I am so confused.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Carlos, maybe you should ask yourself this: if your wife were pregnant, and became ill in her last trimester with something that combined with pregnancy made the risk of her dying very real (or another scenario is one where the treatment would kill the fetus), would you risk the life of your wife? Would you want legislators deciding that for you, telling you that your wife would possibly die to save the fetus, or would you rather make the painful and very personal decision about what to do between the two of you?

Circumstances like that are extremely rare, but hyped up by the pro choice people.

<>
 
Circumstances like that are extremely rare, but hyped up by the pro choice people.

<>

Rare maybe, but it does happen. And provisions should be made for those it happens to.


Btw Carlos, I give you a great deal of credit for actually researching and considering this issue, regardless of the conclusion you come to. More people should be as thoughtful. :up:
 
Since Diamond seems to have gotten not only his medical but also his psychological license, I'm sure he has stats he can throw out there for us. ;) Or maybe he's specialized in both obstetrics and psychiatry?

I figured him more as a proctologist..........getting his head out of his own ass must surely be a full-time job by now...........
 
Hey, I'm a pediatrician. I've spent a lot of time working in the neonatal intensive care unit (the NICU), and I've been to a lot of deliveries. Because of the hospital I work in, many of those deliveries are to moms with high-risk pregnancies, whether they started off high-risk or became so during the pregnancy. We've had moms who end up in the adult ICU, and we've had moms die.

We also have an endless census of babies born to moms whose health had become poor. Some of these babies come out just fine. Many of these babies come out gravely ill themselves----the "health of the mother" affects more than just the mother. Many other babies come out in an "in between" state, neither healthy nor deathly ill. They're born very early----we can "take" a baby out by C-section as low as 23 weeks (that means only 5 1/2 months along instead of 9). I say we "can" because that's just it---we can....but I can't tell you how many multiple, multiple problems these kids end up with, if they even survive to leave the NICU. Infection upon infection upon infection. Serious, chronic lung disease requiring multiple medications for a very long time. Strokes are common. Retinopathy of Prematurity is nearly universal in these kids and leads to poor vision and blindness. Necrotizing Enterocolitis is not uncommon, leading to death of the bowel once these kids start eating formula.

Some of these babies come out okay.

Dammit, though, far far too many of these kids end up in a way that I wouldn't wish upon any living soul. It makes me question what we do in the NICU every day that I'm there.

Listen, if you think that "health of the mother" is far too broad, make legislators tighten up the definition. But listen to me---do not take away the health of the mother in an effort to save the baby----because you're more than likely not doing the baby any favors.

Knowing what I know, if my wife were to become deathly ill because of the pregnancy, I would without question choose the potential of life with her and the potential of more kids down the line over risking her death only for the possibility that the baby will also be healthy enough to survive.

Knowing what I know, the health of the mother is tied far too tightly to the health of the baby to ignore.

Knowing what I know, and seeing what I've seen---the health of the mother is paramount.
 
Yes, and most women elect to have the baby.

<>

I'd love to see a link to the data, and good to see that the women who don't fall into the "most" category had a say in the matter.........

Less Government is good, eh ?
 
Circumstances like that are extremely rare, but hyped up by the pro choice people.

<>

diamond, what do you think is the purpose of the 'health of the mother' clauses? Do you really think that people are going around knocking out their fetuses at 6 1/2 months willy-nilly? I think the latter is far more hyped up by the pro-life people.
 
diamond, the reason I brought up your kids is because she doesn't discriminate and she is violent against strangers (children included). But if you think that this isn't a serious illness and people like her should have babies, hey you go right ahead. I thank God that she was never pregnant.
 
I can't claim to know all the facts on late-term abortion, but what I know disturbs me.. I'm generally pro-life, except in the instance of the health of the mother, rape, etc :blahblah: In the case of late-term abortion, if it's that far along, why "terminate" the child? Isn't the fetus potentially viable at that stage? Why not attempt to save its life once it's out?

:shrug:
 
I can't claim to know all the facts on late-term abortion, but what I know disturbs me.. I'm generally pro-life, except in the instance of the health of the mother, rape, etc :blahblah: In the case of late-term abortion, if it's that far along, why "terminate" the child? Isn't the fetus potentially viable at that stage? Why not attempt to save its life once it's out?

:shrug:

Look about 4 posts above by Utoo........
 
I think that this issue is essentially moot, as Obama is not in favor of late-term abortions. A look at any of the fact check links posted in this thread show that.
 
of the 2 parties involved, one is innocent the other not.

<>

In your belief system maybe. Doesn't change the fact that the one party involved is also the one that is to make the free decision which life she gives priority in such a situation.
 
Carlos, I have two questions:

1) Has this thread helped you in any way (i.e.: people presenting facts, through links, and the opinion of a pediatrician)?

2) Is there a particular reason why abortion is the number one issue on your list, ahead of the economy, foreign policy, and civil rights?
 
The Roe v. Wade decision still leaves late-term abortion to the states. Obama said he'd uphold the court decision. If your concern is late-term abortion in your state, why not consider who you are electing as your state officials? Or why not move to a state that supports where you stand? If it's a personal decision, it's a personal decision. Why try to make it universal? You having the difficulty making the decision is just a microcosm of how divided the country is on the issue.

Diamond for you to say that the person committing suicide is not innocent is a very vile thing to say. I wonder if you've ever been a survivor of a loved one who committed suicide? I have. My friend was very much innocent. She was a victim. A victim who was abused and mistreated. A victim who unfortunately lived in an age where the current medicine could not help her. Her parents were literally waiting for a medical breakthrough. I ask that you use caution in deciding matters of who is innocent and who is not when considering areas you are unfamiliar with.
 
But you'd sacrifice your wife if her health were endangered by giving birth ?

Clearly he would. Even if it were his daughter.

Because the woman is just a vessel to the pro-life people. They actually don't give a shit about the woman or the baby once it's born. It's all about the fetus with most of them.


Proof? See the quote below:

of the 2 parties involved, one is innocent the other not.
 
Circumstances like that are extremely rare, but hyped up by the pro choice people.

<>

Not as rare as an Uncle wanting to marry his nephew or a man wanting to marry a robot, yet you use those arguments all the time... The difference is this rare circumstance is REAL, yours is just some figment of the extreme right's imagination.
 
Circumstances like that are extremely rare, but hyped up by the pro choice people.

<>

Actually, diamond, they are NOT at all rare. Nature and childbirth are not some "lala let's pick daisies walk in the park" for everyone. Complications, and serious ones at that, are horribly more commonplace than you'd think. Don't be naive.
 
Carlos, I have two questions:

1) Has this thread helped you in any way (i.e.: people presenting facts, through links, and the opinion of a pediatrician)?

2) Is there a particular reason why abortion is the number one issue on your list, ahead of the economy, foreign policy, and civil rights?

First of all, thanks to all responding to this thread.
I rarely post here and I wonder if this should have been a Blog posting instead.

To answer the first question Pfan; I think that Utoo had great points that will probably help my decision, thanks Utoo.
To answer the second one, I do not think you have any kids Pfan (I am not sure)...but for me, having two children....it is extremely hard to think abortion as another "issue", I just can not compare this with economy issues, foreign policy, etc. I just can't.
There are some great comments here, thanks to all.
 
Back
Top Bottom