probably be better defined as after movement is felt) can go ahead and look up the procedure for such an abortion. It's fvcking disgusting and horrific. I'm sure that no God would back the right to rip your child to threads.
ETA: This is only concerning abortions for "frivolous" reasons. If there is a medical reason then it may be the only way to give the baby peace. Plus, there is often a different procedure done in those cases that is more humane, in my opinion.
Yep. When I was younger I didn't have much of an opinion on abortion because I just assumed it was done humanely, like when they put an animal to sleep at the shelter. Once I got older, I decided to research it and thats when I found out that they do literally tear the child to pieces. Alive. They rip out its arms, legs,and body with forceps. Sometimes the child comes out whole, but often they pull out the child in pieces.
It is barbaric. Nothing should have to die that way, especially an innocent child who is being rejected because the mother decides she isn't ready for a baby.
Yes, I think abortions that late should be illegal. I consider a frivolous reason: "He and I broke up, so I ditched the baby." Situations like that should not be legal IMO. Maybe this wasn't the reason the woman mentioned in the OP aborted her child, but I'm basing all my responses off situations in which that is the only reason the child is aborted. I'm also only talking about abortions that occur in the 2nd trimester or later.
I believe a "frivolous abortion" can be defined. If there is no medical reason for the woman to receive the abortion (such as the child having some condition, the mothers life/health in danger, fetus is unhealthy and will have a low quality of life, etc) this is an example of how you can seperate abortions because of Downs and abortions because of break-ups.
And the issue with children being adopted into terrible homes is a completely different issue.
I couldn't agree more. Oh, and everyone who is defending late-term abortions (which would probably be better defined as after movement is felt) can go ahead and look up the procedure for such an abortion. It's fvcking disgusting and horrific. I'm sure that no God would back the right to rip your child to threads.
ETA: This is only concerning abortions for "frivolous" reasons. If there is a medical reason then it may be the only way to give the baby peace. Plus, there is often a different procedure done in those cases that is more humane, in my opinion.
Yep. When I was younger I didn't have much of an opinion on abortion because I just assumed it was done humanely, like when they put an animal to sleep at the shelter. Once I got older, I decided to research it and thats when I found out that they do literally tear the child to pieces. Alive. They rip out its arms, legs,and body with forceps. Sometimes the child comes out whole, but often they pull out the child in pieces.
It is barbaric. Nothing should have to die that way, especially an innocent child who is being rejected because the mother decides she isn't ready for a baby.
That's exactly how I found out what is done. I was actually pro-choice growing up, because I thought it was humane. Once I researched it and found how it's really done I couldn't stop crying. It's just disgusting.
Yes, I think abortions that late should be illegal. I consider a frivolous reason: "He and I broke up, so I ditched the baby." Situations like that should not be legal IMO. Maybe this wasn't the reason the woman mentioned in the OP aborted her child, but I'm basing all my responses off situations in which that is the only reason the child is aborted. I'm also only talking about abortions that occur in the 2nd trimester or later.
I believe a "frivolous abortion" can be defined. If there is no medical reason for the woman to receive the abortion (such as the child having some condition, the mothers life/health in danger, fetus is unhealthy and will have a low quality of life, etc) this is an example of how you can seperate abortions because of Downs and abortions because of break-ups.
And the issue with children being adopted into terrible homes is a completely different issue.
no, it is not a completely different issue... you were the one who brought up adoption as though it was a perfect solution. sentencing a kid to years in foster care is not something i take lightly and the examples i linked for you are just the most extreme.
i also disagree with your ideas of frivolous... maternal depression is a real issue, for one thing, and it does have repercussions on the baby when he is born. i have no idea what the real issues were for the person who was described in this post, but i do think there is a genuine problem with what you are saying. i do not think it is anyone's place to tell me when i must have a child and for what reason. i have rights and they shouldn't evaporate when i am pregnant. abortion is really only the tip of this iceberg... did you know that women have been compelled to have c-sections against their will? do you want to be tied to a gurney and cut open while you beg the doctors to stop? the law has been pulled apart by people who, however well-meaning, are screwing with my rights.
I couldn't agree more. Oh, and everyone who is defending late-term abortions (which would probably be better defined as after movement is felt) can go ahead and look up the procedure for such an abortion. It's fvcking disgusting and horrific. I'm sure that no God would back the right to rip your child to threads.
ETA: This is only concerning abortions for "frivolous" reasons. If there is a medical reason then it may be the only way to give the baby peace. Plus, there is often a different procedure done in those cases that is more humane, in my opinion.
thinking like yours is the reason for articles like this.
why would any god do that to a child? you are fooling yourself if you think intact dilation and extraction only happens in "frivolous" abortions. i am completely happy writing off a god that does this:
Now, I am in no way defending this girl, but I feel bad for her. It may not be today, and it may not be tomorrow, but there will be a day when she realizes that she has made a mistake.
This. Though she may not get it now, I suspect the enormity of what she has done will hit her someday. Even if that's ten years down the line for her, it makes me sad for her. Though, I also understand how being around her currently would drive you insane.
I couldn't agree more. Oh, and everyone who is defending late-term abortions (which would probably be better defined as after movement is felt) can go ahead and look up the procedure for such an abortion. It's fvcking disgusting and horrific. I'm sure that no God would back the right to rip your child to threads.
