Abortion

oranbhoy67

Fizzlesque wrote: »

Funny you should post that, because I was thinking along similar lines earlier - perhaps more men should have a vasectomy (especially those who are militantly opposed to abortion) and have it reversed when they're ready to start a family.

whats the difference between militantly opposed to abortion & just opposed???



I hate the way people make out that men dont have a say on abortion.. im sorry., it is a Womans body off course , but she is carrying a mans child always.


Im all for womens rights , but that does not include the right to take another humans life.. it is something that i will never ever agree with pro- abortionists on!

eviltwin

tomtherobot wrote: »

If somebody you are counseling is suffering because of a false belief, would you set them right on that belief or allow them to suffer?

If you think you mum was murdered when in fact she died in her sleep, she died a peaceful death. That is a FACT. So yeah I would tell you.

Re a pregnant woman having a miscarriage in the first few weeks, the whole "is it a life" thing is really up to the person themselves. So I wouldn't disrespect a woman who is grieving by telling her she is over reacting.

Would you tell a woman who has a miscarriage and is okay with it that she should be in mourning ?

tomtherobot

eviltwin wrote: »

I never said it did I mentioned it because you said in an earlier post that people shouldn't be paying taxes to help people who are in situations of their own making. I made the point I deal with people in violent relationships, one could argue that is of their own making and I asked you would you stop the state supporting my employer ( which you didn't answer )

My opinion is only an opinion, no more or less valid than yours but having been through an abortion personally I think my experience is important to debunk the myths that are on these threads.

This is the first time you've mentioned your abortion. As regards your being a counselor I never said that people who suffer domestic abuse shouldn't get counseling, in fact i have been quite clear in saying they should.

I don't think that people who perpetrate domestic violence, or that might advocate it as a fair choice, are in a position to demand state funding for it's victims.

eviltwin

tomtherobot wrote: »

This is the first time you've mentioned your abortion. As regards your being a counselor I never said that people who suffer domestic abuse shouldn't get counseling, in fact i have been quite clear in saying they should.

I don't think that people who perpetrate domestic violence, or that might advocate it as a fair choice, are in a position to demand state funding for it's victims.

Post 22 I mentioned it. I don't know how to link it. Go back and read.

The state does give funding to help for people who are violent to their partners. The idea being that if we deal with them rather than always deal with their victims we reduce the number of victims, have a lot less violence and therefore save money.

tomtherobot

eviltwin wrote: »

So I wouldn't disrespect a woman who is grieving by telling her she is over reacting.

But by saying an unborn child isn't really alive, it's clearly implicit that somebody is overreacting if their grieving a death.

eviltwin

tomtherobot wrote: »

But by saying an unborn child isn't really alive, it's clearly implicit that somebody is overreacting if their grieving a death.

But that's MY opinion. Its not hers so I am not going to make her feel worse than she already is. Its about knowing when to shut the fcuk up.

tomtherobot

eviltwin wrote: »

Post 22 I mentioned it. I don't know how to link it. Go back and read.

Fair enough, i need to catch up on my reading.

eviltwin wrote: »

The state does give funding to help for people who are violent to their partners. The idea being that if we deal with them rather than always deal with their victims we reduce the number of victims, have a lot less violence and therefore save money.

Your talking about a different thing. Is it not hypocritical for the perpetrators of domestic violence, or those that would justify it, to demand state funding for it's victims?

Morag

People grieve potential life's and potential children.
It happens you don't have to even have been pregnant for it to happen.

eviltwin

tomtherobot wrote: »

Your talking about a different thing. Is it not hypocritical for the perpetrators of domestic violence, or those that would justify it, to demand state funding for it's victims?

Sorry I misread your post. I imagine some of those people hate the fact their taxes are going to the likes of Amen or Safe Ireland. Equally there are probably victims who have been abused by partners angry the state gives money to legal aid for these guys.

To go back to the abortion issue I know many people who are pro-life who work with post abortion services, some do it for free! They don't agree with abortion but are mature enough to realise that it happens and needs to be dealt with. Approx 250 women a day travel overseas to have one. Its not right to leave the ones who are suffering to just get by on their own. Long term those women and men could have huge issues that could have massive implications for them, their family, society as a whole really.

