ABORTION.......

Phoenix32890 wrote:

real life-I would say that only if the pregnant woman requests to see those things. As I have said many times before, abortion is not an easy choice, and I would suspect that there is great conflict to most women who choose abortion.

Are you hoping that by engendering guilt in the woman that she would decide not to abort? That is not very empathic of you. If you were having a heart transplant, would you want to be required to observe a video of the operation? I know that it is not the same as seeing brainwaves, but I think that you will get my meaning!

Hi Phoenix,

Is it not the responsibility of the medical practitioner to be sure that the woman has all pertinent information regarding any procedure?

We have informed consent laws for many other folks selling products including real estate agents, health and life insurance salesmen, remodeling contractors, etc and they are required to disclose all pertinent information whether we know to ask the right questions or not.

Are you saying that an abortion , a life and death issue, is not as important as these other buying decisions?

Or should abortionists be free to profit on the guilt and fear of the woman without any responsibility?

0 Replies

real life,

I think more education would be better, informed decisions are usually (but not always) better.

I know women who would rather NOT see closeup footage of births when they are having a baby and would rather not be too aware of exactly what is going to happen to them and their bodies during and after birth. Some have the courage to face it all, others do better without it.

I'm all for discouraging abortion and moving it further in the direction of "last resort" but causing too much guilt could cause more damage than good...(and as you know, I'm all about the maximum good for as many people as possible - it's just the definition of "people" that we disagree on)

0 Replies

Quote:

Is it not the responsibility of the medical practitioner to be sure that the woman has all pertinent information regarding any procedure?

Real life- Giving informed consent would involve telling the patient about the procedure, what he is going to do in the operating room, and discussing the recovery. Showing ultrasounds has nothing to do with informed consent. The patient very well knows what she is doing.

No matter how you twist the issue, all you are attempting to do is to cause more conflict in a conflicted woman. You are so transparent, I feel ridiculous even attempting to respond in a reasonable fashion.

REAL LIFE- Tell it like it is. Be honest. You don't want women to have abortions, and you would do anything, even tearing a woman apart emotionally, to gain your end.

0 Replies

Phoenix,

You make the statement: "The patient very well knows what she is doing."

I am puzzled by this. I am not trying to bait or anything here but you could tell me exactly what it is you mean by she very well knows what she is doing?

0 Replies

Phoenix, not fair. Your charge against RealLife dismisses the argument that many women do want to know. Some feel betrayed that they were not informed how much their baby would suffer. For you to accuse Reallife of wanting harm to come to the mother is ridiculous. By saying that, you are ignoring her concern for that unborn person in the womb. Why should not the woman have the right to be fully informed before she makes a decision to destroy it?

For you to accuse Reallife of wanting harm to the woman is a silly as us using your words to accuse you of wanting to be sure the woman aborts that baby no matter what.

0 Replies

Quote:

You make the statement: "The patient very well knows what she is doing."

Momma...................A woman is pregnant. She knows darn well that when she has had the abortion, she will no longer be pregnant.

Quote:

Phoenix, not fair. Your charge against RealLife dismisses the argument that many women do want to know. Some feel betrayed that they were not informed how much their baby would suffer.

Foxfyre- I a woman wants to see an ultrasound, I certainly have no problem with that, although I question whether in an early abortion, a fetus suffers at all. In a partial birth abortion, yes, but those are for the most part, illegal.

My argument is that showing a woman an ultrasound, without her request is NOT a part of informed consent, and should not be forced on her, in a ploy to have her change her mind about the procedure.

0 Replies

Phoenix,

I guess I didn't explain what I meant very well at all, did I? I need to think about how to phrase what I mean. I will get back to you on this.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Quote:
Is it not the responsibility of the medical practitioner to be sure that the woman has all pertinent information regarding any procedure?

Real life- Giving informed consent would involve telling the patient about the procedure, what he is going to do in the operating room, and discussing the recovery. Showing ultrasounds has nothing to do with informed consent. The patient very well knows what she is doing.

No matter how you twist the issue, all you are attempting to do is to cause more conflict in a conflicted woman. You are so transparent, I feel ridiculous even attempting to respond in a reasonable fashion.