ETA: This is only concerning abortions for "frivolous" reasons. If there is a medical reason then it may be the only way to give the baby peace. Plus, there is often a different procedure done in those cases that is more humane, in my opinion.
thinking like yours is the reason for articles like this.
why would any god do that to a child? you are fooling yourself if you think intact dilation and extraction only happens in "frivolous" abortions. i am completely happy writing off a god that does this:
You must not read well, because I never said I had any issue with such an abortion when medically necessary. Are you suggesting that the pregnant woman in that article being near death did not constitute a medically necessary reason to have a late-term abortion? I also said that abortions are often performed in more humane manner when medically necessary. Therefore, I'm NOT fooling myself.
ETA: I just finished reading the second article, and I'm convinced that you do not know how to read. As I stated earlier (now 3 times, I believe) I have no issue with medically necessary late-term abortions. Please read before you accuse people of being part of the problem.
Yes, I think abortions that late should be illegal. I consider a frivolous reason: "He and I broke up, so I ditched the baby." Situations like that should not be legal IMO. Maybe this wasn't the reason the woman mentioned in the OP aborted her child, but I'm basing all my responses off situations in which that is the only reason the child is aborted. I'm also only talking about abortions that occur in the 2nd trimester or later.
I believe a "frivolous abortion" can be defined. If there is no medical reason for the woman to receive the abortion (such as the child having some condition, the mothers life/health in danger, fetus is unhealthy and will have a low quality of life, etc) this is an example of how you can seperate abortions because of Downs and abortions because of break-ups.
And the issue with children being adopted into terrible homes is a completely different issue.
no, it is not a completely different issue... you were the one who brought up adoption as though it was a perfect solution. sentencing a kid to years in foster care is not something i take lightly and the examples i linked for you
i also disagree with your ideas of frivolous... maternal depression is a real issue, for one thing, and it does have repercussions on the baby when he is born. i have no idea what the real issues were for the person who was described in this post, but i do think there is a genuine problem with what you are saying. i do not think it is anyone's place to tell me when i must have a child and for what reason. i have rights and they shouldn't evaporate when i am pregnant. abortion is really only the tip of this iceberg... did you know that women have been compelled to have c-sections against their will? do you want to be tied to a gurney and cut open while you beg the doctors to stop? the law has been pulled apart by people who, however well-meaning, are screwing with my rights.
It is a completely different issue because are we discussing the downfalls of foster care or abortion? Do they relate? Well yes, but that's a whole different issue we have in America that needs to be tackled seperately. This discussion would become too overwhelming to bundle them both. Foster care, as it should be, is a good solution.
I think we will never agree on this topic because I feel that once you are pregnant past a certain point, there are two sets of rights to consider: the childs rights and the mothers rights.
Really, all that sets our opinions apart from each other is that you don't believe a child has human rights until after they are born and I believe they have those rights once they are developed in the womb past a certain point. So really, about 6/7 months seperate our opinions.
Also, I should acknowledge that you believe a woman has rights over her body. Which I believe also... except when those rights deny another humans rights to life. And again, we will never agree because you recognize that a baby has the right to life after birth, and I see that they have a right to life before birth.
I mean, for this woman to have rights to her body, she must stop the life of another human. And I see that as wrong. At 20 weeks the baby has developed every organ and can even hear and recognize the mothers voice. 20 weeks is just too far along. If a woman does not want the baby, I believe they need to recognize this and make that decision before the embryo develops into a fetus/baby.
I couldn't agree more. Oh, and everyone who is defending late-term abortions (which would probably be better defined as after movement is felt) can go ahead and look up the procedure for such an abortion. It's fvcking disgusting and horrific. I'm sure that no God would back the right to rip your child to threads.
ETA: This is only concerning abortions for "frivolous" reasons. If there is a medical reason then it may be the only way to give the baby peace. Plus, there is often a different procedure done in those cases that is more humane, in my opinion.
thinking like yours is the reason for articles like this.
why would any god do that to a child? you are fooling yourself if you think intact dilation and extraction only happens in "frivolous" abortions. i am completely happy writing off a god that does this:
You must not read well, because I never said I had any issue with such an abortion when medically necessary. Are you suggesting that the pregnant woman in that article being near death did not constitute a medically necessary reason to have a late-term abortion? I also said that abortions are often performed in more humane manner when medically necessary. Therefore, I'm NOT fooling myself.
why do you think that? nothing implies that people like doing that procedure for fun, as in, when they're NOT medically necessary.
edit: and even if you do have "no issue" with such abortions when medically necessary, politicians are thinking of you and people like you when they ban that procedure. there were no exceptions in that law. seriously, you should read that first article, and see exactly why she wrote it when she did.
I couldn't agree more. Oh, and everyone who is defending late-term abortions (which would probably be better defined as after movement is felt) can go ahead and look up the procedure for such an abortion. It's fvcking disgusting and horrific. I'm sure that no God would back the right to rip your child to threads.
ETA: This is only concerning abortions for "frivolous" reasons. If there is a medical reason then it may be the only way to give the baby peace. Plus, there is often a different procedure done in those cases that is more humane, in my opinion.
thinking like yours is the reason for articles like this.
why would any god do that to a child? you are fooling yourself if you think intact dilation and extraction only happens in "frivolous" abortions. i am completely happy writing off a god that does this:
You must not read well, because I never said I had any issue with such an abortion when medically necessary. Are you suggesting that the pregnant woman in that article being near death did not constitute a medically necessary reason to have a late-term abortion? I also said that abortions are often performed in more humane manner when medically necessary. Therefore, I'm NOT fooling myself.
why do you think that? nothing implies that people like doing that procedure for fun, as in, when they're NOT medically necessary.
edit: and even if you do have "no issue" with such abortions when medically necessary, politicians are thinking of you and people like you when they ban that procedure. there were no exceptions in that law. seriously, you should read that first article, and see exactly why she wrote it when she did.