Martyn1989

tomtherobot wrote: »

Firstly, maintenance payments for children? How can a society, or individual, who supports a woman's exclusive right to chose to have an abortion at the same time come to fathers with the paw out looking for money to support children. If a father has no choice whether the child is alive or not how can he be demanded to support that child? Makes no sense whatsoever to me.

I don't know why these issues always have to be about being 'fair' to men and women. Men and woman are biologically different therefore there are many facts of life that will shift this balance of 'fairness' from one to the other across the board. IMO it is the womans body therefore would be the womans choice ultimately, and regardless of that mans opinion on the matter it is his responsibility as the father to be in the childs life and pay his share of the costs associated with bringing up a child.

tomtherobot

eviltwin wrote: »

But that's MY opinion. Its not hers so I am not going to make her feel worse than she already is. Its about knowing when to shut the fcuk up.

Well my friend when it comes to right and wrong, im sure you know, there is no universal fact. There is no scientific proof that it is right or wrong to kill. People formulate opinions and use these opinions, beliefs or morals (call them what you will) to establish codes we should live by.

In establishing these codes we often use human experience as guideline. Experience shows that the grief suffered through miscarriage or stillbirth being greater than the 'sense of loss' possible from say, contraception, allows that something tangible has been lost.

This to me is as close as we will get to proof that an unborn child has 'life' and because i respect the grief of a child lost in this manner, as i respect the grief of life lost in other ways, I believe we should protect this life, even if it means not shutting up because it's the easy choice.

Khannie

eviltwin wrote: »

But that's MY opinion. Its not hers so I am not going to make her feel worse than she already is. Its about knowing when to shut the fcuk up.

It's an interesting point though. Would your opinion be that someone who's grieving for the loss of an early pregnancy is overreacting because from your perspective it's just a bunch of cells?

I mean, I don't like it when people kill insects. Not at all. I think it would be overreacting to grieve for them though.

eviltwin

tomtherobot wrote: »

Well my friend when it comes to right and wrong, im sure you know, there is no universal fact. There is no scientific proof that it is right or wrong to kill. People formulate opinions and use these opinions, beliefs or morals (call them what you will) to establish codes we should live by.

In establishing these codes we often use human experience as guideline. Experience shows that the grief suffered through miscarriage or stillbirth being greater than the 'sense of loss' possible from say, contraception, allows that something tangible has been lost.

This to me is as close as we will get to proof that an unborn child has 'life' and because i respect the grief of a child lost in this manner, as i respect the grief of life lost in other ways, I believe we should protect this life, even if it means not shutting up because it's the easy choice.

Women accessing support after an abortion have already done the deed so there won't be any life to save, why deny them help then if they need it, its not going to change anything.

eviltwin

Khannie wrote: »

It's an interesting point though. Would your opinion be that someone who's grieving for the loss of an early pregnancy is overreacting because from your perspective it's just a bunch of cells?

I mean, I don't like it when people kill insects. Not at all. I think it would be overreacting to grieve for them though.

Dunno, depends again on the situation. I know women trying for babies who have had meltdowns when they get their period. I personally can't understand that reaction but like I said before its not my place to tell them how they should feel.

Mickeroo

Khannie wrote: »

It's an interesting point though. Would your opinion be that someone who's grieving for the loss of an early pregnancy is overreacting because from your perspective it's just a bunch of cells?

I mean, I don't like it when people kill insects. Not at all. I think it would be overreacting to grieve for them though.

Not everyone who has a miscarriage grieves for the loss of their pregnancy, some just accept it and try again. Miscarriages are fairly common in the early stage of a pregnancy are they not? It's a personal thing, there's no real definitive answer. Personally I can't compare a miscarriage to killing an insect tbh.

If someone's trying to have kids I'd imagine a miscarriage is a pretty emotional experience after the initial excitement of being pregnant, to be already dreaming of the child that will arrive in 9 months only to have that taken away and having to try again. It's not particularly easy to get pregnant in the first place a lot of the time, I know a couple who were trying for almost a year before it finally happened, of course a miscarriage could be devastating.

I really don't understand this line of questioning tbh as miscarrying a child you wanted to have is entirely different to aborting one you don't though I imagine both can be extremely traumatising in their own way.

Khannie

Mickeroo wrote: »

Personally I can't compare a miscarriage to killing an insect tbh.

Ah it's just part of the discussion. I'm trying to understand the extent of the opposing view really. It's an extension of the "just a bunch of cells" / "not a human" notion.

Neyite

Khannie wrote: »

What hospital was that Neyite? We've had more than statistically significant number of miscarriages and for our last 4 pregnancies we've been sent to the early pregnancy unit for scans without any issue at all. We just rang the hospital and asked if memory serves (Rotunda).

It was Galway city. I was told a month or so afterwards by a midwife that if I had just turned up, they could not have turned me away, but me being polite thought it would be manners to call them first. Wont make that mistake again!

Sponge25 wrote: »

How long does it take before a lady feels symptomatic of pregnancy? Anyone ever seen 'I didn't know I was pregnant' or some similiar titled documentary about women who suddenly find themselves giving birth in the bath or the kitchen floor without even knowing they were pregnant untill they went into labour!?

The only symptom I had, right up until the kicking started was missed periods. If I hadnt been tracking and actively trying to get pregnant, and peeing on lots of sticks, I probably wouldnt have noticed a missed period for a few weeks otherwise. But rarely women can have zero symptoms and continue to have periods.

Khannie

Meant to answer this....

Mickeroo wrote: »

Miscarriages are fairly common in the early stage of a pregnancy are they not?

Around the 20% mark (from memory).

Morag

Mickeroo wrote: »

I really don't understand this line of questioning tbh as miscarrying a child you wanted to have is entirely different to aborting one you don't though I imagine both can be extremely traumatising in their own way.

I do, cos even if a woman chooses to have an abortion there is always the what if. Those women also greive even if it was the right choice for them. But when what would have been the due date some around and for the next few years the date of the abortion and what would have been the birthday of the baby they didn't' have comes around they will get upset over it.

It's normal, but what isn't is not being able to tell anyone why they are upset/sad/down/off forum. It can be hard when in families someone close to her later announces they are pregnant and is due around the same time.

It is the same emotional roller coaster as a woman who has had a miscarriage but it's not that long ago that those who had miscarriages suffered in the same sort of silence not telling anyone, or only telling a few were as for most of the thousands of women who have had abortions they couldn't tell anyone for fear of of the shunning, shaming and abuse they would have gotten.

I know I am one of the few lucky ones who was able to tell family and friends get support and I was able then able to be there for when family members miscarried and explain the emotional and mental roller coaster and help them with it.

tomtherobot

Khannie wrote: »

I mean, I don't like it when people kill insects. Not at all. I think it would be overreacting to grieve for them though.

TBH if i lose my car keys I fall to pieces. Most people don't. From this i can deduce that for most people loosing car keys isn't such a big loss.

If i take it that people typically suffer more from the loss of miscarriage than the potential loss of contraception or masturbation I can deduce that something more important has been lost.

Science can't tell me it's wrong to kill. We base that moral code on the value we give to human life, which is largely deduced from our intuitive relationship to human life.

I'm arguing we can use this same intuitive deduction to show the value of life before birth. Why do people (even pro-abortionists) talk about the trauma involved with abortion if something valuable hasn't been lost?

up for anything

Matt_Trakker wrote: »

most women don't even know they're pregnant until 12 weeks, kinda pointless to have an abortion if ya don't even know you're pregnant.

Most women these days know they are pregnant before they even miss a period.

The twelve week idea comes from long ago when the most sure way of knowing you were pregnant was to miss three periods - also a fail safe in case you miscarried.

tomtherobot wrote: »

Fine, go and tell people mourning a miscarriage or a stillbirth that it wasn't a life just a little bunch of clustered up cells

And you have been told continually throughout this thread by a lot of people that for some, miscarriage/stillbirth/abortion brings about the end of the possibility of life. Why would you tell someone mourning a miscarriage or a stillbirth that they shouldn't be sad over that?

tomtherobot wrote: »

But by saying an unborn child isn't really alive, it's clearly implicit that somebody is overreacting if their grieving a death.

See above. You keep saying the same thing over and over again but in different ways in order to force reactions, for what reason I don't understand.