REAL LIFE- Tell it like it is. Be honest. You don't want women to have abortions, and you would do anything, even tearing a woman apart emotionally, to gain your end.

Hi Phoenix--

Thanks for the warning. Indeed, you did not respond in a reasonable fashion. But I can see why you felt ridiculous. It is a true description of your position on informed consent.

It is really too bad that you cannot bring yourself to honestly address the question at hand. An ultrasound, as well as display of the heartbeat and brainwaves of the unborn is all about informed consent; information that you apparently want to sweep under the rug and pretend doesn't exist.

Why would you hide this information from the woman?

Your only concern seems to be 'conflict' and 'torn emotions'. I am really more concerned with the arms that are torn off the body of the unborn and the legs that are torn from the trunk.

Do you really think it is a good thing to hide from the woman the picture of the body that is about to be destroyed because of the abortionist's need to pocket a fee? Why do you place no responsibility on the medical practitioner to inform the woman what is really happening?

Let's have some transparency on your part. Do you work, or have you ever worked either for pay or as a volunteer in an abortion clinic or for any individual or organization that provides abortions or counsels women regarding abortion?

0 Replies

My husband's recent cancer surgery involved some rather lengthly consultations with his personal physician, and with the surgeon. They didn't show him a video of the operation and nobody is suggesting that the woman be forced to see a video of the abortion unless she wants to see one. But the professionals explained every known method of treating him and, once he elected surgery, they told him every aspect about the surgery, where the incision would be made, how long he would be on the table and in recovery, what to expect during recuperation, and every possible thing that could go wrong. In other words he was fully informed before submitting to the procedure. He certainly was not expecting to hear everything he was told, but the doctors thought it best that he know. And in the end he was able to make an informed decision of which procedure would be the most beneficial and there were no unpleasant surprises.

I think that is not too much to expect professional to do for a woman who is about to make a decision as important as terminating the life of an unborn child.

0 Replies

Thanks for answering my question Phoenix. Smile

You are right about amnio. being necessary to determine the important medical facts. My mistake.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

I think that is not too much to expect professional to do for a woman who is about to make a decision as important as terminating the life of an unborn child.

I think that your sentence points out the main difference of opinion that we have. Therefore, when it comes to the entire issue of abortion, we are coming from two entirely different perspectives.

You believe that the product of a conception, even at the earliest stages, is an unborn child, a living human being. I believe that the product of a conception, in the early stages of a pregnancy, is living, but only a potential, and not yet a human being.

I also believe that a woman has the right to autonomy over her own body. From what you have written, I can infer that you believe that anything possibe should be done to dissuade a woman having an abortion.

After being in this thread for some time. I realize that we are going round and round in circles. Therefore, this is the last that you will hear from me on this thread.

0 Replies

Phoenix has correctly identified the issue here. The issue is as has been pointed out by others:

1) The pro-abortion right group does not assign human status to the unborn at an early stage, or, since the woman should have complete autonomy over her body, at any stage. This group must see the unborn as subhuman to justify their stance, but are divided over the moralty of abortion at late stages. They are unwilling to tie any abortion policy to issues of morality however or restrict abortion in any way. Further if she doesn't want to know, the woman should not be advised of what the procedure is or the effect on the unborn.

2) The pro-life group believes the unborn are human beings as much as the born are human beings and thus the woman must have consideration for a second life, not just her own. This group believes every child conceived should be loved, properly cared for, and wanted, and if the birth mother is unable to provide that for the child, the option of adoption by loving parents is the reasonable backup plan. All women should be fullly advised of the procedure and the effect on the unborn prior to a procedure being done. This group is divided, however, on the timing or circumstances in which abortion should be legal with some saying never and some conceding some issues as reasonable.

Both groups are pro choice. The first argues that a woman should be able to choose to terminate a pregnancy at any stage and for any reason. The second argues that the woman should choose whether or not to take the risk of pregnancy, but if she chooses to take the risk and pregnancy occurs, then she is responsible for the welfare of her baby both born and unborn. There continues debates within the pro-life groups as to moral decisions to be made in cases where the woman is impregnated against her will.