Dude, the original purpose of this post was a vent about a woman who had a late-term abortion because she broke up with her boyfriend. I would consider that NOT MEDICALLY NECESSARY. People DO have late-term abortions for reasons that are NOT MEDICALLY NECESSARY, and I am against such abortions.
Also, I recall when President Bush was attempting to ban all late-term abortions. I believe that if everyone took their heads out of their asse.s (it will never happen, I know), it probably wouldn't be too difficult to instate a system in which late-term abortions are allowed when deemed medically necessary by a dr. For instance, if the mother's life is in danger or the baby has some condition that may cause a poor life or death.
I couldn't agree more. Oh, and everyone who is defending late-term abortions (which would probably be better defined as after movement is felt) can go ahead and look up the procedure for such an abortion. It's fvcking disgusting and horrific. I'm sure that no God would back the right to rip your child to threads.
ETA: This is only concerning abortions for "frivolous" reasons. If there is a medical reason then it may be the only way to give the baby peace. Plus, there is often a different procedure done in those cases that is more humane, in my opinion.
thinking like yours is the reason for articles like this.
why would any god do that to a child? you are fooling yourself if you think intact dilation and extraction only happens in "frivolous" abortions. i am completely happy writing off a god that does this:
Yes, I think abortions that late should be illegal. I consider a frivolous reason: "He and I broke up, so I ditched the baby." Situations like that should not be legal IMO. Maybe this wasn't the reason the woman mentioned in the OP aborted her child, but I'm basing all my responses off situations in which that is the only reason the child is aborted. I'm also only talking about abortions that occur in the 2nd trimester or later.
I believe a "frivolous abortion" can be defined. If there is no medical reason for the woman to receive the abortion (such as the child having some condition, the mothers life/health in danger, fetus is unhealthy and will have a low quality of life, etc) this is an example of how you can seperate abortions because of Downs and abortions because of break-ups.
And the issue with children being adopted into terrible homes is a completely different issue.
no, it is not a completely different issue... you were the one who brought up adoption as though it was a perfect solution. sentencing a kid to years in foster care is not something i take lightly and the examples i linked for you
i also disagree with your ideas of frivolous... maternal depression is a real issue, for one thing, and it does have repercussions on the baby when he is born. i have no idea what the real issues were for the person who was described in this post, but i do think there is a genuine problem with what you are saying. i do not think it is anyone's place to tell me when i must have a child and for what reason. i have rights and they shouldn't evaporate when i am pregnant. abortion is really only the tip of this iceberg... did you know that women have been compelled to have c-sections against their will? do you want to be tied to a gurney and cut open while you beg the doctors to stop? the law has been pulled apart by people who, however well-meaning, are screwing with my rights.
It is a completely different issue because are we discussing the downfalls of foster care or abortion? Do they relate? Well yes, but that's a whole different issue we have in America that needs to be tackled seperately. This discussion would become too overwhelming to bundle them both. Foster care, as it should be, is a good solution.
I think we will never agree on this topic because I feel that once you are pregnant past a certain point, there are two sets of rights to consider: the childs rights and the mothers rights.
Really, all that sets our opinions apart from each other is that you don't believe a child has human rights until after they are born and I believe they have those rights once they are developed in the womb past a certain point. So really, about 6/7 months seperate our opinions.
Also, I should acknowledge that you believe a woman has rights over her body. Which I believe also... except when those rights deny another humans rights to life. And again, we will never agree because you recognize that a baby has the right to life after birth, and I see that they have a right to life before birth.
I mean, for this woman to have rights to her body, she must stop the life of another human. And I see that as wrong. At 20 weeks the baby has developed every organ and can even hear and recognize the mothers voice. 20 weeks is just too far along. If a woman does not want the baby, I believe they need to recognize this and make that decision before the embryo develops into a fetus/baby.
Since I am the OP of this post, let me clarify some things for many of you. I am pro-life yet pro-choice at the same time. I believe in a womans right to choose the course of her life. To each their own and maybe its the attorney in me that has truly analyzed her actions subsequent her abortion.
Abortion will always be a trite debate and like many of you have stated, it is impossible to judge a person as we will never be in their position. A woman always has the right to choose.
Now as far as this young lady is concerned I am not judging her right to choose, I am judging the actions that led up to the abortion and her reaction after, as though she has a sensitivity chip missing.
Abortion is not humane, in anyway. Even abortion when medically necessary is non humane, the emotional ramifications are greater than imaginable.
She pranced around the office as though she was punishing her ex. This young lady has everything that most of could want at the young age of 20.
The post was intended to remind you all that you are pregnant or moms already. Cherish those LO's and remind yourself that you are greatful of those little bpm that you see on your ultrasounds and when they are born and they keep you up at night, remind your self that there are people in this world that make choices that will affect your children. And raise your children to make right decisions that are pure in heart and to be noble in all that they do.
She litteraly stated that he, the boyfriend didnt deserve this baby.