Sponge25 wrote: »

haha, yeah I heard girls boobies hurt when they're pregnant sometimes! Maybe it's something to do with milk production to feed the baby?

Sponge25 wrote: »

Well atleast he/she's happy and that's what really matters? I know you're sad but the babies what matters most? huh?

Sponge25 wrote: »

It's not unusual for some girls to not get a period an odd month! Is it?

Sponge25 wrote: »

I know Ireland has no jurisdiction over the UK but where does Ireland stand on woman going to the UK for abortions? Legally etc? even if it's not mentioned, what's the opinion of officials etc?

Disingenous or not really 25 but a slow 15.

Mickeroo

Sharrow wrote: »

I do, cos even if a woman chooses to have an abortion there is always the what if. Those women also greive even if it was the right choice for them. But when what would have been the due date some around and for the next few years the date of the abortion and what would have been the birthday of the baby they didn't' have comes around they will get upset over it.

It's normal, but what isn't is not being able to tell anyone why they are upset/sad/down/off forum. It can be hard when in families someone close to her later announces they are pregnant and is due around the same time.

It is the same emotional roller coaster as a woman who has had a miscarriage but it's not that long ago that those who had miscarriages suffered in the same sort of silence not telling anyone, or only telling a few were as for most of the thousands of women who have had abortions they couldn't tell anyone for fear of of the shunning, shaming and abuse they would have gotten.

I know I am one of the few lucky ones who was able to tell family and friends get support and I was able then able to be there for when family members miscarried and explain the emotional and mental roller coaster and help them with it.

I get that, I just think there must be a different set of emotions involved. I'd imagine feelings of guilt over whether you made the right decision or not would be unique to abortion compared to miscarriage, if you get what I mean.

The bit i didn't understand in the question is how they could think people who are pro-choice would consider it silly or something to be upset over a miscarriage/abortion. Thats what it seemed was being suggested.

Nodin

tomtherobot wrote: »

............

I'm arguing we can use this same intuitive deduction to show the value of life before birth. Why do people (even pro-abortionists) talk about the trauma involved with abortion if something valuable hasn't been lost?

This has been explained to you before. I'd suggest you're trolling at this stage.

tomtherobot

up for anything wrote: »

Why would you tell someone mourning a miscarriage or a stillbirth that they shouldn't be sad over that?

If never said that at all. In fact the opposite, I greatly sympathize with those who lose a child in this manner. I think that should be clear from reading my posts.

Morag

Mickeroo wrote: »

I get that, I just think there must be a different set of emotions involved. I'd imagine feelings of guilt over whether you made the right decision or not would be unique to abortion compared to miscarriage, if you get what I mean.

The bit i didn't understand in the question is how they could think people who are pro-choice would consider it silly or something to be upset over a miscarriage/abortion. Thats what it seemed was being suggested.

That is cos certain people think we have to be unfeeling monsters or else we would not be pro choice.

Khannie

tomtherobot wrote: »

the value of life before birth.

You and I are in agreement on that front (in case you thought I was disagreeing with you).

tomtherobot

Mickeroo wrote: »

The bit i didn't understand in the question is how they could think people who are pro-choice would consider it silly or something to be upset over a miscarriage/abortion. Thats what it seemed was being suggested.

I didn't say that at all and my apologies for any inadvertent offense if it has been understood that way.

My point, if pro-abortionists had the courage of their convictions ie that an unborn child isn't alive, they would be surely willing to share this with people grieving to lesson their loss.

Khannie

Sharrow wrote: »

That is cos certain people think we have to be unfeeling monsters or else we would not be pro choice.

I put forward / reiterated the question so I'm guessing that's aimed at me and you're entirely wrong. I don't believe that pro choice = unfeeling monster in the slightest. I understand the argument for choice. I would go so far as to say that it is a logical argument. I just firmly believe that the right to life should take precedence over it.

It is difficult for me to see a developing foetus as a "bunch of cells" (that phrase has been used in this thread). If it were merely a bunch of cells, why would it be worth grieving over? It's a fairly straightforward extension in logic. You don't grieve when you cut your nails for example. If you believe that it's just a bunch of cells (and I'm not saying that you do, but others who have posted in this thread do) then the question is a reasonable one. If you don't believe the "bunch of cells" business, then the question isn't aimed at you.

Mickeroo

tomtherobot wrote: »

I didn't say that at all and my apologies for any inadvertent offense if it has been understood that way.

My point, if pro-abortionists had the courage of their convictions ie that an unborn child isn't alive, they would be surely willing to share this with people grieving to lesson their loss.

But that would require a complete lack of empathy or sensitivity and not to mention a high level of stupidity rather than courage. You're pretty much suggesting what you apologised for not suggesting in the same post

I think most would just try and support their friend through their grief tbh.

Khannie

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think most would just try and support their friend through their grief tbh.

I agree, but I think you're missing the point (and I believe it's an interesting one). If you believe that it's just a bunch of cells as some in this thread have, you could argue that it's entirely ridiculous for them to grieve.

up for anything

up for anything wrote:

And you have been told continually throughout this thread by a lot of people that for some, miscarriage/stillbirth/abortion brings about the end of the possibility of life. Why would you tell someone mourning a miscarriage or a stillbirth that they shouldn't be sad over that?

tomtherobot wrote: »

If never said that at all. In fact the opposite, I greatly sympathize with those who lose a child in this manner. I think that should be clear from reading my posts.

Apologies, for the unclarity of that sentence. I should really have written: Why should I tell someone mourning a miscarriage or a stillbirth that they shouldn't be sad over that - just because I believe abortion is not murdering an unborn child?

You are still harping on about:

if pro-abortionists had the courage of their convictions ie that an unborn child isn't alive, they would be surely willing to share this with people grieving to lesson their loss.

You should really have said if some pro-abortionists....

tomtherobot

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think most would just try and support their friend through their grief tbh.

If i truly believed that an unborn child was just a bunch of lifeless cells and if my friend was grieving a miscarriage I think it would be my responsibility to share that belief with them.

In the real world it would be a horrible and insensitive thing to do because we intuitively know an unborn child has great value.

tomtherobot

up for anything wrote: »

You should really have said if some pro-abortionists....

Sorry if that's the case, do some pro-abortionists believe an unborn child is alive, if then why pro-abortion?

Khannie

up for anything wrote: »

Why would you tell someone mourning a miscarriage or a stillbirth that they shouldn't be sad over that?

Just so we're clear....I think it would be entirely ruthless and entirely disgusting to tell someone that they're being a muppet to grieve over the loss of a bunch of cells. I could see though how someone might consider it a ridiculous overreaction if there view was that it was just a bunch of cells. I am more wondering if such people actually exist.

Khannie

tomtherobot wrote: »

If i truly believed that an unborn child was just a bunch of lifeless cells and if my friend was grieving a miscarriage I think it would be my responsibility to share that belief with them.

Why? It's not going to make them feel any better.

B0jangles

How do you explain the devastating pain a person can feel when their doctor tells them they are infertile? They will probably feel an intense grief for the loss of a potential child/children that never existed at all. Would you tell them that the children they might greeve for are entirely imaginary and to get over themselves?

That grief is real though - same as the grief a woman who miscarries a wanted pregnancy can feel, as can her parter even though he/she is not carrying the pregnancy. It's the desire for a wanted child being denied that brings the grief. A woman who opts for an abortion does not want that potential child so the feelings of devastation grief may well not be there.

Morag

Khannie wrote: »

I put forward / reiterated the question so I'm guessing that's aimed at me and you're entirely wrong. I don't believe that pro choice = unfeeling monster in the slightest. I understand the argument for choice. I would go so far as to say that it is a logical argument. I just firmly believe that the right to life should take precedence over it.

It is difficult for me to see a developing foetus as a "bunch of cells" (that phrase has been used in this thread). If it were merely a bunch of cells, why would it be worth grieving over? It's a fairly straightforward extension in logic. You don't grieve when you cut your nails for example. If you believe that it's just a bunch of cells (and I'm not saying that you do, but others who have posted in this thread do) then the question is a reasonable one. If you don't believe the "bunch of cells" business, then the question isn't aimed at you.

Nope wasn't aimed at you.
It was aimed people whom I have interacted who are pro life and think if they can just wake up women who have abortions to the fact they are killing a baby it will stop abortions.

From conception there is the potential for a brand new person the likes of which has never happened before that is what differentiates human embryos from nail clippings and I would ever deny that.

Every woman who has an abortion knows well that if they continued the pregnancy there would be a baby. Having an abortion is about stopping that process and then it comes down to for me the person or the potential person and it is the person who already exists and their life which I will end up siding with for the most part esp with in the 1st 12 weeks.

Morag

B0jangles wrote: »

How do you explain the devastating pain a person can feel when their doctor tells them they are infertile? They will probably feel an intense grief for the loss of a potential child/children that never existed at all. Would you tell them that the children they might greeve for are entirely imaginary and to get over themselves?

That grief is real though - same as the grief a woman who miscarries a wanted pregnancy can feel, as can her parter even though he/she is not carrying the pregnancy. It's the desire for a wanted child being denied that brings the grief. A woman who opts for an abortion does not want that potential child so the feelings of devastation grief may well not be there.

For some women who abort it is there, they want kids, would want to be able to have this kid but thier life circumstances are such they choose not to.

Khannie

B0jangles wrote: »

A woman who opts for an abortion does not want that potential child so the feelings of devastation grief may well not be there.

I believe that some women who abort do want the child but it's not "the right time" or whatever. I believe that lots of women who abort suffer grief as Sharrow said. edit: Jinx.

Mickeroo

Khannie wrote: »

I agree, but I think you're missing the point (and I believe it's an interesting one). If you believe that it's just a bunch of cells as some in this thread have, you could argue that it's entirely ridiculous for them to grieve.

I don't really buy the bunch of cells thing. Technically a fully grown adult human is a bunch of cells. I see where you're coming from to a point. Would I be wrong in saying when people grieve for the loss of an unborn child it seems to me they aren't specifically grieving for the actual foetus, they are grieving for what they hoped foetus would eventually become? (basically trying to say what B0jangles said above but failing to do so )

Personally I wouldn't call a foetus a bunch of lifeless cells but neither would I value it the same as a child that has already been born. If you gave me a choice of saving a baby a few weeks old over an unborn baby I'd save the born one everytime without hesitation.

tomtherobot wrote: »

If i truly believed that an unborn child was just a bunch of lifeless cells and if my friend was grieving a miscarriage I think it would be my responsibility to share that belief with them.

In the real world it would be a horrible and insensitive thing to do because we intuitively know an unborn child has great value.

Ok I see your logic. i think. I would consider it skewed though.

tomtherobot wrote: »

Sorry if that's the case, do some pro-abortionists believe an unborn child is alive, if then why pro-abortion?

Alive but not self aware. Just to be clear I'm talking about the early stages of pregnancy before the foetus has a fully functioning human body of it's own. There's a point in a pregnancy where abortion becomes very wrong imo.

Mensch Maschine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkgDhDa4HHo

Morag

Emotional reactions and responses to having had an abortion are not so black and white there are a range of them and to try and state other wise is harmful and well dumb imo.

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/09/05/evidenced-based-activism-misunderstanding-abortion-regret

“I Regret My Abortion:” we’ve all seen this infamous anti-choice sign, whether at a rally or outside a clinic. As pro-choice activists, our knee-jerk reaction may be to respond, whether aloud or in our own minds, with a reference to the plethora of research that suggests that relief, not regret, is the most commonly reported feeling after abortion. Yet our knee-jerk reaction may be as stigmatizing as the anti-choice sign itself. When we rely on a relief/regret dichotomy, we leave little room for the complexity inherent in women’s reproductive lives.

Both the pro-choice and pro-life movements create simplistic narratives about women’s attachment to pregnancy. The pro-choice movement claims that women who have abortions do not experience regret afterwards because they form no attachment to their pregnancy, while conversely, the anti-choice movement claims that women always experience regret after an abortion because of an instantaneous bond with the pregnancy.

The competing narratives of relief or regret alienate women who have more complicated relationships to their unwanted pregnancies. In her article “(Mis)Understanding Abortion Regret,” sociologist Katrina Kimport explores what makes some abortions more difficult emotional experiences than others (for a video abstract of her paper, see here). She argues that instead of enforcing a relief/regret binary, we need to understand the emotional circumstances in which abortion decisions occur.

