When does a med student learn to do abortions?

[Brainsucker]

But please note that you are actually very run-of-the-mill for NARAL and other groups and I am the radical here. I wasn't when I came to this work, but that is the way it goes...

Really? I thought that NARAL's public position was pro-choice, no restrictions.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[trustwomen]

Really? I thought that NARAL's public position was pro-choice, no restrictions.

(wiping tears away) NARAL protects Roe v. Wade. You support Roe v. Wade. There are a lot of NARAL donors who aren't even fans of second-trimester procedures, but who are smart enough to realize that that's not the vast majority of abortions.

Now, NARAL does oppose all the legal restrictions on abortion that I was talking about in my earlier post; but that has nothing to do with third-trimester abortion. Even the so-called "partial-birth abortion" debate (another red herring, BTW) is NOT about third-trimester abortion, unlike what the antis would have you believe. It's about restricting a procedure that is used far more often in 2nd trimester procedures (which means pre-viability, but that doesn't matter when the PBA bans declare a "living child" as such from CONCEPTION). The technique is hardly ever used in those couple of hundred third-trimester procedures that happen every year (out of well over a million abortions, please note). So when NARAL opposes the PBA nonsense, it does not mean they are defending third-trimester abortion.

NARAL does, at most, defend the health exception to the third-trimester abortion BAN that is currently in place in the U.S. because of the wording of Roe. The ban itself they have no problem with, as long as women's health is not compromised. (Again, I am referring to the 3rd trimester ban inherent in Roe, not the PBA nonsense that seeks to redefine fetuses and potentially ban all abortions, including early ones). To add to the complexity, the so-called PBA procedure (D&X) is only used when there is a danger to the woman's health and fertility, because of fetal hydrocephaly or an especially tight cervix on the woman. So the "health exception" is used to argue for the necessity of this procedure and against the PBA ban. But please note that the PBA ban does not restrict itself to 3rd trimester procedures.

 

[trustwomen]

Why do you think I want to win hearts and minds when to you this means either accepting your view of abortion or just keeping quirt about it?

Now that statement just makes no sense at all. You clearly want to make people "think twice" about being pro-choice, and make them doubt their empathy and good judgment. Otherwise you wouldn't be baiting Flea girl, or repeatedly asking the same question (which was a really poor excuse for a "trap", by the way, asked to the wrong person to boot). Or adding flip comments about "evil" on what was clearly a pro-choice thread.

I never said you had to keep quiet (though you certainly have been quiet since I started posting) and I know full well you will never accept my view of abortion. You can't understand it; whereas I understand yours inside and out, and still somehow manage to disagree with it - which must be infuriating coming from a "young lady".

I sincerely hope that many of the doctors on this thread will seriously consider becoming abortion providers; there is a shortage of them, and you can learn how to do early abortions no matter what specialty you choose. A few of you have told me that they are training in EM, and therefore don't plan on doing abortions - to you I answer, EM docs will be especially motivated to provide abortions, once the Supreme Court turns and the dying women start filling the ED again. I know family physicians, pediatricians, OB/GYNs, internists, psychiatrists, and general surgeons who have trained in and provide abortions. First-trimester abortion (nearly 90% of all abortion) is a very simple, minor surgery that takes about 3-5 minutes to complete once you are properly trained. Don't be scared by the rhetoric. Most of you (I hope) became doctors to help people and do good in the world. Believe me, this work is good work, done by heroes.

 

[NEATOMD]

Pro-Choice. Name one aborted baby that ever got a choice in the matter. I think (just my opinion) that it's too bad that just because someone decides that another without a voice doesn't deserve one, they are free to keep them silent.

I feel for those who are in the difficult situations such as those described in previous post, and I have more compassion for them then you will know (or believe). I can't imagine what it would be like in such situations.

But, my compassion for the being inside them is just as strong.

And, I just can't bring myself to the point of looking at that life (as fragile as it may be) and not see a human life (especially as they get older). And I can't help but thinking that this little human deserves and is worthy to get every chance I can give it to live.

I realize that some have defects and others may never make it to term, but I still can't get past the thought of ending a life that (I feel) isn't mine (or any other humans) to take.

Please don't take this response as any sort of "guilt trip". It isnt, it's my feelings, my emotions. I don't expect others to see it my way, you haven't been through my life experiences just as I haven't been through yours.

I hope with all that I am, that my daughter realizes that no matter what she does, no matter how much I disagree with anything that she ever does, I still love her. I loved her when she was concieved. I loved her when those first cells divided. I loved her when she took her first breath, step, rode her first bike. I still love her and still will whenever either of us takes our last breath. That she realizes I'm not perfect and I've made mistakes. And nothing can't be reconciled. That those thoughts of rejection or humiliation won't stand a chance. I really hope, that when anyone comes to try and tell her these things are not true, she'll know they're wrong and forgive them the same.

All this just to say, I don't ever want to learn how to perform abortions. I really hope that I'm never forced to.

I can imagine that you're already formulating a response. I wish that you'd take the time to try and understand what I mean, and not rush to your response and tell me all the ways I'm wrong or try to make me look narrow minded, foolish, arrogant, or selfish. It won't change my mind. I'm not going to change yours. I already know you disagree. I already know why. It doesn't change a thing.

 

[8744]

... until I looked at the counselor's notes and saw that she had just left an abusive relationship? (Did you know, Panda, that beating the **** out of your girlfriend does not in any way prevent you from having access to your children - as long as you don't beat them too? Meaning that once you have a baby with an a**hole you are tied to him, for life, by law?) How I went up to her and whispered, Congratulations - you got yourself free - and how that impossibly wide smile got even wider as she hugged me? Would it alter your views, just a little, if I told you that my life was saved, both literally and figuratively, by an abortion I desperately needed? That I've seen so many women live free and proud and strong because they weren't forced to be mothers against their will?