Think about this. Im trying a case right now that involves a mother of 1 and a half children. Well the father of these children did not want a second child, thus he punched her in the stomach. The mother lost the child. Thus the incredibly selfish man is going to prison for murder of a fetus at 23 weeks.
How is that any different from abortion? He had a choice, yet that baby had no voice nor did the mother.
This girl has a great family who would have loved that baby, but she instead indicates that she used her pregnancy as a pawn.
To lighten my post, I had more sex than I wanted to ( well sorta), more blood work than I wanted to, more progesterone than I wanted to, and killer m/s that has me tossing my morning bagel in front of judges etc. you get the point. I want this little one sooo bad and every week that I see that flicker of a heartbeat, I get a zeal of we did it.
It broke my heart and the hearts of everyone else in the office. I cant fire her for her personal actions, but trust me she is under serious scrutiny.
To all of you who haver responded congrats on your LO's and future LO's life is is good when you make it good.
I think we will never agree on this topic because I feel that once you are pregnant past a certain point, there are two sets of rights to consider: the childs rights and the mothers rights.
Really, all that sets our opinions apart from each other is that you don't believe a child has human rights until after they are born and I believe they have those rights once they are developed in the womb past a certain point. So really, about 6/7 months seperate our opinions.
Also, I should acknowledge that you believe a woman has rights over her body. Which I believe also... except when those rights deny another humans rights to life. And again, we will never agree because you recognize that a baby has the right to life after birth, and I see that they have a right to life before birth.
I mean, for this woman to have rights to her body, she must stop the life of another human. And I see that as wrong. At 20 weeks the baby has developed every organ and can even hear and recognize the mothers voice. 20 weeks is just too far along. If a woman does not want the baby, I believe they need to recognize this and make that decision before the embryo develops into a fetus/baby.
I agree with this statement, 100%.
You may think that, but the courts disagree. At least in Canadaian law, a fetus has absolutely no rights as a human being. None. Not until they are born and completely out of the mother's body.
Canada has no abortion laws what-so-ever. You could ask for an abortion when you were overdue and, legally, would not be doing anything wrong. True, no doctor would be willing to perform one on you, but it would not be illegal if you found one would would. Am I saying that it's right? No, of course not. But since it is still considered to be an extention of the mother's body, she has complete freedom over what she does.
You may not like the law, but restricting at 24 weeks is STILL more than what Canada has. Ever since R. v. Morgentaler in the late 1980s, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has made all of the laws that existed banning abortion deemed unconstitutional. I think the discussions that have gone on in this thread show why the government refuses to touch the topic with a 20 foot pole.
For what its worth, with the information we have been given I find the actions of the woman in question to be disgusting. However, I am trying not to place too much judgement in case their is an underlying issue the OP wasn't aware of.
ARG! I know so many wonderful people who deserve to be parents and can't concieve. This is heartbreaking. TEAM ADOPTION!!!!! I don't even know this person, and I know that, yes, thre may be other "things" going on...but still...I can't help but feel anger and sadness towards her and this little angel.
I too am crying at my desk after reading this, thinking of my dear best friend and cousin, who has been TTC for 4 years, with 6 m/s....my heart is wrenching in pain.
It is sad, but it wasn't your choice. Is it more sad to have an abortion at 20 weeks, or raise a child you don't want?! Just playing devil's advocate
I'm with you...
And you know what? This post/type of story just drags us all down. Maybe I shouldn't have opened it because I don't want to hear about someone deciding to abort a baby but really... who feels better after reading this? Anyone?
Just give her outrageous tasks, that NO ONE could finish...and then you will just "have to" let her go for "performance" reasons. I am sure as an assistant there is something in her job des. that says something along the lines of "and other duties upon request"....furthermore, my expertise is employment law - if she really is a twit, then she absolutely can be let go for performance or simply that your team "is going in a different direction" - away from stupidity.
It is a completely different issue because are we discussing the downfalls of foster care or abortion? Do they relate? Well yes, but that's a whole different issue we have in America that needs to be tackled seperately. This discussion would become too overwhelming to bundle them both. Foster care, as it should be, is a good solution.
I think we will never agree on this topic because I feel that once you are pregnant past a certain point, there are two sets of rights to consider: the childs rights and the mothers rights.
Really, all that sets our opinions apart from each other is that you don't believe a child has human rights until after they are born and I believe they have those rights once they are developed in the womb past a certain point. So really, about 6/7 months seperate our opinions.
Also, I should acknowledge that you believe a woman has rights over her body. Which I believe also... except when those rights deny another humans rights to life. And again, we will never agree because you recognize that a baby has the right to life after birth, and I see that they have a right to life before birth.
I mean, for this woman to have rights to her body, she must stop the life of another human. And I see that as wrong. At 20 weeks the baby has developed every organ and can even hear and recognize the mothers voice. 20 weeks is just too far along. If a woman does not want the baby, I believe they need to recognize this and make that decision before the embryo develops into a fetus/baby.
ok, so pregnant women should lose their rights. i'm glad you've made that abundantly clear. i hope you realize that this means that fetuses have rights that are now utterly different from everyone else's. there is never a point in which a born human being is entitled to the use of someone else's body. none. even if that human being is going to die. if your brother needed a kidney and you just didn't want to donate one, for whatever reason, that is always your choice to make, and no court will ever strap you down and take it, even though you can survive very well with a single kidney. you however, believe that fetuses should have that right when no one else on the planet does.
and that is why we see forced c-sections. mother's rights to decline or opt for medical care are eroding because people like you don't realize how their opinions are affecting the laws. you only think this is about abortion, but it's not. i don't know how much more clearly i can state this. i love and want my baby, but i will not act to erode the rights of my whole gender because of it. i think ideally, all babies should be born and enjoy happy, loving homes. but since we all know that isn't the reality of the world, i will not add the pain of women who are strapped to gurneys and cut open against their will to that.
i will not add the horror of the state imprisoning pregnant women for the good of their babies to that.