To explore what makes some abortions emotionally difficult for some women, Kimport draws on in-depth interviews with 21 women recruited through two separate secular post-abortion support talklines. She postulates that emotional difficulty related to abortion has at least three factors:

1. Social disapproval

Social disapproval encompasses stigma, personal beliefs about abortion, and expectations of certain emotional reactions. For some women, social disapproval takes the form of experiencing judgment about the abortion from friends or family. For other women, it means confronting their lack of grief about the abortion after expecting to feel sadness.

2. Romantic relationship loss

Women who fell into this category were predominantly experiencing grief over the loss of a relationship, not the loss of a pregnancy. This includes shifts in relationships, unsupportive partners, and break-ups (often as a result of the pregnancy, not the abortion). One participant elaborated on the significance of relationship loss, saying, “I don’t think abortion can be emotionally harmful. I think the people in a woman’s life who are not supportive of her can be emotionally harmful.”

3. Emotional conflict between head and heart

Kimport defines this category as composed of women who “saw abortion as the logical choice in their current circumstances, but some significant part of them also wanted to continue the pregnancy.” This includes myriad circumstances, such as women who want to raise a child but know that they can’t realistically afford to parent, women who want to parent but not with their current partner, and even women with medical conditions that make a current pregnancy unsafe. Notably, there were no clear demographic patterns among women who fit this category, and belonging in this category often also experienced social disapproval and/or relationship loss, compounding their experience of emotional difficulty.

We know that most abortions are not emotionally difficult. So what can we learn from women who have emotional difficulty around abortion? Kimport’s goal is not to provide us with an exhaustive list of sources of emotional difficulty around abortion. Instead, she suggests a new framework that emphasizes focusing on a woman’s relationship to her pregnancy, allowing for complex, even conflicting feelings.

In our continuing efforts to speak about abortion experiences with authenticity, we need to move past a regret/relief dichotomy that debates the effects of abortion procedure. Instead, Kimport suggests ways of framing the issue that more expansively consider the woman’s experience, such as “some circumstances can make abortion emotionally difficult,” or, to put it more simply, some abortions are hard. Kimport’s study adds to the body of literature that asserts that it’s often not the abortion itself that causes emotional difficulty, but rather the circumstances surrounding the abortion.

It’s also important to note that emotional difficulty with abortion is not a reason to restrict abortion. Mandatory ultrasounds, waiting periods, TRAP laws, and other restrictions do nothing to improve the emotional experiences of women obtaining abortions—they do not make friends and family less judgmental, they do not improve relationships, and they do not help a woman overcome a head vs heart conflict.

Kimport’s article opens the door for a more nuanced discussion of supporting women who have abortions on their own terms. She also invites us to consider more complex questions: How can we change the feeling rules around abortion such that women don’t expect to feel grief afterwards? How can we prepare women for the judgment they may face from friends, or from themselves? Kimport’s article provides more evidence that women need depoliticized support to process any complex feelings they may have after an abortion. It’s our job now to use her research to make that happen.

daisybelle2008

tomtherobot wrote: »

Fine, go and tell people mourning a miscarriage or a stillbirth that it wasn't a life just a little bunch of clustered up cells. Can you give me something more than just calling my arguments flawed?

OK why do religious people who believe in Heaven etc. bother grieving at all if the dead person has gone to everlasting paradise? Surely they are failing in their beliefs not to be dancing around and celebrating and telling everyone to cop on as they are now with the 'saviour'?
Surely it is selfish for them to be grieving and not pointing that out?

B0jangles

Sharrow wrote: »

For some women who abort it is there, they want kids, would want to be able to have this kid but thier life circumstances are such they choose not to.

Sorry, I never meant to suggest that some women aren't forced by very difficult circumstances to choose to abort a pregnancy that they might otherwise have chosen to continue with; I was just trying to present a possible situation to explain why it is perfectly reasonable for one person to grieve after a miscarriage at a very early stage and another person to feel perfectly able to have an abortion at exactly the same stage and not feel that they are doing more than removing a clump of developing tissue.

Basically that there are no absolutes about how someone might feel about these situations, only infinite shades of grey.