Ah. So it was a mercy killing. Why didn't you say so? Well heck. Why let something as arbritrary as the +2 station interfere with your quest to alleviate suffering? Why not hunt down the recently born and put them out of there miseries too?

 

[8744]

...A few of you have told me that they are training in EM, and therefore don't plan on doing abortions - to you I answer, EM docs will be especially motivated to provide abortions, once the Supreme Court turns and the dying women start filling the ED again.....

Young lady, there are OB-Gyns who refuse to do abortions.

An unwanted pregnancy is not exactly what I'd call a medical emergency. I mean, I don't think the code pager is going to go off for a stat abortion. Relax, you have 38 weeks to find a butcher.

(I'm starting an Emergency Medicine Residency in July, by the way.)

 

[beefballs]

Panda why do you keep calling her young lady? Trustwomen seems able to put facts together and arrive at a logical conclusion, she doesn't deserve your derision.

 

[8744]

Panda why do you keep calling her young lady? Trustwomen seems able to put facts together and arrive at a logical conclusion, she doesn't deserve your derision.

It is not derision.

 

[beefballs]

what is it then? \

ps-former 0311

 

[8744]

Not to mention that the arguments advanced on this thread to support abortion are not very tightly constrained if I can use that expression. This is because many of you have a somewhat fluid definition of the fetus which changes to to support whatever justification you are advocating.

There are only two consistent positions for you to take. The first is that the fetus is not a baby, has no feelings, and therefore can be removed and discarded with no more thought than when I excise a skin tag or a hemorrhoid. The second is that while the fetus may be a baby (or a potential baby) and has some right to life, the rights of the mother trump the life of her fetus.

Instead, the water is muddied by placing the fetus on a sliding scale of worth which ranges from uterine parasite to hopelessly doomed child for whom death would be merciful. If it's nothing to kill the uterine parasite then the mothers are just being silly expressing any emotion and while I'd never advocate making fun of them surely you wise young adults must roll your eyes at their ignorance. If, on the other hand, we're really killing something here, even if for the best of reasons (because as a dog owner for my entire life I have had to put down several beloved dogs), then maybe your enthusiasm for abortion is a little macabre.

Parasite, skin tag, or baby. Make up your minds.

 

[8744]

what is it then? \

ps-former 0311

Sadness. And a profound hope that my daughters never end up with such a callous disregard for life.

Who were you with?

Sergeant P. Bear, USMC (former)
Kilo 3/8
1984-1991

 

[beefballs]

97-01 kilo 3/7 & bravo 1/7 in 29 you were at lejeune

damn '84 that makes you about 40

the young lady thing comes off as paternal, as if you were talking down regardless I won't hijack the thread
later all

 

[Sohalia]

I sincerely hope that many of the doctors on this thread will seriously consider becoming abortion providers; there is a shortage of them, and you can learn how to do early abortions no matter what specialty you choose. A few of you have told me that they are training in EM, and therefore don't plan on doing abortions - to you I answer, EM docs will be especially motivated to provide abortions, once the Supreme Court turns and the dying women start filling the ED again. I know family physicians, pediatricians, OB/GYNs, internists, psychiatrists, and general surgeons who have trained in and provide abortions. First-trimester abortion (nearly 90% of all abortion) is a very simple, minor surgery that takes about 3-5 minutes to complete once you are properly trained. Don't be scared by the rhetoric. Most of you (I hope) became doctors to help people and do good in the world. Believe me, this work is good work, done by heroes.

How does one who is not going into ob-gyn get training to do this such that one would feel pretty comfortable doing these in the US without worrying about being sued if there was a complication?

 

[trustwomen]

How does one who is not going into ob-gyn get training to do this such that one would feel pretty comfortable doing these in the US without worrying about being sued if there was a complication?

Contact Medical Students for Choice (ms4c.org, as someone else pointed out earlier in the thread). There are standards for abortion care that are put out every year by the National Abortion Federation and NAF members also undergo a quality assurance visit before being accepted. This includes doctors who are individual members of NAF.

Best of luck.

 

[trustwomen]

There are only two consistent positions for you to take. The first is that the fetus is not a baby, has no feelings, and therefore can be removed and discarded with no more thought than when I excise a skin tag or a hemorrhoid. The second is that while the fetus may be a baby (or a potential baby) and has some right to life, the rights of the mother trump the life of her fetus.

Your premise is false. Just like C.S. Lewis' "lunatic, liar or lord" argument, you are creating a falsely restrictive set of options and then taking each option to the extreme.

Broaden your mind for a moment and hear this: a fetus is not a baby, and has no feelings - yet women can have feelings about a fetus. Pregnancy is a big deal - that is my perspective. You are the one minimizing its importance to women. It is so important, so life-changing, that it must not be imposed on someone who doesn't want it. Women who have abortions mourn lost possibilities, shattered illusions about their loved ones (who have often not risen to the occasion), and lost innocence (I mean innocence in the sense of "not having been harshly confronted with reality yet", not in the way I know you'll interpret it). Pregnancy and abortion are emotional issues because the possibility of childbearing is an emotional topic. Women get all emotional when the condom breaks, too, even if they don't conceive. It isn't ridiculous or incomprehensible that they feel this way, nor is it evidence that a sperm is a life. A small number of women may indeed feel that an abortion is no big deal, and I'm fine with that. The fact that most don't feel that way tells us precisely nothing about the status of the fetus. Abortion has only as much meaning as the pregnant woman attributes to it - and the same applies to the fetus. If I get emotional about wanting to do abortions, if I think it is a good thing to do, it is because of the women I'll be helping. They are the people in this situation; they are my patients.

I have seen a whole lot of fetuses. A 6-week embryo is roughly the size of a small pea; it is a whitish-beige clot that looks exactly (no offense) like a loogie. A 6-week embryo has no feelings, no consciousness, no ability to survive outside the womb even for a second. I don't believe that a fetus has a right to life, nor do I believe that it is a person. I've heard so many people compare the plight of fetuses to jews during the holocaust, or blacks during slavery - but please note that neither jews nor blacks were insentient, pea-sized, and most importantly living inside the bodies of their oppressors.

