Does the abortion debate reveal what some people really think about women?

username123

clairefontaine wrote: »

I think you would see more abortions. Locality would make it a more viable choice for a lot of people. And cheaper. No travel plans, also you are not under the same pressure for time. People might still travel though so the "neighbours can't see."

Unmarried fathers can never go to court for this because they cant prove paternity at that stage of a pregnancy. It's a non runner and it's in science fiction territory anyhow. The most that could possibly happen in this kind of scenario is that a woman would be required to sign something that said she informed her husband she was having the procedure. That's about the limit on that.

Maybe you would see more. Its awful to think that cost is a limiting factor for some people - that must really be a terrible situation to be in. I dont have an issue with it rising anyway, especially if the reason is affordability. Mind you we will never know the true figures on abortion as the UK is not the only country women travel to and even in the UK, many Irish women will give the UK address of a friend or relative - so I think it would look a lot higher anyway simply because a truer number would be visible. And yes, there would still be some who would travel - although perhaps just travel to a different part of Ireland?

Excellent point re early stage paternity testing. Never even thought of it.

clairefontaine

username123 wrote: »

Maybe you would see more. Its awful to think that cost is a limiting factor for some people - that must really be a terrible situation to be in. I dont have an issue with it rising anyway, especially if the reason is affordability. Mind you we will never know the true figures on abortion as the UK is not the only country women travel to and even in the UK, many Irish women will give the UK address of a friend or relative - so I think it would look a lot higher anyway simply because a truer number would be visible. And yes, there would still be some who would travel - although perhaps just travel to a different part of Ireland?

Excellent point re early stage paternity testing. Never even thought of it.

It's not just money it's time.

By the time you find out your pregnant, you could be so many weeks along, that doesn't give you much time to make such a big decision, plan a trip, and raise the funds, get time off work or school, and cope with the aftercare, and then jump right back into your life, all under the apparantly more palatable for some "12 week" mark.

iguana

HHobo wrote: »

I'm curios about what happens if a mother decides to give up her newborn for adoption. What legal rights does the biological fathe have? Can he take custody of the child?

Also, if he can and does, can he force the mother to pay child support?

The father can legally adopt the child and, unless there is a very good reason not to allow it (like he was the mother's rapist) the adoption should go through easily.

And no he can't look for child support as the mother has terminated her responsibilities along with her rights, the same as she would if anyone else adopted the child.

eviltwin

Timing is a big issue. Personally I was trying to book flights round work and family, I rushed into it without thinking it through just so I wouldn't miss a crucial period in work. If I could have had the abortion here there would have been less pressure, I would have had time for proper counselling and been more sure of my decision.

Another downside to the situation here is that no abortion means no real provision for proper aftercare physical or mental.

jaffacakesyum

Whispered wrote: »

In general.

You can't force a woman to keep a baby, rightly so, you can't force her to abort, rightly so. But when a father states he wants nothing to do with a child he's still financially responsible for the child.

As I mentioned earlier, it's off topic, but when abortion is legislated for I would also like to see the men involved have some form of choice too. If a woman does have her choice, then surely the man should too (obviously not a physical abortion against the womans wishes, but a type of legal one)

Absolutely.

A father should be allowed a legal abortion and sign a document so that he's completely financially unresponsible for the child. However, he should then not be allowed anything to do with the child later if he changes his mind unless at the discretion of the mother or the child once they reach 18.

In the future (and this is reeeeally looking ahead :pac: ) it would be interesting with women who want an abortion but the father wanting to keep the child, if the embryo could basically be transplanted from the mother to another woman or even some artifical incubator although that sounds completely futuristic and "unnatural"!! However, if it was in the future something that was possible and men's rights group supported it, all the more to them.

But for now, you cannot physically force a woman to be an incubator for something she doesn't want and in many cases wasn't her fault or didn't have a say in to begin with. It's completely backward in my opinion.

Morag

eviltwin wrote: »

Another downside to the situation here is that no abortion means no real provision for proper aftercare physical or mental.

There are family planning clinics and well woman clinics and gps who will do post abortion check ups (should be done at 6 weeks) and who will do referrals to counseling which does not involve saying having an abortion is wrong and praying for forgiveness.

Chemical Burn

No

eviltwin

Morag wrote: »

There are family planning clinics and well woman clinics and gps who will do post abortion check ups (should be done at 6 weeks) and who will do referrals to counseling which does not involve saying having an abortion is wrong and praying for forgiveness.

Yeah but its not long term counselling and tbh I think sometimes you don't need specialists, you just want somewhere to go where you can talk to other women in the same situation and not feel like a freak. At least 150,000 women and its nearly impossible to find any who will talk about it because of the stigma. That's shocking.

Morag

Being involved in pro choice activism I have listened to a lot of women over the years and I agree there should be a support group be it in person or at least online but the stigma of it means it's not been done, yet. It would be something I'd consider getting involved with mind.

rainbow kirby

Chemical Burn wrote: »

No

Care to expand?

Whispered

username123 wrote: »

Is it an issue at all? Was the deception not the problem in the example you used Whispered, as opposed to abortion? Who knows what the guy would have said had he been faced with the unwanted pregnancy.

As far as he was concerned it wasn't unwanted. He would have been delighted, and indeed I've seen him since go on to be a fantastic father to a child with a woman he barely knew. All totally besides the point. Sorry!

But anyway, the reason I mention it wasn't as an anti abortion post at all. You wondered why sometimes the topic veers into fathers rights and I was just clarifying the reason it would be at the forefront of my own mind. Why I personally would bring it up.

poeticseraphim

philologos wrote: »

My point is that a pro-life position isn't anti-woman and that pro-choicers who claim such are lying.

This discussion is not about pro-life or pro-choice positions. It really is not.

And equating adult men and women to a fetus is not helpful.

The point is the tone and attitude of discussion.

The assumptions and hypocrisies it brings out.

Fathers SHOULD be allowed legal abortions.

But then you have a situation where a child grows up knowing it was aborted. And a child who suffers the consequences of that. That does not happen when a woman has one. But a fetus does.

Maybe men should be allowed I don't know.

Maybe you should need a license to get pregnant and abort the rest. (joking n the last part).

But maybe if you are bringing a citizen into the world you should have to do the paper work in advance!

I would consider letting men legal abortions. I have to think about that.

Fizzlesque

eviltwin wrote: »

Yeah but its not long term counselling and tbh I think sometimes you don't need specialists, you just want somewhere to go where you can talk to other women in the same situation and not feel like a freak. At least 150,000 women and its nearly impossible to find any who will talk about it because of the stigma. That's shocking.

This is something I think really needs addressing - and it won't be addressed sufficiently as long as there is guilt and feeling like you'll be judged and all the negative stigma that surrounds abortion.

Because I've always been very open about my daughter, and the fact I chose to have her adopted, I've always been happy to answer the 'do you have children' question with the truth. Over the years I've had lots of conversations with women who had an abortion (at parties, in the pub, random one-off situations, plane journeys; lots of different settings) and for some reason our conversations turned personal and when I've told them about my daughter, they've told me they'd had an abortion, and we've had very open and honest chats about our respective chosen paths. I didn't set out to become an unexpected and occasional confidante to, oftentimes, total strangers, it just turned out that way.

A common theme, I've noticed, is the lack of opportunity to put their experience into words, to talk about it, clear it out from the corners of their mind. Some of the women had only talked to one person, once, and that was it......that would be torture for me. Being able to talk about my daughter has been crucial to my emotional health. Even with it I nearly lost my mind, and my heart is fairly shredded, but without it - I'd possibly have been found dead from a drug overdose, sometime during the past, post-adoption, years.

I know there are obvious differences between pregnancy not ending in motherhood for someone who has had an abortion, and for someone who has had their child adopted, but there are similarities too. To discover you're pregnant is a big thing, no matter which side of the happy-to-be-pregnant fence you're standing on. Something is in your body and that something might or might not grow into a human that wants/needs to be expelled from inside you :eek:

---

> one way or another. Sorry to be so alien about it, but it kind of is - if you spend as long mulling it over, like-so:eek:, as I do. And it's going to change your life - how much it does that, depends on you.

Someone asked why would counseling be needed if it's 'just a bunch of cells' that are being removed. Why do I still need to speak, to almost anyone who will listen, about my daughter, 24 years later? I guess it's because sometimes the right thing to do hurts like hell and 'being right' isn't an antidote to feeling pain.

And sometimes you just want to talk about it because it's good to talk.

All the women I've spoken to have thanked me for the chance to chat about their abortions without feeling judged. I'm glad I was able to give them that, but also feel sad that there's a need out there that's not being met because of (a) stigma/judgement and (b) an erroneous assumption (accusation, perhaps?) that there should be no need for counseling (especially a long time later) if the woman in question was so sure of her decision. Life just ain't that neatly and peachily divided into clear cut lines for us to follow.

We're blessed with the ability to communicate, I say, let's communicate. xx

philologos

poeticseraphim wrote: »

Fathers SHOULD be allowed legal abortions.

But then you have a situation where a child grows up knowing it was aborted. And a child who suffers the consequences of that. That does not happen when a woman has one. But a fetus does.

Maybe men should be allowed I don't know.

Are you actually serious?

I'm sorry, that's absolutely horrific. Are you seriously suggesting that fathers should be able to mandate an abortion?

How the hell is that pro-women's rights?

KamiKazeKitten

philologos wrote: »

Are you actually serious?

I'm sorry, that's absolutely horrific. Are you seriously suggesting that fathers should be able to mandate an abortion?

How the hell is that pro-women's rights?

The poster said legal abortions.
Not forcing a woman to have an abortion, to me it sounds more like the father being able to legally opt out (for want of better words!), and then have a choice whether to raise a child or not.

That's my reading of it anyway - I'm pretty tired right now so maybe I'm way off the mark.

philologos

philologos wrote: »

Are you actually serious?

I'm sorry, that's absolutely horrific. Are you seriously suggesting that fathers should be able to mandate an abortion?

How the hell is that pro-women's rights?

I think PS is referring to a legal abortion insofar as the father could abdicate all parental rights and the mother can't pursue him for child support, if she chooses to have the child instead of abort against his wishes.

Personally I just see this as substituting one injustice for another. Fathers who's partner goes ahead and has a baby they don't want, are presently left with no choice as to the role expected of them, legally and socially. Obviously this is difficult, and an inequality.

Mothers, or pregnant women can choose to abort or adopt, thereby removing themselves legally from the role of mother and its responsibilities. Fathers, or partners of pregnant women do not have this choice.

BUT, I think if we were to offer 'legal' abortions to the would be fathers, we run the risk of turning back the clock when it comes to womens roles as mothers. This could very well see the rise of men who refuse any responsiblity for contraception, since they can walk away consequence free, from its absence or misuse. It also means that the only party to sex who has any consequence to a pregnancy - wanted or unwanted - is the woman.

Its very possible that in time, society could see children as the sole domain of women, with men being seen as more optional than at present. It would also be heaven for a certain type of feckless young male, some of whom rack up several children by different mothers without a second thought at present. I think this quite rare, thankfully.

In this scenario the woman pays in pregnancy and lone parenthood, if she chooses to see the pregnancy to term, or in the (possible) emotional, or physical, or financial consequences of (travelling for) an abortion. Not to mention the stigma.

The woman pays either way, which isn't a more just situation that present, it just changes the person who suffers the injustice.

Of course, the child who's father decides to 'abort' them will know about this and has to learn to live with it, and explain it to their schoolfriends, partners, colleagues and acquaintances throughout their lives, something an aborted foetus doesn't do, and that is likely to be a major issue in many of their lives. So the potential child also pays a price to some degree.

I don't think its fair to make a man a father against his wishes and expect him to pay for a 'mistake'. I'm not sure the alternative is more appealing either. It'd take wiser heads than mine to come up with a truly equitable solution.

clairefontaine

That is nicely thought out Candie. A lot of food for thought.

I would add that it would be practically a minefield too. For example, what's the time limit on the opt out?

There are a lot of cases where women decide to abort because the father had made a decision not to be involved so they don't want to go through with raising a child on their own.

So do those who support this idea of male abortion think he can exempt himself five months into a pregnancy? Thereby the woman who may have made a different choice cant really make that choice. How about ten years down the line after ten years of involvement with the child? At what point is the cut off for that. His abortion wont cost him anything, no trips to a clinic, no potential medical problems, nothing. It will cost him a relationship with his child, but he didnt want that anyway right?

One could argue this is already happening, and despite the odd case you hear of men going to gaol for no child support, often enough women don't pursue maintenance because they can't or the courts fail at enforcement. And either way, the kids are paying for this in multiple ways, aside from financially. What would giving it the legal thumbs up do?

Your absolutely right. Sex becomes consequence free.

As for fair and equal, when it comes to unplanned pregnancy, there is no such thing as fair and equal. It is beyond that, with different sets of consequences for everyone. So we can get up in an ivory tower and howl about fairness, but in the end it doesn't matter, it's the consequences that matter because the consequences are not equal.

clairefontaine

clairefontaine wrote: »

That is nicely thought out Candie. A lot of food for thought.

I would add that it would be practically a minefield too. For example, what's the time limit on the opt out?

There are a lot of cases where women decide to abort because the father had made a decision not to be involved so they don't want to go through with raising a child on their own.

So do you think he can exempt himself five months into a pregnancy? Thereby the woman who may have made a different choice cant really make that choice. How about ten years down the line after ten years of involvement with the child? At what point is the cut off for that. His abortion wont cost him anything, no trips to a clinic, no potential medical problems, nothing. It will cost him a relationship with his child, but he didnt want that anyway right?

Your absolutely right. Sex becomes consequence free.

As for fair and equal, when it comes to unplanned pregnancy, there is no such thing as fair and equal. It is beyond that, with different sets of consequences for everyone. So we can get up in an ivory tower and howl about fairness, but in the end it doesn't matter, it's the consequences that matter because the consequences are not equal.

Personally I don't think it will or can ever happen to give this option to men. And that is unfair, no doubt about it. The alternative is unfair too.

However, I don't think the cost/benefit analysis supports its instigation anyway. Presently in an unwanted pregnancy scenario the man loses out if he is being made a father against his wishes.

If he were given the option of a legal abortion at any point of the childs life, the consequences are more wide ranging. Instead of the man's life being affected, we have the woman, the child (as I outlined in my previous post), and the State losing out.

I don't think the State would ever support the move, since the added financial burden will have to be financed somehow, and the majority of voters in this country, and most others, won't support picking up the tab for what will probably be seen as 'feckless' fathers by a substantial minority, if not a majority.

Pregnancy, childbirth, abortion, and (unplanned, single) motherhood are issues that can never have equal winners, or equal losers. All we can practically do as things stand is hope that all parties behave reasonably and in consultation with one another to limit the worst consequences.

clairefontaine

Candie, this already is the case, it just hasn't been officially recognised or given the official legal thumbs up.

clairefontaine

clairefontaine wrote: »

Candie, this already is the case, it just hasn't been officially recognised or given the official legal thumbs up.

Well, it is and it isn't. There's a big difference in how society sees de facto options, and options enshrined in law, its the difference between a social trend and a legal right. The cultural consequences are different for each.

eviltwin

Fizzlesque wrote: »

This is something I think really needs addressing - and it won't be addressed sufficiently as long as there is guilt and feeling like you'll be judged and all the negative stigma that surrounds abortion.

Because I've always been very open about my daughter, and the fact I chose to have her adopted, I've always been happy to answer the 'do you have children' question with the truth. Over the years I've had lots of conversations with women who had an abortion (at parties, in the pub, random one-off situations, plane journeys; lots of different settings) and for some reason our conversations turned personal and when I've told them about my daughter, they've told me they'd had an abortion, and we've had very open and honest chats about our respective chosen paths. I didn't set out to become an unexpected and occasional confidante to, oftentimes, total strangers, it just turned out that way.

A common theme, I've noticed, is the lack of opportunity to put their experience into words, to talk about it, clear it out from the corners of their mind. Some of the women had only talked to one person, once, and that was it......that would be torture for me. Being able to talk about my daughter has been crucial to my emotional health. Even with it I nearly lost my mind, and my heart is fairly shredded, but without it - I'd possibly have been found dead from a drug overdose, sometime during the past, post-adoption, years.

I know there are obvious differences between pregnancy not ending in motherhood for someone who has had an abortion, and for someone who has had their child adopted, but there are similarities too. To discover you're pregnant is a big thing, no matter which side of the happy-to-be-pregnant fence you're standing on. Something is in your body and that something might or might not grow into a human that wants/needs to be expelled from inside you :eek:

---

> one way or another. Sorry to be so alien about it, but it kind of is - if you spend as long mulling it over, like-so:eek:, as I do. And it's going to change your life - how much it does that, depends on you.

Someone asked why would counseling be needed if it's 'just a bunch of cells' that are being removed. Why do I still need to speak, to almost anyone who will listen, about my daughter, 24 years later? I guess it's because sometimes the right thing to do hurts like hell and 'being right' isn't an antidote to feeling pain.

And sometimes you just want to talk about it because it's good to talk.

All the women I've spoken to have thanked me for the chance to chat about their abortions without feeling judged. I'm glad I was able to give them that, but also feel sad that there's a need out there that's not being met because of (a) stigma/judgement and (b) an erroneous assumption (accusation, perhaps?) that there should be no need for counseling (especially a long time later) if the woman in question was so sure of her decision. Life just ain't that neatly and peachily divided into clear cut lines for us to follow.

We're blessed with the ability to communicate, I say, let's communicate. xx

Thank you for posting that. I think you hit the nail on the head. There is counselling etc out there for those who need it - needs to be more though - and that's great but what if you don't have any issues with it, you don't need help or support, you just want to talk about it with someone who you can trust not to make you feel bad about it.

I've told a few people and the general reaction has been great and I feel good its not a secret anymore. I'm very lucky I was able to have an abortion and move on from it but keeping it a secret doesn't sit right with me. It was a major event in my life, it changed me in so many ways ( all positive ), its a huge part of my story and it just didn't feel right to me to hide that. Why should I?

One really good thing is that I can see more women admitting to having abortions on message boards which is a great move forward.

HHobo

I'll probably be pilloried for this opinion but I think women should care more about contraception and do bare a greater responsibility than men by virtue of the fact that they are the ones who can get pregnant. In much the same way as a man is simply powerless if a woman decides to have an abortion, women are uniquely effected by conception.

For men, it is basically just biological hard cheese that they do not have control over becoming a parent once pregnancy ensues. Even where they to have the right to abdicate parentage, they could do nothing to prevent the child from being born.

In the same fashion it is basically just biological hard cheese for women that men can walk away from a pregnancy they don't want (in the physical sense at least).

Even in the case where a man fathers a child he didn't want and has the legal right to disavow any involvement, I wouldn't be too quick to call this consequence free. Most of us are not quite so flippant about fathering kids here and there. Men do and will continue to care about contraception and both men and women should care from a health point of view too.

Women have the right to abdicate their parentage.
So long as this is true, men should have the right too.

username123

HHobo wrote: »

I'll probably be pilloried for this opinion but I think women should care more about contraception and do bare a greater responsibility than men by virtue of the fact that they are the ones who can get pregnant. In much the same way as a man is simply powerless if a woman decides to have an abortion, women are uniquely effected by conception.

Are you aware that no contraception is 100% successful?

Do you think that the 5000 women who travel for abortion each year do so because they werent using contraception?

clairefontaine

HHobo wrote: »

I'll probably be pilloried for this opinion but I think women should care more about contraception and do bare a greater responsibility than men by virtue of the fact that they are the ones who can get pregnant. In much the same way as a man is simply powerless if a woman decides to have an abortion, women are uniquely effected by conception.

For men, it is basically just biological hard cheese that they do not have control over becoming a parent once pregnancy ensues. Even where they to have the right to abdicate parentage, they could do nothing to prevent the child from being born.

In the same fashion it is basically just biological hard cheese for women that men can walk away from a pregnancy they don't want (in the physical sense at least).

Even in the case where a man fathers a child he didn't want and has the legal right to disavow any involvement, I wouldn't be too quick to call this consequence free. Most of us are not quite so flippant about fathering kids here and there. Men do and will continue to care about contraception and both men and women should care from a health point of view too.

Women have the right to abdicate their parentage.
So long as this is true, men should have the right too.

Are you also aware that there are women who face this choice with a planned pregnancy also because the father to be changed his mind?

eviltwin

HHobo wrote: »

I'll probably be pilloried for this opinion but I think women should care more about contraception and do bare a greater responsibility than men by virtue of the fact that they are the ones who can get pregnant. In much the same way as a man is simply powerless if a woman decides to have an abortion, women are uniquely effected by conception.

For men, it is basically just biological hard cheese that they do not have control over becoming a parent once pregnancy ensues. Even where they to have the right to abdicate parentage, they could do nothing to prevent the child from being born.

In the same fashion it is basically just biological hard cheese for women that men can walk away from a pregnancy they don't want (in the physical sense at least).

Even in the case where a man fathers a child he didn't want and has the legal right to disavow any involvement, I wouldn't be too quick to call this consequence free. Most of us are not quite so flippant about fathering kids here and there. Men do and will continue to care about contraception and both men and women should care from a health point of view too.

Women have the right to abdicate their parentage.
So long as this is true, men should have the right too.

Contraception in my relationship is always a joint responsibility. I was the one using it but my partner has always been involved with the decision, we don't follow the rule that because its my body that can become pregnant that he is dissolved of responsiblity just becasue he wasn't controlling his fertility.

periodictable

As a male, I'm pretty sure that were we able to become pregnant, that, at the end of 9 months we'd be offered a choice of two doors: delivery room or termination room.
To have an abortion or continue with a pregnancy, for whatever reason is a woman's business.

HHobo

eviltwin wrote: »

Contraception in my relationship is always a joint responsibility. I was the one using it but my partner has always been involved with the decision, we don't follow the rule that because its my body that can become pregnant that he is dissolved of responsiblity just becasue he wasn't controlling his fertility.

Would you be equally egalitarian if this contracreption should fail and you did become pregant. You decide you want an abortion and he decides he wants to keep the child.

In the end you will get what you want. Even were he to suggest that you should carry the child to term and he would take full responsibility for it, you would feel entirely entitled to terminate the pregnancy anyway if that were your choice? - after all, it is your body that is pregnant.

Is this a fair characterisation of how you would feel about it? - I mean in terms of choice, not necessarily the particular decisions.

If it is, why do ask that a person with dramatically less power to choose and dramatically less control to take on the same level of responsibility?

jaffacakesyum

HHobo wrote: »

Would you be equally egalitarian if this contracreption should fail and you did become pregant. You decide you want an abortion and he decides he wants to keep the child.

In the end you will get what you want. Even were he to suggest that you should carry the child to term and he would take full responsibility for it, you would feel entirely entitled to terminate the pregnancy anyway if that were your choice? - after all, it is your body that is pregnant.

Is this a fair characterisation of how you would feel about it? - I mean in terms of choice, not necessarily the particular decisions.

If it is, why do ask that a person with dramatically less power to choose and dramatically less control to take on the same level of responsibility?

I don't really understand what you are saying. I think it's a bit scary that you are promoting that men shouldn't take responsibility for contraception What are you suggesting exactly? "Men go have sex with who you want, don't wear a condom, don't ask if she's on the pill, go for it, sure it's not you who will end up pregnant" :eek:

eviltwin

HHobo wrote: »

Would you be equally egalitarian if this contracreption should fail and you did become pregant. You decide you want an abortion and he decides he wants to keep the child.

In the end you will get what you want. Even were he to suggest that you should carry the child to term and he would take full responsibility for it, you would feel entirely entitled to terminate the pregnancy anyway if that were your choice? - after all, it is your body that is pregnant.

Is this a fair characterisation of how you would feel about it? - I mean in terms of choice, not necessarily the particular decisions.

If it is, why do ask that a person with dramatically less power to choose and dramatically less control to take on the same level of responsibility?

The way I look at it is if I'm using contraception he knows I don't want a child. Neither does he.

So in the event that the contraception failed, while I would obviously talk to him about it and possibly go to counselling, ultimately he would know I didn't want kids and it would be unfair for him to change the goalposts.

eviltwin

HHobo wrote: »

If it is, why do ask that a person with dramatically less power to choose and dramatically less control to take on the same level of responsibility?

Because its common sense ??!!! If you don't want to be in a position where a woman can abort a baby you want or have a baby you don't want why wouldn't you do all you can to make sure that doesn't happen?

HHobo

eviltwin wrote: »

The way I look at it is if I'm using contraception he knows I don't want a child. Neither does he.

So in the event that the contraception failed, while I would obviously talk to him about it and possibly go to counselling, ultimately he would know I didn't want kids and it would be unfair for him to change the goalposts.

And if we lived in a world where people were always fair, or for that matter honest, I would agree.

You neglected to actually answer the question. I even specified that it may not be, and I'm happy to accept that it probably wouldn't be, the actual decisions you would make. The question was about whether or not, the pregnant body in question being yours, you would feel entitled to a great portion of choice? You claimed that the body being yours should not burden you with a greater share of the responsibility.

eviltwin

HHobo wrote: »

And if we lived in a world where people were always fair, or for that matter honest, I would agree.

You neglected to actually answer the question. I even specified that it may not be, and I'm happy to accept that it probably wouldn't be, the actual decisions you would make. The question was about whether or not, the pregnant body in question being yours, you would feel entitled to a great portion of choice? You claimed that the body being yours should not burden you with a greater share of the responsibility.

How can I answer that question not being in that position? Who knows what they would do?

I would listen to him, I would do my best to find a way to keep the child but I'm not going to be a martyr either and put myself through something that could be destructive to my mental health just to make another person happy - a person who would have been very aware I didn't want to become pregnant and who had been of the same opinion

Ultimately if I felt for me a pregnancy would cause more harm than good I would have an abortion.

Its unfair but its always going to be unequal when pregnancy only affects one person's body.

Re contraception mostly it is the women who take responsiblity and thats fine, if thats what works in their relationships there is no issue, but its foolish for a man to absolve himself of input into that decision. He needs to be involved.

getz

Morag wrote: »

There are family planning clinics and well woman clinics and gps who will do post abortion check ups (should be done at 6 weeks) and who will do referrals to counseling which does not involve saying having an abortion is wrong and praying for forgiveness.

strange isent it that st bridget was irelands first abortionist,but you will not find that in the church teachings, in 650 bridgets biographer cogitosus,told the story of a young woman who had broken her vows of chasity and fell pregnant,she went to see bridget who took care of of the problem,[bridget exerising her faith blessed her causing the fetus to disappear], into days world bridget would be excommunicated,

username123

HHobo wrote: »

If it is, why do ask that a person with dramatically less power to choose and dramatically less control to take on the same level of responsibility?

Because a crisis pregnancy isnt a power struggle?

People seem to miss the fact that the very definition of crisis pregnancy is that it is a crisis and the two people involved didnt want a pregnancy to occur in the first place.

I have yet to meet a man who hold the view that if contraception failed he would want the woman to go ahead with the pregnancy anyway and then he would take sole responsibility for a child.

Legislating for extreme cases is never a good idea.

CaraMay

It may always only affect one persons body but it doesn't always only affect one persons mental health... There is very little evidence on the affects of abortion on the fathers of the babies and less so when he specifically didn't want the abortion to happen.

Say you don't want to keep the baby as its not a good time for you but he wants you to have the baby and he will take over at birth and says if you abort the baby he will commit suicide - where do you stand then? It's my body so tough seems to be the attitude...

eviltwin

CaraMay wrote: »

It may always only affect one persons body but it doesn't always only affect one persons mental health... There is very little evidence on the affects of abortion on the fathers of the babies and less so when he specifically didn't want the abortion to happen.

Say you don't want to keep the baby as its not a good time for you but he wants you to have the baby and he will take over at birth and says if you abort the baby he will commit suicide - where do you stand then? It's my body so tough seems to be the attitude...

Thats life though, there are so many situations where one person makes a decision that affects their partner in a bad way. People need to be free to make their own decisions, all we can do is try and mediate and have supports in place for the people who need it.

CaraMay

It would be interesting if the stats we to have did detail if the man / father knew about the abortion and / or if he was opposed to it...

eviltwin

CaraMay wrote: »

It would be interesting if the stats we to have did detail if the man / father knew about the abortion and / or if he was opposed to it...

This is an interesting point actually, all the post abortion counselling here is open to both men and women but I've heard that men rarely go. I don't know why that is, are men not as affected by women or do they feel its not for them. I know in my case the father took it worse than I did, four years later its still having an impact on him but then he flat out refuses to get any help or support. But you can't help someone who refuses to help themselves.

CaraMay

Had he opposed the abortion? You don't need to answer if its too private.

I chatted to my oh about this and he says he would have been devastated if I had had an abortion but would have felt he had no control of the situation. It's a heart breaking position for men who want the kid.

eviltwin

CaraMay wrote: »

Had he opposed the abortion? You don't need to answer if its too private.

I chatted to my oh about this and he says he would have been devastated if I had had an abortion but would have felt he had no control of the situation. It's a heart breaking position for men who want the kid.

No not at all, it was a mutual decision and he came with me. He blamed himself for a long time afterwards for the impact it had on me but that wasn't his fault. But he won't get help to address those issues and until he does he's never going to get better.

partyatmygaff

periodictable wrote: »

As a male, I'm pretty sure that were we able to become pregnant, that, at the end of 9 months we'd be offered a choice of two doors: delivery room or termination room.

Speak for yourself. I very much doubt that anyone would support something as morally bereft as what you're suggesting.

HHobo

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Speak for yourself. I very much doubt that anyone would support something as morally bereft as what you're suggesting.

When I read what he wrote first I reacted much the same, but upon re-reading it, I think he was making the point that if men were the ones who could become pregnant, there just wouldn't be any debate about abortion rights. Men would have them, no question.

I could be definately be wrong in that interpretation though!!

HHobo

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

I don't really understand what you are saying. I think it's a bit scary that you are promoting that men shouldn't take responsibility for contraception

I'm not promoting anything of the sort.

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

What are you suggesting exactly? "Men go have sex with who you want, don't wear a condom, don't ask if she's on the pill, go for it, sure it's not you who will end up pregnant" :eek:

No and I honestly don't know how you could get there from what I said.

It is a generally accepted principle that if I have more power and control over a situation than you do, I have a proportionally greater responsibility.
This is not, nor should it be, an all-or-nothing proposition.

Fizzlesque

eviltwin wrote: »

Thank you for posting that. I think you hit the nail on the head. There is counselling etc out there for those who need it - needs to be more though - and that's great but what if you don't have any issues with it, you don't need help or support, you just want to talk about it with someone who you can trust not to make you feel bad about it.

I've told a few people and the general reaction has been great and I feel good its not a secret anymore. I'm very lucky I was able to have an abortion and move on from it but keeping it a secret doesn't sit right with me. It was a major event in my life, it changed me in so many ways ( all positive ), its a huge part of my story and it just didn't feel right to me to hide that. Why should I?

One really good thing is that I can see more women admitting to having abortions on message boards which is a great move forward.

Thanks, Eviltwin - I wasn't sure if I'd myself expressed clearly enough with regard to thinking that it isn't necessary to be traumatised, or to have issues, for the chance to express yourself to be of value. And keeping secrets can't be good - keeping something a secret gives it power to become much more than it started out being.

I read some literature about adoption in the bad old days (for a piece I was writing for a writing course I was doing) and it really bothered me when I learned that the women whose babies were adopted were told to go home and forget they'd ever had a baby. Yeah riiight :rolleyes: Similarly, the women who did the adopting were told to pretend they'd given birth to the baby they brought home. Secrets and lies, what a foundation.

I'm glad you were able to stop your experience from being forced into becoming a secret. As you say, it's part of your story, why should you have to hide it?

pwurple

I've told a few people and the general reaction has been great and I feel good its not a secret anymore. I'm very lucky I was able to have an abortion and move on from it but keeping it a secret doesn't sit right with me. It was a major event in my life, it changed me in so many ways ( all positive ), its a huge part of my story and it just didn't feel right to me to hide that. Why should I?

100% glad you don't keep it secret. Openness helps us all, and probably your mental health as well. Keeping lifelong secrets would eat away at me anyway.

Fizzlesque wrote: »

I read some literature about adoption in the bad old days (for a piece I was writing for a writing course I was doing) and it really bothered me when I learned that the women whose babies were adopted were told to go home and forget they'd ever had a baby. Yeah riiight :rolleyes: Similarly, the women who did the adopting were told to pretend they'd given birth to the baby they brought home. Secrets and lies, what a foundation.

Agreed, awful stuff. The hangover of lies, shame and secrecy still affects people who adopt or are adopted today. I wish there was more openness about it.

username123

pwurple wrote: »

Agreed, awful stuff. The hangover of lies, shame and secrecy still affects people who adopt or are adopted today. I wish there was more openness about it.

Yes its desperate. I know a lady in her 60s who was only told a few years ago that she had in fact been the subject of an illegal adoption arranged by local convent. She had always believed she was adopted but had never had it confirmed until recently. The culture of secrecy has affected her more than the fact that she was adopted. She feels very let down by the people who adopted her (plus associated friends and family), who lied to her for nearly 60 years, despite her actually asking if she was adopted since her teens. Even given that the secrecy was because the adoption was illegal (ie, not to hurt her), it has had a negative lifelong effect on this lady.

periodictable

HHobo wrote: »

When I read what he wrote first I reacted much the same, but upon re-reading it, I think he was making the point that if men were the ones who could become pregnant, there just wouldn't be any debate about abortion rights. Men would have them, no question.

I could be definately be wrong in that interpretation though!!

Your interpretation is correct.
And in fact, look at the wording of the amendment which is concerned with the "right to life"-drafted by a man-ought it not to be concerned with the health of the woman rather than her right to life? I mean, a situation could arise where the woman could be denied a termination, only to remain alive, postpartum, in a vegetative state....yet she's still alive, so the law is satisfied and justice is done? I think not.

jaffacakesyum

HHobo wrote: »

I'm not promoting anything of the sort.



No and I honestly don't know how you could get there from what I said.

It is a generally accepted principle that if I have more power and control over a situation than you do, I have a proportionally greater responsibility.
This is not, nor should it be, an all-or-nothing proposition.

Contraception shouldn't be a petty power struggle. Any adult should take reponsibility for contraception. It takes two to tango. Why on earth would you be promoting that women should take more responsibility than men for contraception? It serves no benefit whatsoever

It doesn't affect me personally as I would always make sure I'm taking the pill correctly and wouldn't have sex if the guy refused to wear a condom and I also use the pull out method but regardless, I wouldn't suggest to anyone that women should take the fore runner on this. Everybody should act responsibly when it comes to sex, regardless of gender or sexuality.

EDIT: Just wanted to apologise actually, perhaps shouldn't have used the word 'promote' as you've just said you're not promoting anything of the sort but at the same time I'm confused because you do seem to suggest that men shouldn't have as much responsibility for it so I will leave the post as it is and hopefully haven't offended you as I don't want to put words in your mouth

jaffacakesyum

periodictable wrote: »

Your interpretation is correct.

100% agree.

Lingua Franca

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

It doesn't affect me personally as I would always make sure I'm taking the pill correctly and wouldn't have sex if the guy refused to wear a condom and I also use the pull out method but regardless, I wouldn't suggest to anyone that women should take the fore runner on this. Everybody should act responsibly when it comes to sex, regardless of gender or sexuality.

...especially since there's more risks to sex than just pregnancy.

Everyone should be looking after themselves. Everyone should be educated in sexual health and have access to contraception and std testing. And we should all take responsibility for ourselves but also what we could do to our partners.