Dangerous Man

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yes I've no doubt they exist but using the tiny tiny tiny minority to support your argument is a little facetious imo.

Couldn't agree more. So do you think that pro-abortionists will stop using rape or spurious claims of medical emergency as a basis for legitimizing the killing of the unborn on demand? No - neither do I.

Dangerous Man

daisybelle2008 wrote: »

OK why do religious people who believe in Heaven etc. bother grieving at all if the dead person has gone to everlasting paradise? Surely they are failing in their beliefs not to be dancing around and celebrating and telling everyone to cop on as they are now with the 'saviour'?
Surely it is selfish for them to be grieving and not pointing that out?

This debate has nothing to do with religion. I'm an atheist and am pro-life. If my beliefs run in accord with what some religious institutes preach / believe - it's not because I believe in that religion or some god / deity. Forget about religion - focusing on it won't get you anywhere.

tomtherobot

Khannie wrote: »

Why? It's not going to make them feel any better.

Well you and I both know that because we can see what a bunch of BS it is. This situation should show any rational caring person what a load of BS it is that an unborn child is just a bunch of cells.

B0jangles wrote: »

How do you explain the devastating pain a person can feel when their doctor tells them they are infertile? They will probably feel an intense grief for the loss of a potential child/children that never existed at all. Would you tell them that the children they might greeve for are entirely imaginary and to get over themselves?

That grief is real though - same as the grief a woman who miscarries a wanted pregnancy can feel, as can her parter even though he/she is not carrying the pregnancy. It's the desire for a wanted child being denied that brings the grief. A woman who opts for an abortion does not want that potential child so the feelings of devastation grief may well not be there.

Firstly, i'm not saying that people who miscarry don't grieve, very much the opposite and this has been covered.

You make an interesting point regarding infertile people or couples. I can see how devastating this would be and these people have my utmost sympathy. I still don't think it's a valid comparison. Let's say we're looking at the loss of a friend versus the loss of a potential friend. This is still a very different situation from loosing, or not having, the ability to make friends at all.

Sharrow wrote: »

Emotional reactions and responses to having had an abortion are not so black and white there are a range of them and to try and state other wise is harmful and well dumb imo.

I don't know if that's directed at me the but the emotional responses of people having abortions aren't really central to my point.

Also from your list, I believe these might be factors which would cause remorse or upset with anybody who killed.

Esoteric_

tomtherobot wrote: »

Secondly, the Ray D'arcy show this morning was talking about counseling for women after abortion. Seemingly the HSE already pays for this. I can't understand how state support for counseling for women who've had abortions is justified. On one side of the debate, pro abortionists say it's a procedure to remove a physical growth which isn't alive. If that's the case why the need for counseling? On the other side, anti-abortionists say it's murder, so why would the state be counseling murderers? Did I miss something, do we not still have old folk being left to rot on trolleys, surely the HSE has greater priorities now than counseling women who've chose to have an abortion.

So, does that mean that women who have children and develop post natal depression should not receive any government funded treatment for this? I mean, they know the risks, but chose to have the child, amirite?

tomtherobot

LyndaMcL wrote: »

So, does that mean that women who have children and develop post natal depression should not receive any government funded treatment for this? I mean, they know the risks, but chose to have the child, amirite?

Sorry i think i have clarified this already. I'm not against the state funding of counseling for a variety of problems, post-natal depression, domestic violence, drug-abuse and so on. My argument against the state funding of abortion counseling is that it comes without the acknowledgement that abortion is harmful.

Idle Passerby

tomtherobot wrote: »

Sorry i think i have clarified this already. I'm not against the state funding of counseling for a variety of problems, post-natal depression, domestic violence, drug-abuse and so on. My argument against the state funding of abortion counseling is that it comes without the acknowledgement that abortion is harmful.

Well that's what this whole argument comes down to then. Some see the feotus/zygote as a fully formed person with the same human rights as an individual person who can live independently (as in, not inside another person, dependent on their body/blood/food etc for its survival) and other people see it as something, that since it cannot live outside the mother, it is not therefore a fully formed person and not inherently deserving of the rights a fully formed person would have, so aborting it cannot be considered murder.