I dare anyone to look, really look, at a 6-week embryo, then look at me, and tell me that I am a murderer for having had an abortion at barely 14 years old. You say I have no respect for life, Panda, and you couldn't be more wrong. I am the compassionate sentimental type that wishes she had the willpower to go vegan. I came to the realization that I cannot save the entire world about 5 years ago, in my mid-twenties. But unlike others who just give up and say "well then, I guess I'll just get mine", I still want to try to change what I can. Even my conservative father is proud of me, fully knowing what I do and why I do it. Please stop assuming that you know what it's like to be a woman, to be sexual as a woman, and to be pregnant, in this world.

 

[8744]

Your premise is false. Just like C.S. Lewis' "lunatic, liar or lord" argument, you are creating a falsely restrictive set of options and then taking each option to the extreme.

Broaden your mind for a moment and hear this: a fetus is not a baby, and has no feelings - yet women can have feelings about a fetus. Pregnancy is a big deal - that is my perspective. You are the one minimizing its importance to women. It is so important, so life-changing, that it must not be imposed on someone who doesn't want it. Women who have abortions mourn lost possibilities, shattered illusions about their loved ones (who have often not risen to the occasion), and lost innocence (I mean innocence in the sense of "not having been harshly confronted with reality yet", not in the way I know you'll interpret it). Pregnancy and abortion are emotional issues because the possibility of childbearing is an emotional topic. Women get all emotional when the condom breaks, too, even if they don't conceive. It isn't ridiculous or incomprehensible that they feel this way, nor is it evidence that a sperm is a life. A small number of women may indeed feel that an abortion is no big deal, and I'm fine with that. The fact that most don't feel that way tells us precisely nothing about the status of the fetus. Abortion has only as much meaning as the pregnant woman attributes to it - and the same applies to the fetus. If I get emotional about wanting to do abortions, if I think it is a good thing to do, it is because of the women I'll be helping. They are the people in this situation; they are my patients.

I have seen a whole lot of fetuses. A 6-week embryo is roughly the size of a small pea; it is a whitish-beige clot that looks exactly (no offense) like a loogie. A 6-week embryo has no feelings, no consciousness, no ability to survive outside the womb even for a second. I don't believe that a fetus has a right to life, nor do I believe that it is a person. I've heard so many people compare the plight of fetuses to jews during the holocaust, or blacks during slavery - but please note that neither jews nor blacks were insentient, pea-sized, and most importantly living inside the bodies of their oppressors.

I dare anyone to look, really look, at a 6-week embryo, then look at me, and tell me that I am a murderer for having had an abortion at barely 14 years old. You say I have no respect for life, Panda, and you couldn't be more wrong. I am the compassionate sentimental type that wishes she had the willpower to go vegan. I came to the realization that I cannot save the entire world about 5 years ago, in my mid-twenties. But unlike others who just give up and say "well then, I guess I'll just get mine", I still want to try to change what I can. Even my conservative father is proud of me, fully knowing what I do and why I do it. Please stop assuming that you know what it's like to be a woman, to be sexual as a woman, and to be pregnant, in this world.

Like I said. If the fetus is nothing then it's no big deal. If it is then to be pro-choice is to believe that the mother's "rights" trump the fetus'. It is or isn't. Everything else is just camoflauge. You believe it isn't. Fine. But then quit offering as justification that by removing it you are saving it, at that arbritraty time when it becomes a baby, from a life of misery because this is a silly argument that can be so easily "reduced to absurdity" that you should be ashamed to make it.

Same with the "who are you to impose your morality" ploy. This is also silly and can also be reduced in a similar fashion.

 

[8744]

97-01 kilo 3/7 & bravo 1/7 in 29 you were at lejeune

damn '84 that makes you about 40

the young lady thing comes off as paternal, as if you were talking down regardless I won't hijack the thread
later all

42.

 

[8744]

..I have seen a whole lot of fetuses. A 6-week embryo is roughly the size of a small pea; it is a whitish-beige clot that looks exactly (no offense) like a loogie...

Ah. The famous "cuteness test." We only get all gooshy and protect cute things.

 

[NEATOMD]

I have seen a whole lot of fetuses. A 6-week embryo is roughly the size of a small pea; it is a whitish-beige clot that looks exactly (no offense) like a loogie. A 6-week embryo has no feelings, no consciousness, no ability to survive outside the womb even for a second.

I think this is a dangerous statement. It seems that you are implying that
lacking common human traits disqualifies people from being human.

Anyway, I do think 6 week old fetuses look human:
http://www.dushkin.com/connectext/psy/ch03/fetus.mhtml

During week six:
The "loogie" has had a heartbeat for a week. It has a brain (incomplete, but so do some who are born). Has arms, legs, and gender. It has most adult organs: including nostrils, lenses on its eyes, and a GI tract complete with pancreas. It is half an inch long. Has human DNA. (look these up in an embryo book for verification, but here's a web addy for quick reference: http://www.pregnancy.org/pregnancy/fetaldevelopment1.php.)

But, I don't believe that these things are all necessary for the fetus to be human.

 

[bluehighlighter]

It seems that you guys have gotten pretty involved in your personal opinions about the issue on here...However, in efforts to somewhat address the original question. Currently, 22% of OB/GYN residencies provide training on abortions. However, this training is in regards to hospital setting and medical emergenicies. Very few ppl are getting trained on how to perform clinical procedures, which is where the majority of abortions occur. My information came from Planned Parenthood Health Systems of West Virginia.

 

[sacrament]

Currently, 22% of OB/GYN residencies provide training on abortions.

