When life begins + maternal feelings

[Phosphor]

sole responsibility to
any

there's a difference between understanding why, which of course i do - it
was me who raised the issue of the support of extended family in the first
place - and the moral consequences. surely on your reasoning we should put
to death all retarded, old, infirm and insane people since they are also
nothing but a burden on those who have to care for them. tell me, what is
the difference?

Andrew

[Phosphor]

sole responsibility to
any

the other clear choice, of course, is adoption. why do u consider killing to
be a better option than adoption?

Andrew

[Jasbir Kaur Villaschi]

Hi Andrew,

to bear young is not devoid of personal risk too... although time has marched on
many countries and cultures still believe that their population should be born without
adequate medical attention and there is no recourse for many women if they suffer
complications... therefore dying as a result... if you are in such a country you may feel it's a risk too many...

sure women can keep the faith and manage to bring a child into this world, but can
she guarantee that this child will get a loving home, end up waiting all its life for love sitting in an institution, not be abused etc etc ? probably
not ...

so in all fairness she has the right to weigh it all up and decide whether it is more acceptable to shoulder the burden(sin if she is of a religuous faith) of a termination now ... or carry on and
perhaps shoulder the burden/sin of creating a life of suffering for her child...
it's a tough call and many do not have the courage to see it through ... when they do they often create a whole another world of hurt ... for themselves and their kids.

(you know it's true we've been talking about people re-living their fundamental feelings of rejection)

what would you do ??? think about it deeply because each and every female on this planet has many many times...

peace

Jas

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

The problems that you site are those that may be the same if a man loses his
wife and has to bring up children on his own (as does happen).

Does your idea extend to killing the infant too, or is Only OK if it is
still in the womb?

Soroush

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Jas

Could she not do these evaluations BEFORE she got pregnant?

Soroush

[Nancy Siciliana]

Do you know anything about the adoption process as it exists in western culture? I live in North America, and I know from first hand knowledge that most women would not want to subject a child to this system. It would appear you don't know much about this--otherwise you wouldn't even offer this as an alternative.
Children who aren't adopted at birth are usually not adopted--and that leaves a lot of children left in the "care" of woefully inadequate state facilities--and foster homes. It is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a good life.

When a woman decides that she will not force another human being to endure this, and endure being unwanted and uncared for (or forced to grow up without the necessities of life), then I definitely see aborting the fetus as a much better option.

Do you want to help women avoid abortion? Have a vasectomy, my friend. Then YOU will not force such a decision on anyone.

Nancy

[Nancy Siciliana]

What moral consequences, exactly, are you talking about?

What do these moral consequences have to do with a woman having the full right of self-determination? Your additional remarks are not my reasoning at all.

Nancy

[Nancy Siciliana]

As I said earlier--the killing and abuse that takes place once the child is born is generally sanctioned by men:

they are protected by law when they abandon their children, as the law refuses to compel their responsibility and refuses to enforce any decisions about support which go unheeded;
they are protected by law when they rape and incest their children (and many institutions which obfuscate the entire idea, and put the child in danger) as the law does not view the victim as anything other than a "witness" to a crime, and therefore easy to discredit
they are protected by law when they kill children, rape women en masse, and force women to bear those children during wars
they are protected by law when they take life in capital punishment.

The number of men who are solely responsible for raising children is very small, in our society, though I admit this minority does exist. On the other hand, ALL women in this society are expected to do most of the work of childbearing and childrearing, completely without help or remuneration of any kind.

I will repeat this one more time, then I have to say I'm getting really tired of the argument, particularly because the points keep being made over and over again (clearly, Soroush, you are exhibiting a failure of imagination here--an inability to comprehend because of an inability to empathise with a woman in this situation):

If you are against abortion, don't have one.
Can't bear children? Okay then, support your anti-abortion stance by having a vasectomy.
Not willing to do this? Then that betrays the real intentions behind your stance.

Nancy

[Nancy Siciliana]

Hmm. Maybe so--perhaps you should counsel patients in this dilemma to think about using that perfect, no-side effects/safe, reliable form of birth control that exists--after the pregnancy becomes a fact, Soroush....

Nancy

[Jasbir Kaur Villaschi]

Sourosh,

I think you'll find I did advocate playing mental scenarios forward before entering
the risk zone... prior to this email but in the case where she is not able to eg. rape, abandonment, contraceptive failure etc I was trying to elucidate for Andrew just what women go through
to reach a decision it's not all cut and dried and cold heartedness

maybe if men did this too before this deep involvement we wouldn't have so many
divorces, abandoned families and unwanted pregnancies too ...

Jas

P.s. you were wondering about your tone ... this is one where your tone could
get you into hot water

Finrod wrote: