Obama reverses abortion policy

[namkcuR]

Using the word "murder" isn't smug. It's actually a sober reality.

You're speaking of murder as an action with a simple definition and end result, even though know very well that people are getting more from that word then that. The way people are reading it, it speaks of the intent, will, and feeling of women who have abortions. You know very well that when you say "...even wondering whether the right to control one's own body includes the right to commit murder", you are painting a picture of all women who choose to have abortions as callus, feeling-less people who have abortions for their own personal amusement. It seems like a lot of anti-abortion people paint a picture of a world where women who get abortions are either sixteen year old not-the-sharpest-tool-in-the-shed types who have had unprotected sex with their high school boyfriend and then immediately upon discovering the pregnancy ask their parents to drive them to the nearest clinic, or high-powered career types who just can't be bothered by an unexpected pregnancy. The point here is that the world is grey. You, nor I, have any way of knowing the circumstances that surround each abortion or potential abortion. But I would wager money that there are very few women who giggle on the way to the clinic and then go about their merry way afterwards. I would wager money that very few women get any enjoyment out of abortion, and that very few do so without being very emotional about it before and/or after, and that very few women don't still think about it years and years later. They're not all murderous monsters. So it's not that people are disputing the sterile, textbook definition of what abortion it is, it's that people are disputing the connotations about the people who have abortions that you make you when you use the word murder.

 

[BVS]

(this might sound familiar.)

I wasn't pretending to be innocent in that post, I knew what I was doing...

 

[phillyfan26]

I'd find it much easier to join in this discussion if BVS and Nathan weren't having a sniping contest in the middle of it.

 

[phillyfan26]

Can the legal system handle having a very short amount of time to prove rape in time to allow for a first trimester abortion? I seriously doubt it.

 

[anitram]

As a woman who is pro-choice, I feel no guilt whatsoever and no immorality over my position. But I'm glad that we now have people here telling us how we feel and why we feel that way. It's always good to know.

And nathan, I am sorry for your loss. I think you probably have a lot more empathy here among the pro-choice women than you may think - after all, you have no idea how many of us may have gone through something like that. As for your doctor, to be honest, I wouldn't really project her position on anyone else; I have known plenty of doctors in my life who were lovely people but also extremely functional and detached. Some of them because it was their personality, others because they felt it helped them do their job better. We may agree or disagree on that, but his or her cold response is not fairly ascribed to anyone else, IMO.

 

[anitram]

Can the legal system handle having a very short amount of time to prove rape in time to allow for a first trimester abortion? I seriously doubt it.

These are practical questions, nobody wants to talk about them.

Just like nobody wants to talk about sentences for doctors and husbands for aiding and abetting their patients and wives in getting illegal abortions. Or what about the women themselves?

 

[AliEnvy]

The discomfort of calling the murder of innocent people -- whether they're Iraqis or babies -- does not change what it is.

Yep. Many people on both sides of this issue would far rather be in denial than be discomforted.

I am anti-abortion, but what will limiting family planning information and making abortion illegal realistically accomplish? Forcibly enslaving women to unwanted children just perpetuates high levels of poverty and violence.

Reducing unwanted pregnancies and widely providing birth control options without judgement or shame will save far more lives than force and lead to much higher quality of life overall from a socio-economic standpoint.

 

[mama cass]

heres all the statistics:

UNITED STATES

Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700

Who's having abortions (age)?
52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.

Who's having abortions (race)?
While white women obtain 60% of all abortions, their abortion rate is well below that of minority women. Black women are more than 3 times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are roughly 2 times as likely.

Who's having abortions (marital status)?
64.4% of all abortions are performed on never-married women; Married women account for 18.4% of all abortions and divorced women obtain 9.4%.

Who's having abortions (religion)?
Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as "Born-again/Evangelical".

Who's having abortions (income)?
Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%.

Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

At what gestational ages are abortions performed:
52% of all abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy, 25% happen between the 9th & 10th week, 12% happen between the 11th and 12th week, 6% happen between the 13th & 15th week, 4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and 1% of all abortions (16,450/yr.) happen after the 20th week of pregnancy.