No way... only 22%? That's pathetic. It'd be tough to pay me enough money to do ob/gyn for a living, but if I could safely offer abortion as a service to my patients (even if I did, say, cardiology) then I absolutely would. In the grand scheme of civilization, I think a case could be made that abortions provide a greater service to humanity than does the modern practice of delivering babies. (This stance, of course, makes me unpopular with nearly everybody in the world.)

 

[TypeA]

My information came from Planned Parenthood Health Systems of West Virginia.

Why don't people use Planned Parenthood for PLANNING...rather than running to them after the fact? If planning were more of a concern, we would have fewer of these arguments.

 

[trustwomen]

Why don't people use Planned Parenthood for PLANNING...rather than running to them after the fact? If planning were more of a concern, we would have fewer of these arguments.

Most people do use them for planning - that is most of their business (yet nobody believes this, because of well-orchestrated propaganda from those who are against what they do - both abortion and contraception).

Preventing unplanned pregnancies is absolutely something good. It is the only way you can really reduce the abortion rate (abortion is preventable surgery, after all).

 

[ShyRem]

Preventing unplanned pregnancies is really good and would certainly be the preferred action, but I doubt the rapist will be nice if you ask him to put on a condom before he rapes you. Not too much "prevention" you can do there.

 

[beefballs]

Panda & NEato-how do you feel about the morning after pill?

 

[TypeA]

Preventing unplanned pregnancies is really good and would certainly be the preferred action, but I doubt the rapist will be nice if you ask him to put on a condom before he rapes you. Not too much "prevention" you can do there.

I totally agree with you there. Unfortunately, rapes are not the cause for many...too many.

 

[8744]

Panda & NEato-how do you feel about the morning after pill?

I don't know. I understand that it is not an abortifacient (sp) but if I am wrong I am willing to be corrected.

By the way, even though many OB-Gyn programs do not teach elective abortion, the procedure for a D and C of, for example, an incomplete spontaneous abortion is I believe functionally the same as for an elective abortion.

I don't think anybody is arguing against providing medically necessary abortions in cases like extopic pregnancies.

 

[8744]

Preventing unplanned pregnancies is really good and would certainly be the preferred action, but I doubt the rapist will be nice if you ask him to put on a condom before he rapes you. Not too much "prevention" you can do there.

OK. I'll throw you a bone. Since my goal is to prevent as many babies as possible from being killed in utero and since, South Dakota aside, abortion will never be banned how about we allow abortion for rape, incest, low socio-economic class, races prone to child abuse, and for everybody else except white middle class women older than 18 who should know better and can thus be expected to take responsibilty.

The "rape gambit" is another place where pro-choice arguments suffer from a lack of constraint.

 

[trustwomen]

OK. I'll throw you a bone. Since my goal is to prevent as many babies as possible from being killed in utero and since, South Dakota aside, abortion will never be banned how about we allow abortion for rape, incest, low socio-economic class, races prone to child abuse, and for everybody else except white middle class women older than 18 who should know better and can thus be expected to take responsibilty.

The "rape gambit" is another place where pro-choice arguments suffer from a lack of constraint.

Don't be so sure that abortion will never be banned. One Supreme Court decision and every state that wants to ban abortion, will. Meaning New England and West Coast is fine, Midwest and South starts seeing dying women in the ED. Actually, some EDs already see women who self-abort because they can't afford the procedure (Hyde Amendment).

If you enacted your proposal, a whole lot of "white middle class women older than 18 who should know better" with unwanted pregnancies would get "raped" every year. How would you prove they are lying? In the states which only pay for abortion in cases of rape, there are several ways they "screen" the "cheaters". Some are decent and just require the doctor to say "to the best of my knowledge this pregnancy was the result of rape", kind of a solemn attestation on the part of the patient leading to a solemn attestation on the part of the doctor. Others require the woman to report the rape before she can have the abortion (traumatic, since there is a reason so many rapes go unreported - it's not a fun process). Still others require that she report the rape within 72 hours of it happening in order for it to be considered a "real" rape for the purposes of a Medicaid abortion.

FYI, most of the patients I counseled who had been raped had not reported it. They had no incentive to make up a rape story for me, as a) they could have an abortion regardless and b) within five seconds of meeting me they can tell that I wouldn't judge them for having a so-called "elective" abortion anyway. So why did they not report it? Usually because it was someone they knew and they didn't want to crack open their family/social circle and start what would have amounted to a private civil war. The second big reason was not being able to emotionally handle the whole process - rape kit, interrogation, lawyers, police... Many of the women who had been raped felt that their abortion was a turning point, rejecting/fighting off the rapist in the most intimate way, taking control back over their lives and bodies. Many of them wept in recovery room - I always asked what they felt, since tears can mean many things - and they said I'm so happy, or I'm so relieved. Then they would feel guilty for not feeling guilty about the abortion.

 

[trustwomen]

I don't know. I understand that it is not an abortifacient (sp) but if I am wrong I am willing to be corrected.

By the way, even though many OB-Gyn programs do not teach elective abortion, the procedure for a D and C of, for example, an incomplete spontaneous abortion is I believe functionally the same as for an elective abortion.

I don't think anybody is arguing against providing medically necessary abortions in cases like extopic pregnancies.

Panda, bless you for not opposing emergency contraception at least. When you are an EM doc you will see many women coming in who have been raped - I feel it is cruel NOT to offer them EC. (Many hospitals don't). It is not an abortifacient - if the woman is already pregnant, nothing happens. The controversy comes because one of the possible mechanisms of action, just like oral contraception (it is the same drug in a higher dose, after all), is thinning the lining of the uterus. This leads the fundies to oppose it because a fertilized egg might fail to implant in the uterine wall because of it. (And a fertilized egg, as we all know and agree, is a baby.) Although this is much more likely to happen with OC than with EC (makes sense as OC is longer-acting, whereas EC is unlikely to thin anything in its two doses), and the primary mechanism of both is the suppression of ovulation. This is why those who oppose EC also oppose birth control pills - or if they don't it's just because they are misinformed.

And yes, an "old-school" D&C is an abortion procedure - it's just really primitive and dangerous when compared to aspiration D&C (or do they teach aspiration D&Cs now?). In countries where abortion is illegal, doctors see a whole lot of patients for "incomplete spontaneous abortion" requiring D&C.

 

[ShyRem]

I have torn feelings here - I am one of those women who needed significant infertility treatments to get my two beautiful children. I think people (men AND women) should use some brains before they have sex. I've seen children thrown away in dumpsters while I was trying desperately to get pregnant, and it just about tore my heart out.

On the other hand, I do support a woman's right to choose. I would hope that the morning after pill would be a better choice if they didn't think about prevention beforehand. Let's face it, there are plenty of abortions that go wrong. And plenty that go right for a wide variety of reasons. And I would sincerely hope any physician will never argue against "abortion" for the health of the woman (abortion in quotes because technically a ruptured ectopic pregnancy is still aborting fetal tissue).

I think my main problem is with people who have sex without concern for consequences and then are astounded when they turn up pregnant. I don't know what the answer is - I can see arguments for sex education can equate to greater promiscuity, and I can see arguments for sex education can equate to more informed choices (whether abstention or prevention). It is entirely dependent upon the person and their intellectual/emotional maturity level. Personally I absolutely LOVE (hear the sarcasm, folks) the women who truly believe that if they douche with Coca-Cola they won't get pregnant - or if they have sex standing up they won't get pregnant. Or they have to "really love" the person to get pregnant. Yeah, I've seen lots of girls who end up pregnant who have really skewed information about how/why they get pregnant. My personal favorite? The girl I picked up who fainted: asked if she could be pregnant. "Oh, no.. I'm NOT pregnant". "well, are you sexually active?" "yes." "well, then you might very well be pregnant." "Oh, NO.... see I just don't want to be, so I know I'm not." "well, are you using birth control?" "Nope. I just don't want to be, so I know I'm not." She was.

Too bad we can't install a switch that would prevent people from sexual acts until their brain catches up with their hormones. In the meantime, communication lines need to be open and (ok, this is going to sound really bad but please don't take this too harshly) consequences for sexual actions (rather like consequences for breaking the law - don't take this to mean throw them in jail and no, I don't have any idea what those consequences should be -- perhaps chemical restraint for men? norplant for women? that sounds harsh). Men make babies without taking care of them. Women have babies without taking care of them properly. Children get adopted to loving families, but without knowledge of their background, family history, etc. These questions are complex, and no straight answers available. However, education is a good place to start - and the basics like "if you have sex, you WILL get pregnant at some point" need to be stressed. And you need to teach the consequences about how hard being a parent really is (and let's all face it - it's the toughest most underpaid, underappreciated job out there).

 

[trustwomen]

I think my main problem is with people who have sex without concern for consequences and then are astounded when they turn up pregnant. I don't know what the answer is -

Irresponsible people always "get the goat" of responsible people (myself included). However, even mostly responsible people can have "moments". And, of course, there are a lot of people who are just irresponsible in general - or, in other words, have an external locus of control. (see http://www.wilderdom.com/psychology/loc/LocusOfControlWhatIs.html)

A quote from that site: "Sometimes Locus of Control is seen as a personality construct, but this may be misleading, since the theory and research indicates that that locus of control is largely learned. Seligman's research on learned helplessness is an example, where he found that animals and people will learn to simply give up trying when they experience having no control over what happens to them. In prolonged circumstances without control, developing an external locus of control is an adaptive response. However, if circumstances change, having learned helplessness (external locus of control) is maladaptive."

A whole lot of people grow up without a sense of control; as objects, not as subjects. It's kind of harsh to expect them to suddenly develop that skill, sort of like expecting me to suddenly be able to play baseball or speak Farsi.

ShyRem, I understand your frustration. I think the solution is to reduce the rate of unplanned pregnancies. How to do that? Look at who has done it, and imitate them. Western European countries have comprehensive sex education from early ages, free health care, good social safety nets, cheap and available contraception, and the lowest unplanned pregnancy rates (and thus abortion rates) in the world. Less rape too. Sex is viewed as a health issue, not a moral issue. Without the tantalizing "forbidden fruit" aspect, teens wait longer before initiating sex, i.e. they wait until their bodies actually want it (OK, I'm probably referring more to girls here). Also, providing an alternative to the cycle of poverty (through subsidized higher education and equal opportunities for women) reduces pregnancy rates. Teenage girls raised in poverty have babies when they can't see a reason not to, i.e. what else do they have to look forward to anyway? A baby becomes a way out of your parents' home, a source of independent income, a way to feel adult; and as Fay Weldon said "Something to do, someone to love - it's all any of us want". And the lack of opportunities/social mobility just reinforces that external locus of control.

 

[gdbaby]

And you need to teach the consequences about how hard being a parent really is (and let's all face it - it's the toughest most underpaid, underappreciated job out there).

Shy, I had a feeling you would respond this way. Compassionate and understanding.

I feel like your last sentence is the part of the reason why abortions MUST be legal. NOT because "parenting is hard, I would rather be shopping" (this is not Shy's use of this sentence, I know) but because, for a very large percentage of women who are debating whether or not they should terminate their pregnancies must also realize the incredibly deficiencies in our social service system that will provide them with only minimal help in caring for that child once it is born. People like Shy and myself are so fortunate to have the ability to provide everything our children need (now what they want is another story!). Many women do not have this luxury. And, so long as our current political climate remains as such, education just isn't going to happen. Furthermore, most times we will never know what goes on between the time of sexual intercourse and the time of the termination of pregnancy: false promises by a spouse/partner, abuse, lack of parental/social support, religious ostracization--who knows?

As a society, we love the fetus, we hate the child. We don't want you to terminate your pregnancy, but you will have to search for months to even find the hoops you will need to jump through to get services for you and your child once your deliver.

 

[trustwomen]

Shy, I had a feeling you would respond this way. Compassionate and understanding.

I feel like your last sentence is the part of the reason why abortions MUST be legal. NOT because "parenting is hard, I would rather be shopping" (this is not Shy's use of this sentence, I know) but because, for a very large percentage of women who are debating whether or not they should terminate their pregnancies must also realize the incredibly deficiencies in our social service system that will provide them with only minimal help in caring for that child once it is born. People like Shy and myself are so fortunate to have the ability to provide everything our children need (now what they want is another story!). Many women do not have this luxury. And, so long as our current political climate remains as such, education just isn't going to happen. Furthermore, most times we will never know what goes on between the time of sexual intercourse and the time of the termination of pregnancy: false promises by a spouse/partner, abuse, lack of parental/social support, religious ostracization--who knows?

As a society, we love the fetus, we hate the child. We don't want you to terminate your pregnancy, but you will have to search for months to even find the hoops you will need to jump through to get services for you and your child once your deliver.

 

[gdbaby]

Thought you would like this. Not like you need any help on this issue. You are doing fine on your own.

I would also like to add that if we are going to advocate for education (which I think we should), we have to advocate for GOOD education. Looking back, it is no surprise to me that I got pregnant the summer before I started college (had an abortion my second week of college) when my education consisted of this (Catholic school):

"When a boy (because girls don't like sex) tries to "get fresh" with you, just cross your hands in front of your chest and say 'hands off, I'm special.'"

I wrote a whole comedy sketch about my sex ed classes in catholic school.

 

[gregMD]

why in god's name would you force a woman to have a baby that she didn't want. Get out the coat hanger.....

 

[ShyRem]

Thus the education - if you have sex you WILL get pregnant at some point. (ok, unless you're like me and doped up on all sorts of fertility drugs ) And a very explicit idea of what constitutes sex. The right to choose should be protected, along with education (and yes, gd, I agree wholeheartedly - GOOD education).

 

[gdbaby]

Thus the education - if you have sex you WILL get pregnant at some point. (ok, unless you're like me and doped up on all sorts of fertility drugs ) And a very explicit idea of what constitutes sex. The right to choose should be protected, along with education (and yes, gd, I agree wholeheartedly - GOOD education).

Shy, if I knew fertility drugs would contribute to producing beautiful uber-children like yours, I would have taken some even though my midwife referred to me as a "fertile Myrtle" since I got pg 3 months after getting off depo.

 

[trustwomen]

Let's face it, there are plenty of abortions that go wrong.

I hate to nitpick, but having had your two children, you took as much risk to your health and life as a woman who has 20 abortions. Mortality and morbidity risk is much lower for an abortion than for childbirth (which, when a woman is already pregnant, is the only alternative).

There is a myth out there that abortion is responsible for infertility. The existence of repeat abortion, while understandably controversial, should demonstrate that this is not the case. There is a correlation between multiple abortions and subsequent infertility, but the causation is entirely separate - I'll walk you through it. Women who have a lot of abortions have a lot of unprotected sex, often with different partners. They are significantly more likely to pick up quiet STDs (gonorrhea or chlamydia, usually asymptomatic in women). These STDs are likely to go untreated (if they went to the gyno faithfully, they'd probably be on OC). Untreated STDs cause infertility by known and proven mechanisms. However, since the woman never even knew she had an STD, she is likely to attribute any infertility to... ta-daa!... her abortion.

Same goes with the abortion/breast cancer myth. Having children early and often (and breast-feeding them) is proven to lower your risk of breast cancer. Delaying childbirth, whether by abortion or by abstinence, carries an increased risk of breast cancer (which is why breast cancer used to be called the nun's disease). Therefore, young pregnant women who choose childbirth instead of abortion will have a lower breast cancer risk - but they will also have a lower risk than the "responsible" types who contracept and/or abstain and never get pregnant in the first place. No study yet that claims to link abortion to breast cancer has ever controlled for childbearing (age & frequency).

Be careful what you read re. the dangers of abortion (ShyRem, this isn't to you specifically, but to all - I know you weren't making a statement or anything). There is one guy out there, David Reardon, who bought his Ph.D. from Pacific Western University (an online diploma mill) and has made a career out of correlative studies that supposedly "prove" abortion causes everything from suicide to homicide to motor vehicle accidents. Of course, he never bothers getting to the "causation" part.

 

[trustwomen]

Shy, if I knew fertility drugs would contribute to producing beautiful uber-children like yours, I would have taken some even though my midwife referred to me as a "fertile Myrtle" since I got pg 3 months after getting off depo.

I agree - they're GORGEOUS!! ShyRem, how old were you when you underwent the treatments? Am I crazy for thinking that I won't need them when I'm done med school (34?). I suppose I'm also banking on the fact that my mom was a "fertile myrtle" and I got pregnant my first time (only time without contraception)...

(Yes, Panda, I'm almost 30. Do I count as a "young lady" after all? If so, I humbly accept the first and refuse the second...)

 

[ShyRem]

Question for those against abortion: what do you think about selective reduction in cases of mutliple fetuses?

This was a question my husband and I had to face when we started through the fertility process (but no, we didn't have to go through it - months of fertility drugs, higher than normal dosages of the drugs, and I get pregnant with ONE child both times. No fertile Myrtle here.) Thoughts?

 

[Brainsucker]

I agree - they're GORGEOUS!! ShyRem, how old were you when you underwent the treatments? Am I crazy for thinking that I won't need them when I'm done med school (34?). I suppose I'm also banking on the fact that my mom was a "fertile myrtle" and I got pregnant my first time (only time without contraception)...

(Yes, Panda, I'm almost 30. Do I count as a "young lady" after all? If so, I humbly accept the first and refuse the second...)