Dude, the original purpose of this post was a vent about a woman who had a late-term abortion because she broke up with her boyfriend. I would consider that NOT MEDICALLY NECESSARY. People DO have late-term abortions for reasons that are NOT MEDICALLY NECESSARY, and I am against such abortions.
Also, I recall when President Bush was attempting to ban all late-term abortions. I believe that if everyone took their heads out of their asse.s (it will never happen, I know), it probably wouldn't be too difficult to instate a system in which late-term abortions are allowed when deemed medically necessary by a dr. For instance, if the mother's life is in danger or the baby has some condition that may cause a poor life or death.
yeah, in a survey, approximately half of the women who had abortions after the 16th week said that they had to do so because they couldn't get one any earlier.
"Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion"
why might that be? 26% of the time, it's because she has to arrange transportation:
"In 2005, 87% of U.S. counties had no abortion provider. 1/3 of
American women lived in these counties, which meant they would have to
travel outside their county to obtain an abortion. Of women obtaining
abortions in 2005, nonhospital providers estimate that 25% traveled at
least 50 miles, and 8% traveled more than 100 miles."
it's not like you can just walk into any hospital or clinic and get one on the spot.
60% of the time though, it's because, "She needed time to raise money"
think about that if you oppose federal funding for abortions.
if you really don't want women to have late abortions, make sure they don't have to get a loan or take up a second job to do it.
one more thing, this reason also jumps out at me:
"Woman didn't recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation"
that is one reason why i support universal health care. most of us here were actively trying to conceive. for women who were not, they probably don't have pregnancy tests lying around. they might not even have a obgyn that they could see easily. and even so, 20% had later abortions because their doctor had misjudged gestational age. if we fixed these access problems, i'm willing to bet that we'd massively reduce the amount of late abortions. the woman who this post was about is not the norm for late abortion seekers, though 51% of all the women surveyed (not just late term) gave relationship problems as a reason. that is why i'm more interested in asking about your (and other posters')specific reactions to the subject instead of just this particular case.
Since I am the OP of this post, let me clarify some things for many of you. I am pro-life yet pro-choice at the same time. I believe in a womans right to choose the course of her life. To each their own and maybe its the attorney in me that has truly analyzed her actions subsequent her abortion.
Abortion will always be a trite debate and like many of you have stated, it is impossible to judge a person as we will never be in their position. A woman always has the right to choose.
Now as far as this young lady is concerned I am not judging her right to choose, I am judging the actions that led up to the abortion and her reaction after, as though she has a sensitivity chip missing.
Abortion is not humane, in anyway. Even abortion when medically necessary is non humane, the emotional ramifications are greater than imaginable.
She pranced around the office as though she was punishing her ex. This young lady has everything that most of could want at the young age of 20.
The post was intended to remind you all that you are pregnant or moms already. Cherish those LO's and remind yourself that you are greatful of those little bpm that you see on your ultrasounds and when they are born and they keep you up at night, remind your self that there are people in this world that make choices that will affect your children. And raise your children to make right decisions that are pure in heart and to be noble in all that they do.
She litteraly stated that he, the boyfriend didnt deserve this baby.
Think about this. Im trying a case right now that involves a mother of 1 and a half children. Well the father of these children did not want a second child, thus he punched her in the stomach. The mother lost the child. Thus the incredibly selfish man is going to prison for murder of a fetus at 23 weeks.
How is that any different from abortion? He had a choice, yet that baby had no voice nor did the mother.
This girl has a great family who would have loved that baby, but she instead indicates that she used her pregnancy as a pawn.
To lighten my post, I had more sex than I wanted to ( well sorta), more blood work than I wanted to, more progesterone than I wanted to, and killer m/s that has me tossing my morning bagel in front of judges etc. you get the point. I want this little one sooo bad and every week that I see that flicker of a heartbeat, I get a zeal of we did it.
It broke my heart and the hearts of everyone else in the office. I cant fire her for her personal actions, but trust me she is under serious scrutiny.
To all of you who haver responded congrats on your LO's and future LO's life is is good when you make it good.
thanks for your clarification. i don't know what it would be like to be around this person, and i am angry because this is the example that many people will think of when they think, "late term abortion". it sucks. she's tremendously irresponsible in a lot of ways.
congrats to you on your lo too. you sound like a very sensitive and caring person. i'm sure you'll be an awesome mom.
Since I am the OP of this post, let me clarify some things for many of you. I am pro-life yet pro-choice at the same time. I believe in a womans right to choose the course of her life. To each their own and maybe its the attorney in me that has truly analyzed her actions subsequent her abortion.
Abortion will always be a trite debate and like many of you have stated, it is impossible to judge a person as we will never be in their position. A woman always has the right to choose.
Now as far as this young lady is concerned I am not judging her right to choose, I am judging the actions that led up to the abortion and her reaction after, as though she has a sensitivity chip missing.