Likelihood of abortion:
An estimated 43% of all women will have at least 1 abortion by the time they are 45 years old. 47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion.

Abortion coverage:
48% of all abortion facilities provide services after the 12th week of pregnancy. 9 in 10 managed care plans routinely cover abortion or provide limited coverage. About 14% of all abortions in the United States are paid for with public funds, virtually all of which are state funds. 16 states (CA, CT, HI, ED, IL, MA , MD, MD, MN, MT, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA and WV) pay for abortions for some poor women.

if you want statistics: out of the 40 million abortions performed annually worldwide, 20 million (mostly "illegal" abortions) are performed in unsanitary conditions without adequate medical care due to lack of resources and information etc. resulting in 70 000 deaths each year (this doesn't include serious nasty but non-fatal complications)

abortions will happen whether people agree or not, and i think so many unnecessary deaths is unacceptable in this day and age... this vital information needs to be out there, to get it done safely and prevent such awful risks to a woman's health and life

good for Obama i say!

 

[martha]

Reducing unwanted pregnancies and widely providing birth control options without judgement or shame will save far more lives than force and lead to much higher quality of life overall from a socio-economic standpoint.

And this takes us back to the first post in the thread and why so many of us were so happy to see the policy overturned.

 

[Irvine511]

That may well be, and you've brought up the realities of a complicated situation that too many face (and the reality is that there are waiting lists as long as your arm of people who are willing to take those unwanted babies in). I'm not sure that two wrongs equal a right.

you realize, of course, that i'm going to do the right thing and not bring up adoption laws in Florida and Arkansas and the fact that a loving, committed, married lesbian couple i know and love can't adopt from Vietnam (my friend's mother is Vietnamese).

so i'll let that go, because i know it would be totally and wildly hypocritical of you to call abortion murder, and yet think that the thousands of gay couples who want nothing more than to adopt are somehow unfit to raise a child.

 

[Galeongirl]

I'm all in for birth control. Ofcourse preventing the whole issue is better than treating.
I'm glad I live in a country where I have the right to choose for taking birth control pills or not.

 

[phillyfan26]

you realize, of course, that i'm going to do the right thing and not bring up adoption laws in Florida and Arkansas and the fact that a loving, committed, married lesbian couple i know and love can't adopt from Vietnam (my friend's mother is Vietnamese).

so i'll let that go, because i know it would be totally and wildly hypocritical of you to call abortion murder, and yet think that the thousands of gay couples who want nothing more than to adopt are somehow unfit to raise a child.

But it's complicated, remember?

 

[Irvine511]

They're not all murderous monsters.

but we need them to be, all of them, otherwise our "brave" tell-it-like-it-is pronouncements get exposed by reality as empty, righteous chest thumping.

 

[Irvine511]

These are practical questions, nobody wants to talk about them.

what's also funny is that there is a very mainstream, near-consensus position on abortion.

no one wants a total ban on abortions. not even North Dakota would go that far.

the vast majority of Americans believe that abortion should be totally legal in the first trimester, and then to a limited degree afterwards. which makes sense, since the vast majority of abortions happen in the first trimester, and those that happen afterwards are nearly always for medical reasons.

the practicality of making abortion in the first trimester illegal would be impossible to do. so it seems to me that those who are passionately concerned with the well-being of a fetus above all else would do much more good if they were to work to prevent unwanted pregnancies to begin with -- and, hey, we can start with comprehensive sex education, full funding of birth control, and universal health care -- rather than couching the debate as one of stark choices between life and death.

 

[phillyfan26]

what's also funny is that there is a very mainstream, near-consensus position on abortion.

no one wants a total ban on abortions. not even North Dakota would go that far.

the vast majority of Americans believe that abortion should be totally legal in the first trimester, and then to a limited degree afterwards. which makes sense, since the vast majority of abortions happen in the first trimester, and those that happen afterwards are nearly always for medical reasons.

the practicality of making abortion in the first trimester illegal would be impossible to do. so it seems to me that those who are passionately concerned with the well-being of a fetus above all else would do much more good if they were to work to prevent unwanted pregnancies to begin with -- and, hey, we can start with comprehensive sex education, full funding of birth control, and universal health care -- rather than couching the debate as one of stark choices between life and death.