So long as the debate is at this impasse, there does appear to be no solution that will be completely satisfactory to most, much less everybody. This country has come through difficult debates in the past however, and I trust that good people will be able to come to a reasonable conclusion on this one as well.

0 Replies

Very well put, Foxfyre. This thread could continue for years and I doubt that we would see anything different written. Unless, of course there was a change in law. However, I do not consider the choice of abortion to be a matter of law, but rather a matter of morality, compassion and values.

0 Replies

Quote:

My argument is that showing a woman an ultrasound, without her request is NOT a part of informed consent, and should not be forced on her, in a ploy to have her change her mind about the procedure.

Why should they not show it to her? What damage could it possibly cause?

0 Replies

thunder_runner32 wrote:

Quote:
My argument is that showing a woman an ultrasound, without her request is NOT a part of informed consent, and should not be forced on her, in a ploy to have her change her mind about the procedure.

Why should they not show it to her? What damage could it possibly cause?

It could cause her to face reality.

0 Replies

HUHH!! Reality......that's just cruel!!

0 Replies

Phoenix, you are right that this issue can go nowhere as long as perspectives do not change. I don't always have time to follow these threads but your viewpoint is one that is always refreshingly clear and honest.

Foxfyre, no one here is pro-abortion. We who are pro-choice believe that every woman has the right and responsibility to decide personal matters for herself without interference by the government or people who want to impose their personal beliefs on everyone else. Legal abortion is one of many moral choices a woman can make when faced with an unwanted pregnancy.

I doubt if you or anyone else here is really pro-life. Do you think that all fertile women, including nuns, should be required to have sexual intercourse every month to give the potential child represented by each egg an equal chance at life? Do you think birth control, masturbation and sex with an infertile woman are sinful? Do you oppose all wars and capital punishment and believe that we should give unlimited foreign aid to countries with starving children? Do you eat nothing but plants that died of natural causes and go out of your way to avoid killing insects? If you answered no to any of these, then be truthful and say that you are anti-abortion, not pro-life.

Giving women the "choice" of abstaining from sex or being required to carry an accidental pregnancy is no more pro-choice than saying "submit to Christ or go to hell."

There are men who are acceptable as bed partners but whose children we are not willing to bear, for any number of reasons. Women often get pregnant by accident, through birth control failure, misuse, non-use, ignorance, bad timing or bad choices, especially under the influence of alcohol, drugs, and raging hormones. Should something as important as parenthood be decided by chance instead of choice?

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Why do they have abortions? Because it's convenient for them. Because they can't actually see the face of the child and can rationalize it's life away. I would guess there are many more reasons but those two came to mind immediately.

No one would find it difficult to choose between.....[an early pregnancy and a six year old. Sad yes...comparable, no way. - Eorl] ? I would think that any woman SHOULD find it difficult to choose between the two. Both are living children. In different life stages, yes, but living children nonetheless.

Women have abortions for a lot of reasons other than the 2 that came to your mind. Abortion is not "convenient" and anti-abortionists are doing their best to make it as inconvenient as possible. Why else would there be so much opposition to morning-after pills and RU-whatever? The embryo does not yet HAVE a face at the time most abortions are done. It is not a person, has no mind, and feels no pain, despite the propaganda put out by those who are determined to make women gestate unwanted babies.

Eorl is right. If you cannot understand the difference between an embryo and a six-year-old, you have a serious problem. Can you understand the difference between an acorn and an oak tree? Between a set of blueprints and a house? (If not, I have some blueprints I'll sell you for only $100K). An embryo is a potential child. A fetus is a developing child. When a baby is born, it is a child. You can call a chicken a child and have complete faith in your own mind that it is so, but that doesn't make it true. A PETA member might have a hard time deciding between the life a of chicken and a six-year-old. But most people in this world see the difference.

0 Replies

Terry, your passion in this matter is admirable. But if you had taken the time to read the comments from the pro-lifers on this thread, you would see how far off the mark your assessement is of what we believe and what we think.

0 Replies

(At Terry's post, not Foxfyre's)

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know