Abortion is not humane, in anyway. Even abortion when medically necessary is non humane, the emotional ramifications are greater than imaginable.
She pranced around the office as though she was punishing her ex. This young lady has everything that most of could want at the young age of 20.
The post was intended to remind you all that you are pregnant or moms already. Cherish those LO's and remind yourself that you are greatful of those little bpm that you see on your ultrasounds and when they are born and they keep you up at night, remind your self that there are people in this world that make choices that will affect your children. And raise your children to make right decisions that are pure in heart and to be noble in all that they do.
She litteraly stated that he, the boyfriend didnt deserve this baby.
Think about this. Im trying a case right now that involves a mother of 1 and a half children. Well the father of these children did not want a second child, thus he punched her in the stomach. The mother lost the child. Thus the incredibly selfish man is going to prison for murder of a fetus at 23 weeks.
How is that any different from abortion? He had a choice, yet that baby had no voice nor did the mother.
This girl has a great family who would have loved that baby, but she instead indicates that she used her pregnancy as a pawn.
To lighten my post, I had more sex than I wanted to ( well sorta), more blood work than I wanted to, more progesterone than I wanted to, and killer m/s that has me tossing my morning bagel in front of judges etc. you get the point. I want this little one sooo bad and every week that I see that flicker of a heartbeat, I get a zeal of we did it.
It broke my heart and the hearts of everyone else in the office. I cant fire her for her personal actions, but trust me she is under serious scrutiny.
To all of you who haver responded congrats on your LO's and future LO's life is is good when you make it good.
thanks for your clarification. i don't know what it would be like to be around this person, and i am angry because this is the example that many people will think of when they think, "late term abortion". it sucks. she's tremendously irresponsible in a lot of ways.
congrats to you on your lo too. you sound like a very sensitive and caring person. i'm sure you'll be an awesome mom.
Supermom? I will certainly try, but highly doubt it! I just wanted to make sure that everyone understood that if we outlawed a womans right to terminate her pregnancy we would be a bit tyrannical. If she had a reason such as she didnt know or whatever else than I would be more sympathetic to her. But I cant because again of her admitting that she did it to punish her boyfriend.
Best to you and your sweet-pea! I cant wait until my little November turkey baby arrives.
Just give her outrageous tasks, that NO ONE could finish...and then you will just "have to" let her go for "performance" reasons. I am sure as an assistant there is something in her job des. that says something along the lines of "and other duties upon request"....furthermore, my expertise is employment law - if she really is a twit, then she absolutely can be let go for performance or simply that your team "is going in a different direction" - away from stupidity.
OH MY GOD!!! This advice is so supremely unethical I can hardly even stand it! What's next? Finding ways to fire people because they aren't Christians? They are of a different political party? You MUST be joking!
Just give her outrageous tasks, that NO ONE could finish...and then you will just "have to" let her go for "performance" reasons. I am sure as an assistant there is something in her job des. that says something along the lines of "and other duties upon request"....furthermore, my expertise is employment law - if she really is a twit, then she absolutely can be let go for performance or simply that your team "is going in a different direction" - away from stupidity.
OH MY GOD!!! This advice is so supremely unethical I can hardly even stand it! What's next? Finding ways to fire people because they aren't Christians? They are of a different political party? You MUST be joking!
My dear this child is a Christian she and her family sit on the front row of the same church every Sunday. Also did you know that most of the abortion performed in the us are given to Christians? About 43 percent of the woman who have abortions are Christians.
THAT'S IT!! You are not a lawyer. 20 weeks is not a "late term" abortion. Did you have to read Roe v. Wade in your family law courses? Please just stop posting. Your stupid is hurting me.
DD #1 passed away in January 2011 at 14 days old due to congenital heart disease
DD#2 lost in January 2012 at 23 weeks due to anhydramnios caused by a placental abruption
Re: Late Tem Abortion! 20 weeks
Yep. When I was younger I didn't have much of an opinion on abortion because I just assumed it was done humanely, like when they put an animal to sleep at the shelter. Once I got older, I decided to research it and thats when I found out that they do literally tear the child to pieces. Alive. They rip out its arms, legs,and body with forceps. Sometimes the child comes out whole, but often they pull out the child in pieces.
It is barbaric. Nothing should have to die that way, especially an innocent child who is being rejected because the mother decides she isn't ready for a baby.
That's exactly how I found out what is done. I was actually pro-choice growing up, because I thought it was humane. Once I researched it and found how it's really done I couldn't stop crying. It's just disgusting.
no, it is not a completely different issue... you were the one who brought up adoption as though it was a perfect solution. sentencing a kid to years in foster care is not something i take lightly and the examples i linked for you are just the most extreme.
i also disagree with your ideas of frivolous... maternal depression is a real issue, for one thing, and it does have repercussions on the baby when he is born. i have no idea what the real issues were for the person who was described in this post, but i do think there is a genuine problem with what you are saying. i do not think it is anyone's place to tell me when i must have a child and for what reason. i have rights and they shouldn't evaporate when i am pregnant. abortion is really only the tip of this iceberg... did you know that women have been compelled to have c-sections against their will? do you want to be tied to a gurney and cut open while you beg the doctors to stop? the law has been pulled apart by people who, however well-meaning, are screwing with my rights.
https://www.advocatesforpregnantwomen.org/articles/forced_c-section.htm
https://radicaldoula.com/2010/01/13/woman-forced-into-court-ordered-hospital-confinement-and-c-section/
thinking like yours is the reason for articles like this.
https://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2004/01/25/my_late_term_abortion/
why would any god do that to a child? you are fooling yourself if you think intact dilation and extraction only happens in "frivolous" abortions. i am completely happy writing off a god that does this:
https://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009/06/12/how-a-lateterm-abortion-saved-my-life
This. Though she may not get it now, I suspect the enormity of what she has done will hit her someday. Even if that's ten years down the line for her, it makes me sad for her. Though, I also understand how being around her currently would drive you insane.