And there in lies the reason why the pro-life movement in America makes no sense (note "movement," not every individual). The movement in America wants no abortions, but, at the same time, wants abstinence-only sex education, which is flat out stupid.

 

[AliEnvy]

and the reality is that there are waiting lists as long as your arm of people who are willing to take those unwanted babies in

You've got to think that many more women would actually take the adoption route if it we made realistic attempts to alleviate the shame and guilt and made it more socially acceptable.

 

[anitram]

the practicality of making abortion in the first trimester illegal would be impossible to do. so it seems to me that those who are passionately concerned with the well-being of a fetus above all else would do much more good if they were to work to prevent unwanted pregnancies to begin with -- and, hey, we can start with comprehensive sex education, full funding of birth control, and universal health care -- rather than couching the debate as one of stark choices between life and death.

But giving teenagers condoms and putting your daughters on birth control is evil. Better to teach abstinence and make them wear purity rings.

To be fair there is a contingent of pro-lifers who is not this fundamentalist and believes in sex ed. But by and large, many of them are as adamant about a lack of sex education as they are about abortion.

 

[Irvine511]

But giving teenagers condoms and putting your daughters on birth control is evil. Better to teach abstinence and make them wear purity rings.

i've always been a bigger fan of the purity balls where they dance with their fathers and then their father puts a chastity ring on the daughter and she pledges to remain "pure" until she marries. because that's not medieval at all.

To be fair there is a contingent of pro-lifers who is not this fundamentalist and believes in sex ed. But by and large, many of them are as adamant about a lack of sex education as they are about abortion.

yes, that is absolutely true, and important to bring up in this thread. i actually do think i understand the pro-life position and i actually am more sympathetic than they'd want me to be to their position. but, again, i have a tough time seeing the world so starkly, and perhaps that's just a fundamental difference in worldview. i get the sense that many who are conservative (and many who are likewise religious) think that there really is an answer out there, that there's a right and a wrong, and that there are things that are true and things that are not, and it is their job to see through it all and arrive at said right conclusion and then to pronounce it to the world, unafraid, sort of shining the light of the truth unto those who are too weak to grapple with the naked, blinding, unsettling truth.

obviously, i don't agree. i think life is a morass of complexities and that the opposite of the above is a more accurate depiction of reality -- that it's much more difficult, and more honest, to live with ambiguity and complexity rather than live with what some view as an uncomfortable truth. some might think that it take courage to call abortion murder, but i think it takes more courage to go beyond that.

but, ultimately, i do respect and have sympathy for both sides in this argument. and i don't really have a dog in the fight, so to speak. i will say, however, that two of my absolute best friends on the planet have had unplanned pregnancies. the first involved my friend and his wife who got pregnant like three days after they got married, which was about 3 years to early. so they had the baby. and these are striving, careerist individuals who didn't even consider an abortion, no matter the inconvenience. the other couple had been together for 4 years and they were careful, but she got pregnant. he had planned to propose within the next year anyway, so, again, it was all just sped along. it's quite inconvenient, as she'll have to postpone some of her graduate studies so he can try and be done with his program in the next year, and then once he gets a teaching position, he'll take on the bulk of the child rearing and she'll go back to work. also, being part of the university system, they'll have great health care and child care. so, yeah, it's a few years too early, but, really, abortion wasn't much of a thought.

so i often feel like we need to take people like those i've outlined above and imagine that these are the people who are getting the abortions, when, in reality, they're not. why? because even though it is unplanned, they are educated and fed and clothed and smart and self-reliant and have been equipped to deal with whatever life throws at them. no everyone is so lucky.

 

[Galeongirl]

And there in lies the reason why the pro-life movement in America makes no sense (note "movement," not every individual). The movement in America wants no abortions, but, at the same time, wants abstinence-only sex education, which is flat out stupid.

I'm glad I'm not the only one finding that odd.