You might be better off having a kid or two during med school. Seems like a more manageable time than residency, but what do I know?

 

[Ypo.]

Not to mention that the arguments advanced on this thread to support abortion are not very tightly constrained if I can use that expression. This is because many of you have a somewhat fluid definition of the fetus which changes to to support whatever justification you are advocating.

There are only two consistent positions for you to take. The first is that the fetus is not a baby, has no feelings, and therefore can be removed and discarded with no more thought than when I excise a skin tag or a hemorrhoid. The second is that while the fetus may be a baby (or a potential baby) and has some right to life, the rights of the mother trump the life of her fetus.

Instead, the water is muddied by placing the fetus on a sliding scale of worth which ranges from uterine parasite to hopelessly doomed child for whom death would be merciful. If it's nothing to kill the uterine parasite then the mothers are just being silly expressing any emotion and while I'd never advocate making fun of them surely you wise young adults must roll your eyes at their ignorance. If, on the other hand, we're really killing something here, even if for the best of reasons (because as a dog owner for my entire life I have had to put down several beloved dogs), then maybe your enthusiasm for abortion is a little macabre.

Parasite, skin tag, or baby. Make up your minds.

Wow, this thread has certainly evolved into a debate.

Panda, you and your dogs! You seem to empathise better with them than with anyone else. I'm a dog-owner, so I can understand your love of dogs. But its really silly to expect other people's emotions to follow your own personal rules of logic, don't you think? There are a lot of emotions involved in having an abortion, even if you don't believe the fetus to be a living sentient being, there are hormones, guilt-trips laid by society, you know-its so complex. You don't get hormones when you remove a wart, you don't think about what a big mistake you made, or how your family and parts of society will look down on you, or how maybe one day you want to have kids but this is not the right time, or wondering whether it was a boy or a girl. You don't have to make a huge decision between bringing another life into this world under bad circumstances and choosing not to.

Panda, I'm pro-choice (for the woman, not the fetus just in case you wondering).
I've never really understood why abortions can't be performed past a certain stage- just seems so arbitrary to me. I'm not one of those people who will argue that the fetus is unfeeling. So you can call me a murderer if you want, I don't really care. I just think that right-to-lifers take the right to life to such an extreme that its ridiculous. People get so hung up on moral theory that they push it to extremes. I don't think just about living, I also think about the quality of life, about whats best for all involved. I don't think its good for society to bring unwanted children into the world-I don't think its a good life for the child, or for the mother. I feel that there is already a big population problem in the world, so bringing in more is not good for society as a whole. I don't think that being stuck unconscious on a ventilator is a good life, I don't think that dying in excruciating pain while losing control over your mental functioning is better than dying with dignity. I believe in personal choice. During my free time, I sometimes wonder what the absolute right-to-lifers plan on doing with all those unwanted babies.

Oh, and in case your were wondering? I have a Rottweiler who I love almost more than anyone in the world. One day a few years ago I came home to see the ugliest, mangiest (it was hereditary mange) dog in the neighborhood humping her in the backyard. I took her to the Vet and she had a doggy abortion. It just wasn't a good time in either of our lives to have a litter of puppies. I'm happy to say that she has since experienced the joys of motherhood; a proud mother of 11! And I have never thought twice about it. The last thing this world needed was a bunch of unwanted mangy Rottweiler mutts running around terrorizing the neighborhood.

 

[trustwomen]

You might be better off having a kid or two during med school. Seems like a more manageable time than residency, but what do I know?

Eeesh, too scary. I'd want to be able to stay home at least a year with each. Besides, then they'd be growing up all through med school and residency and I would miss so much... Honestly, I may just go FP and have them at 36, after residency...

 

[ShyRem]

My mother was disgustingly fertile as well. I had.. issues. I lost an ovary when I was three to a terratoma which was literally killing me (they found it on exploratory surgery 'cuz they really didn't know what the h#ll was wrong). My other ovary is in primary failure. I knew this going in trying to get pregnant, and had actually been told all my life I would never have children. I had my daughter when I was 28, and my son when I was 31. It took three months of drugs to get my children, and the side effects were, quite frankly, awful. I gained 40 pounds each time, and got ovarian cysts the size of grapefruit while on the drugs (yeah, sex wasn't fun at that time, neither was walking, or sitting, or any type of moving around). I'm jealous of those women who get pregnant and it's wonderful and romantic to do so - it was an incredibly painful process for me, but worth it.

Too bad I have problems GETTING pregnant- I had no problems BEING pregnant. No morning sickness, nothing like that. And easy labors and deliveries with wonderfully wide birthing hips.

 

[trustwomen]

Wow, this thread has certainly evolved into a debate.

Panda, you and your dogs! You seem to empathise better with them than with anyone else. I'm a dog-owner, so I can understand your love of dogs. But its really silly to expect other people's emotions to follow your own personal rules of logic, don't you think? There are a lot of emotions involved in having an abortion, even if you don't believe the fetus to be a living sentient being, there are hormones, guilt-trips laid by society, you know-its so complex. You don't get hormones when you remove a wart, you don't think about what a big mistake you made, or how your family and parts of society will look down on you, or how maybe one day you want to have kids but this is not the right time, or wondering whether it was a boy or a girl. You don't have to make a huge decision between bringing another life into this world under bad circumstances and choosing not to.

Panda, I'm pro-choice (for the woman, not the fetus just in case you wondering).
I've never really understood why abortions can't be performed past a certain stage- just seems so arbitrary to me. I'm not one of those people who will argue that the fetus is unfeeling. So you can call me a murderer if you want, I don't really care. I just think that right-to-lifers take the right to life to such an extreme that its ridiculous. People get so hung up on moral theory that they push it to extremes. I don't think just about living, I also think about the quality of life, about whats best for all involved. I don't think its good for society to bring unwanted children into the world-I don't think its a good life for the child, or for the mother. I feel that there is already a big population problem in the world, so bringing in more is not good for society as a whole. I don't think that being stuck unconscious on a ventilator is a good life, I don't think that dying in excruciating pain while losing control over your mental functioning is better than dying with dignity. I believe in personal choice. During my free time, I sometimes wonder what the absolute right-to-lifers plan on doing with all those unwanted babies.