You must not read well, because I never said I had any issue with such an abortion when medically necessary. Are you suggesting that the pregnant woman in that article being near death did not constitute a medically necessary reason to have a late-term abortion? I also said that abortions are often performed in more humane manner when medically necessary. Therefore, I'm NOT fooling myself.
ETA: I just finished reading the second article, and I'm convinced that you do not know how to read. As I stated earlier (now 3 times, I believe) I have no issue with medically necessary late-term abortions. Please read before you accuse people of being part of the problem.
It is a completely different issue because are we discussing the downfalls of foster care or abortion? Do they relate? Well yes, but that's a whole different issue we have in America that needs to be tackled seperately. This discussion would become too overwhelming to bundle them both. Foster care, as it should be, is a good solution.
I think we will never agree on this topic because I feel that once you are pregnant past a certain point, there are two sets of rights to consider: the childs rights and the mothers rights.
Really, all that sets our opinions apart from each other is that you don't believe a child has human rights until after they are born and I believe they have those rights once they are developed in the womb past a certain point. So really, about 6/7 months seperate our opinions.
Also, I should acknowledge that you believe a woman has rights over her body. Which I believe also... except when those rights deny another humans rights to life. And again, we will never agree because you recognize that a baby has the right to life after birth, and I see that they have a right to life before birth.
I mean, for this woman to have rights to her body, she must stop the life of another human. And I see that as wrong. At 20 weeks the baby has developed every organ and can even hear and recognize the mothers voice. 20 weeks is just too far along. If a woman does not want the baby, I believe they need to recognize this and make that decision before the embryo develops into a fetus/baby.
why do you think that? nothing implies that people like doing that procedure for fun, as in, when they're NOT medically necessary.
edit: and even if you do have "no issue" with such abortions when medically necessary, politicians are thinking of you and people like you when they ban that procedure. there were no exceptions in that law. seriously, you should read that first article, and see exactly why she wrote it when she did.
Dude, the original purpose of this post was a vent about a woman who had a late-term abortion because she broke up with her boyfriend. I would consider that NOT MEDICALLY NECESSARY. People DO have late-term abortions for reasons that are NOT MEDICALLY NECESSARY, and I am against such abortions.
Also, I recall when President Bush was attempting to ban all late-term abortions. I believe that if everyone took their heads out of their asse.s (it will never happen, I know), it probably wouldn't be too difficult to instate a system in which late-term abortions are allowed when deemed medically necessary by a dr. For instance, if the mother's life is in danger or the baby has some condition that may cause a poor life or death.
Both of those are medically involved reasons.. not frivolous reasons. KC and I both said we'd excuse abortions done for those reasons.
I agree with this statement, 100%.
Since I am the OP of this post, let me clarify some things for many of you. I am pro-life yet pro-choice at the same time. I believe in a womans right to choose the course of her life. To each their own and maybe its the attorney in me that has truly analyzed her actions subsequent her abortion.
Abortion will always be a trite debate and like many of you have stated, it is impossible to judge a person as we will never be in their position. A woman always has the right to choose.
Now as far as this young lady is concerned I am not judging her right to choose, I am judging the actions that led up to the abortion and her reaction after, as though she has a sensitivity chip missing.
Abortion is not humane, in anyway. Even abortion when medically necessary is non humane, the emotional ramifications are greater than imaginable.
She pranced around the office as though she was punishing her ex. This young lady has everything that most of could want at the young age of 20.
The post was intended to remind you all that you are pregnant or moms already. Cherish those LO's and remind yourself that you are greatful of those little bpm that you see on your ultrasounds and when they are born and they keep you up at night, remind your self that there are people in this world that make choices that will affect your children. And raise your children to make right decisions that are pure in heart and to be noble in all that they do.
She litteraly stated that he, the boyfriend didnt deserve this baby.
Think about this. Im trying a case right now that involves a mother of 1 and a half children. Well the father of these children did not want a second child, thus he punched her in the stomach. The mother lost the child. Thus the incredibly selfish man is going to prison for murder of a fetus at 23 weeks.
How is that any different from abortion? He had a choice, yet that baby had no voice nor did the mother.
This girl has a great family who would have loved that baby, but she instead indicates that she used her pregnancy as a pawn.
To lighten my post, I had more sex than I wanted to ( well sorta), more blood work than I wanted to, more progesterone than I wanted to, and killer m/s that has me tossing my morning bagel in front of judges etc. you get the point. I want this little one sooo bad and every week that I see that flicker of a heartbeat, I get a zeal of we did it.
It broke my heart and the hearts of everyone else in the office. I cant fire her for her personal actions, but trust me she is under serious scrutiny.
To all of you who haver responded congrats on your LO's and future LO's life is is good when you make it good.