What I also don't get is how people automatically assume when you're pro abortion it means you're pro abortion anytime during the pregnancy.
In Europe it's legal the first.. 32?weeks? That's the time it takes for a bunch of cells to grow into a foetus who has functions like a human being.
Ofcourse I don't think a full grown baby should be aborted.

 

[mama cass]

In Europe it's legal the first.. 32?weeks?

do you mean "12 weeks"?? 32 weeks is pretty close to term... i was born at 28 weeks...

think it's legal up to 24 weeks in England...

in France it's legal up to 14 weeks (used to be up to 12 weeks til recently)

 

[UberBeaver]

I'm glad I'm not the only one finding that odd.

What I also don't get is how people automatically assume when you're pro abortion it means you're pro abortion anytime during the pregnancy.
In Europe it's legal the first.. 32?weeks? That's the time it takes for a bunch of cells to grow into a foetus who has functions like a human being.
Ofcourse I don't think a full grown baby should be aborted.

I think that 32 may be a bit off. That's practically a full term.

 

[Galeongirl]

do you mean "12 weeks"?? 32 weeks is pretty close to term...

think it's up to 24 weeks in England...

in France it's legal up to 14 weeks (used to be up to 12 weeks til recently)

woops! I meant 12 yes! Sorry for the confusion!

 

[indra]

You've got to think that many more women would actually take the adoption route if it we made realistic attempts to alleviate the shame and guilt and made it more socially acceptable.

That's what's always amazed me. It's considered perfectly acceptable to adopt a child, but also considered very selfish -- even despicable -- to give a child up for adoption. If we want to increase the numbers of children given up for adoption rather than aborted we, as a society, have to be far less judgemental about women who choose not to keep their babies. Giving a child up for adoption -- even if because you just don't want to be bothered with it -- has to be considered a socially acceptable choice and not something to be ashamed of as it is now.

 

[yolland]

These are practical questions, nobody wants to talk about them.

Just like nobody wants to talk about sentences for doctors and husbands for aiding and abetting their patients and wives in getting illegal abortions. Or what about the women themselves?

This is true; it calls into question the sincerity of the claim that abortion is morally equivalent to murder if the usual harsh punishments for murder are not then advocated. Or if exceptions are inconsistently made in cases of rape or incest.

(and the reality is that there are waiting lists as long as your arm of people who are willing to take those unwanted babies in)

I already mentioned the problem with this line of argument earlier:

The infant relinquishment rate has held steady at around 13,000 infants per year for several decades now, despite abortion rates, net birthrates and single motherhood rates having fluctuated considerably during that same time period. And infants are almost always successfully placed for adoption within several months, maximum; it's the swelling numbers of older children in the foster care system that's the problem: most prospective adoptive parents strongly prefer a baby, while few are interested in, say, a 9-year-old with 'developmental issues' resulting from neglect or abuse in his or her birth family. Bottom line is, the data simply don't support the assumption that reducing abortion in itself means more women choosing to give up their babies for adoption--on the contrary, it seems much more likely that criminalizing abortion would only leave us with far more single mothers than we already have; that very few women would choose to relinquish their infants if they're going to have to go through carrying and bearing them in the first place.

Forcing women to bear children against their will is wrong; it is a form of slavery, of claiming entitlement to an innocent person's labor without their consent. Like many others, I would support a compromise position of limiting unrestricted access to abortion to the first trimester, in recognition of the state's interest in procuring future citizens. But not an absolute ban. The state has an interest in protecting the dignity of existing citizens as well.

You've got to think that many more women would actually take the adoption route if it we made realistic attempts to alleviate the shame and guilt and made it more socially acceptable.