Oh, and in case your were wondering? I have a Rottweiler who I love almost more than anyone in the world. One day a few years ago I came home to see the ugliest, mangiest (it was hereditary mange) dog in the neighborhood humping her in the backyard. I took her to the Vet and she had a doggy abortion. It just wasn't a good time in either of our lives to have a litter of puppies. I'm happy to say that she has since experienced the joys of motherhood; a proud mother of 11! And I have never thought twice about it. The last thing this world needed was a bunch of unwanted mangy Rottweiler mutts running around terrorizing the neighborhood.

 

[Brainsucker]

Eeesh, too scary. I'd want to be able to stay home at least a year with each. Besides, then they'd be growing up all through med school and residency and I would miss so much... Honestly, I may just go FP and have them at 36, after residency...

You might not have to wait until after residency if you go FP. I hear they can be a lot more flexible than other programs. You might be interested to read theunderweardrawer.blogspot.com. It might not be all that reassuring a blog, but it's certainly interesting.

 

[trustwomen]

My mother was disgustingly fertile as well. I had.. issues. I lost an ovary when I was three to a terratoma which was literally killing me (they found it on exploratory surgery 'cuz they really didn't know what the h#ll was wrong). My other ovary is in primary failure. I knew this going in trying to get pregnant, and had actually been told all my life I would never have children.

Ah - primary infertility. I am reassured - sorry, hope that doesn't seem mean, but most infertility is primary; secondary infertility (i.e. you've been pregnant before but now you can't) is rare and usually STD-associated. And I'm one of those internal-locus people (right down to the anxiety), meaning I am not too worried about something like that getting past me.

About your selective termination question - it would be an emotional decision, for sure, but if faced with (say) all five babies almost certainly dying, or two babies almost certainly surviving, it's a no-brainer for me. That McCaughey woman was irresponsible IMO. I look forward to reading others' opinions. What are your feelings on this ShyRem?

 

[ShyRem]

No offense taken with your 'reassurance', trust. Infertility is a horrible thing for any woman to face.

As for selective reduction: it was a no-brainer. I have extensive scar tissue that would almost certainly have ruptured had I been pregnant with multiples. As it was, the scar tissue was stretched to the limit both times (my lap scar goes all the way from the xyphoid to the symphisis pubis). We had discussed the issue prior to the fertility treatments and decided if it was a problem to selectively terminate to at most two. I'm sure there would have been more discussions with a specialist had the issue come up.

As for the McCaughey children - I think a great deal of irresponsibility should also be placed on her physician. I was VERY closely monitored - transvag ultrasounds looking at follicle development (number, size, stage) several times through the month during each month of treatments. Having that many children all at once makes me wonder about the medication and dosages she was taking. I had heard that about 50% of the time it is easier to get pg after the first fertility-drug-induced child and the other 50% it shuts you down more. (I got shut down more - it was significantly more difficult getting pregnant with my son.) I wonder how closely she was monitored during her infertility treatments.

 

[8744]

Wow, this thread has certainly evolved into a debate.

Panda, you and your dogs! You seem to empathise better with them than with anyone else. I'm a dog-owner, so I can understand your love of dogs. But its really silly to expect other people's emotions to follow your own personal rules of logic, don't you think? There are a lot of emotions involved in having an abortion, even if you don't believe the fetus to be a living sentient being, there are hormones, guilt-trips laid by society, you know-its so complex. You don't get hormones when you remove a wart, you don't think about what a big mistake you made, or how your family and parts of society will look down on you, or how maybe one day you want to have kids but this is not the right time, or wondering whether it was a boy or a girl. You don't have to make a huge decision between bringing another life into this world under bad circumstances and choosing not to.

Panda, I'm pro-choice (for the woman, not the fetus just in case you wondering).
I've never really understood why abortions can't be performed past a certain stage- just seems so arbitrary to me. I'm not one of those people who will argue that the fetus is unfeeling. So you can call me a murderer if you want, I don't really care. I just think that right-to-lifers take the right to life to such an extreme that its ridiculous. People get so hung up on moral theory that they push it to extremes. I don't think just about living, I also think about the quality of life, about whats best for all involved. I don't think its good for society to bring unwanted children into the world-I don't think its a good life for the child, or for the mother. I feel that there is already a big population problem in the world, so bringing in more is not good for society as a whole. I don't think that being stuck unconscious on a ventilator is a good life, I don't think that dying in excruciating pain while losing control over your mental functioning is better than dying with dignity. I believe in personal choice. During my free time, I sometimes wonder what the absolute right-to-lifers plan on doing with all those unwanted babies.

Oh, and in case your were wondering? I have a Rottweiler who I love almost more than anyone in the world. One day a few years ago I came home to see the ugliest, mangiest (it was hereditary mange) dog in the neighborhood humping her in the backyard. I took her to the Vet and she had a doggy abortion. It just wasn't a good time in either of our lives to have a litter of puppies. I'm happy to say that she has since experienced the joys of motherhood; a proud mother of 11! And I have never thought twice about it. The last thing this world needed was a bunch of unwanted mangy Rottweiler mutts running around terrorizing the neighborhood.

I am not against dog abortion for the same reason I am not against euthanasia for unwanted dogs. They really do suffer if abandoned and as they have no capacity to understand their suffering or even rise above it it is the merciful thing to do. Not that I wouldn't take more dogs if I could. I'd take more children too but do you know that it is costing us 40,000 bucks to adopt our next child? I understand that we need to avoid the practice of buying and selling children but 40K?

I apologize for being sarcastic. Anybody who loves dogs can't be all bad.