You may think that, but the courts disagree. At least in Canadaian law, a fetus has absolutely no rights as a human being. None. Not until they are born and completely out of the mother's body.
Canada has no abortion laws what-so-ever. You could ask for an abortion when you were overdue and, legally, would not be doing anything wrong. True, no doctor would be willing to perform one on you, but it would not be illegal if you found one would would. Am I saying that it's right? No, of course not. But since it is still considered to be an extention of the mother's body, she has complete freedom over what she does.
You may not like the law, but restricting at 24 weeks is STILL more than what Canada has. Ever since R. v. Morgentaler in the late 1980s, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has made all of the laws that existed banning abortion deemed unconstitutional. I think the discussions that have gone on in this thread show why the government refuses to touch the topic with a 20 foot pole.
For what its worth, with the information we have been given I find the actions of the woman in question to be disgusting. However, I am trying not to place too much judgement in case their is an underlying issue the OP wasn't aware of.
ARG! I know so many wonderful people who deserve to be parents and can't concieve. This is heartbreaking. TEAM ADOPTION!!!!! I don't even know this person, and I know that, yes, thre may be other "things" going on...but still...I can't help but feel anger and sadness towards her and this little angel.
I too am crying at my desk after reading this, thinking of my dear best friend and cousin, who has been TTC for 4 years, with 6 m/s....my heart is wrenching in pain.
I'm with you...
And you know what? This post/type of story just drags us all down. Maybe I shouldn't have opened it because I don't want to hear about someone deciding to abort a baby but really... who feels better after reading this? Anyone?
ok, so pregnant women should lose their rights. i'm glad you've made that abundantly clear. i hope you realize that this means that fetuses have rights that are now utterly different from everyone else's. there is never a point in which a born human being is entitled to the use of someone else's body. none. even if that human being is going to die. if your brother needed a kidney and you just didn't want to donate one, for whatever reason, that is always your choice to make, and no court will ever strap you down and take it, even though you can survive very well with a single kidney. you however, believe that fetuses should have that right when no one else on the planet does.
and that is why we see forced c-sections. mother's rights to decline or opt for medical care are eroding because people like you don't realize how their opinions are affecting the laws. you only think this is about abortion, but it's not. i don't know how much more clearly i can state this. i love and want my baby, but i will not act to erode the rights of my whole gender because of it. i think ideally, all babies should be born and enjoy happy, loving homes. but since we all know that isn't the reality of the world, i will not add the pain of women who are strapped to gurneys and cut open against their will to that.
i will not add the horror of the state imprisoning pregnant women for the good of their babies to that.
i will not add shackling pregnant women to that.
https://www.womensenews.org/story/health/060920/jailing-pregnant-women-raises-health-risks
why doesn't this even enter your head?
yeah, in a survey, approximately half of the women who had abortions after the 16th week said that they had to do so because they couldn't get one any earlier.
"Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion"
https://www.holysmoke.org/fem/fem0543.htm
why might that be? 26% of the time, it's because she has to arrange transportation:
"In 2005, 87% of U.S. counties had no abortion provider. 1/3 of American women lived in these counties, which meant they would have to travel outside their county to obtain an abortion. Of women obtaining abortions in 2005, nonhospital providers estimate that 25% traveled at least 50 miles, and 8% traveled more than 100 miles."
https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sfaa/louisiana.html
it's not like you can just walk into any hospital or clinic and get one on the spot.
if you really don't want women to have late abortions, make sure they don't have to get a loan or take up a second job to do it. one more thing, this reason also jumps out at me: that is one reason why i support universal health care. most of us here were actively trying to conceive. for women who were not, they probably don't have pregnancy tests lying around. they might not even have a obgyn that they could see easily. and even so, 20% had later abortions because their doctor had misjudged gestational age. if we fixed these access problems, i'm willing to bet that we'd massively reduce the amount of late abortions.the woman who this post was about is not the norm for late abortion seekers, though 51% of all the women surveyed (not just late term) gave relationship problems as a reason. that is why i'm more interested in asking about your (and other posters')specific reactions to the subject instead of just this particular case.
thanks for your clarification. i don't know what it would be like to be around this person, and i am angry because this is the example that many people will think of when they think, "late term abortion". it sucks. she's tremendously irresponsible in a lot of ways.
congrats to you on your lo too. you sound like a very sensitive and caring person. i'm sure you'll be an awesome mom.
Supermom? I will certainly try, but highly doubt it! I just wanted to make sure that everyone understood that if we outlawed a womans right to terminate her pregnancy we would be a bit tyrannical. If she had a reason such as she didnt know or whatever else than I would be more sympathetic to her. But I cant because again of her admitting that she did it to punish her boyfriend.
Best to you and your sweet-pea! I cant wait until my little November turkey baby arrives.
OH MY GOD!!! This advice is so supremely unethical I can hardly even stand it! What's next? Finding ways to fire people because they aren't Christians? They are of a different political party? You MUST be joking!
My dear this child is a Christian she and her family sit on the front row of the same church every Sunday. Also did you know that most of the abortion performed in the us are given to Christians? About 43 percent of the woman who have abortions are Christians.
Being a Christian is not conviction enough!
DD #1 passed away in January 2011 at 14 days old due to congenital heart disease
DD#2 lost in January 2012 at 23 weeks due to anhydramnios caused by a placental abruption
I'm fairly sure this thread needs to die, but I'll bite.
"I'm totally all for woman's rights, except when they're like... exercised."