That may be true, but you can't "alleviate the shame and guilt" in the presence of an absolute ban on abortion. Being forced to go through a pregnancy against one's will is inherently shaming; if you have the option not to but choose to anyway, that's different. While it's difficult for me to imagine a situation in which I personally wouldn't choose to remain pregnant--rape, perhaps--I'd have to say that if I were in such a situation, but denied that choice, then I think I'd be very unlikely to seriously consider relinquishing the infant for adoption. Because why, after going through all that, should I allow a complete stranger who suffered none of it to take the one thing left in my life that I still have the dignity of some control over the destiny of? Is that attitude a good foundation for parenthood, no, but as an emotional reaction I find it understandable. I think this is partly why, even in the 1950s when the stigma against single parenting was much stronger than it is now, fewer than 1 in 10 single mothers chose to relinquish their infants. And frankly I'd be reluctant to say that a shift towards regarding pregnancy as something which should always be welcomed and celebrated by the mother and everyone in her life, no matter what her circumstances--which I'd imagine would be necessary to "alleviate the shame" surrounding single pregnancy--would result in some kind of all-around 'win-win.' That only takes us farther from maintaining the ideal of a committed relationship as the best environment for both having and raising a baby.

 

[nathan1977]

If we want to increase the numbers of children given up for adoption rather than aborted we, as a society, have to be far less judgemental about women who choose not to keep their babies.

I'm not familiar with any particular stigma involved with adoption (perhaps because I know so many people who have done it), but I agree with this. I also think that the cost of adoptions should go down. For many people it's not an option simply because it's so ridiculously expensive. There are companies out there that offer financial assistance if their employees want to adopt -- it's a nice idea that might bear more support.

 

[martha]

you realize, of course, that i'm going to do the right thing and not bring up adoption laws in Florida and Arkansas and the fact that a loving, committed, married lesbian couple i know and love can't adopt from Vietnam (my friend's mother is Vietnamese).

so i'll let that go, because i know it would be totally and wildly hypocritical of you to call abortion murder, and yet think that the thousands of gay couples who want nothing more than to adopt are somehow unfit to raise a child.

Do you really think you'll get an answer to that question?

 

[Irvine511]

I'm not familiar with any particular stigma involved with adoption (perhaps because I know so many people who have done it), but I agree with this. I also think that the cost of adoptions should go down. For many people it's not an option simply because it's so ridiculously expensive. There are companies out there that offer financial assistance if their employees want to adopt -- it's a nice idea that might bear more support.

what about incentives for adopting older children?




as an aside, a gay male couple i know are actually looking for an older child.

 

[phillyfan26]

I'm not familiar with any particular stigma involved with adoption (perhaps because I know so many people who have done it), but I agree with this. I also think that the cost of adoptions should go down. For many people it's not an option simply because it's so ridiculously expensive. There are companies out there that offer financial assistance if their employees want to adopt -- it's a nice idea that might bear more support.

She was talking about those giving up their children to adoption. You seem to be talking about those doing the adopting.

 

[ShipOfFools]

And ShipOfFools' post above should give us all pause. Because if we're even remotely close to entertaining the notion of killing people because it's easier than taking care of them, that opens a serious Pandora's box.

Abortion isn't murder. Abortion usually has a reason behind it, whether it's that a 13 year old girl got pregnant and can't raise the child, or a druggie got pregnant and can't raise the child, or some other reason that someone got pregnant and can't mother a child. Plus, if they were raped, they wouldn't want to keep the child. Or if that baby was shown to have some sort of birth defect. There's a million reasons why someone would have an abortion, and it's not because that person is a cold blooded murderer. It's usually in the best interests of the child and the mother to have the procedure done.

One of my cousins got pregnant at age 12, and because their parents don't believe in abortion, she was forced to keep the baby. She had to drop out of school and raise it by herself. Because she was forced to keep it, she'll never go to college, much less finish middle school.

 

[AliEnvy]

That may be true, but you can't "alleviate the shame and guilt" in the presence of an absolute ban on abortion.

Just to be clear, when I said I was anti-abortion, I didn't say that it should be banned. I am also pro-choice.

And frankly I'd be reluctant to say that a shift towards regarding pregnancy as something which should always be welcomed and celebrated by the mother and everyone in her life, no matter what her circumstances--which I'd imagine would be necessary to "alleviate the shame" surrounding single pregnancy--would result in some kind of all-around 'win-win.' That only takes us farther from maintaining the ideal of a committed relationship as the best environment for both having and raising a baby.

Um, the idea is to provide more adoptive parents in committed relationships with babies. Not ideal, but better than abortion due to shame and inconvenience.