What's at risk in the abortion "debate"

CaliopeSpidrman

Rose -- so are you anti-choice?  I understand that you, personally, are anti-abortion.  But are you against allowing others to decide that themselves?  I just want to be clear.

Knottie_22382082

Cali- Yes, I am.  I think it would be inconsistent, bordering on hippo-crate-ical, of me to support allowing people to choose to kill other people, which is what I believe abortion to be.  I recognize that many people don't agree with my belief on when personhood/life begins, but I've not found anything that has been able to change my mind about it.  Believing as I do but supporting a right to choose abortion would be the same as supporting a right to walk up to random people on the street and shoot them.  I think it was CS who mentioned upthread "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins" -- since I believe that unborn humans are just as much people as those who have been born, this applies to them, too.

Knottie_22382082

Mouse-  I can see that being a concern in very extreme cases, which is why I'd consider neonatal palliative care and support/counseling for families so afflicted to be a necessary part of my ideal world, from a social justice standpoint. What about things like Down's syndrome and spina bifida, though?  I have trouble drawing a line here.

pdxmouse

Well to me if you're not raising the child you don't get to decide. Those kids don't often get adopted, wind up in institutions, etc. Some abnormalities are worse than others without being life-threatening. So you get to decide for your kids whether it's a life worth living, whether you can give the support they need, etc, but someone from outside doesn't get to make that choice for you. In many places legislation pushed by anti-choicers has made palliative care for infants illegal. Sometimes those laws that say you have to try and save a baby that survives abortion deny the possibility of palliative care for newborns.

BrideBuddies

It's been interesting reading all of this.. and I have no intention of entering the fray.But Mouse.. do be careful with making statements regarding what you called severe fetal abnormalities (spina bifida, Downs, the more drastic ones incompatible with life). I've not said this before, but I have an extremely high chance of having a Downs child.  Perhaps other chromosomal issues, too.   This does not make my child's life less important or less valuable or less rewarding in his/her own way.  I'm trying to come to terms with what may happen and will accept the results, even if my child only lives a minute, an hour or a day.   That is his/her life, such as it is.  But I also know some people only want a "normal" child and will take whatever measures they deem appropriate to get what they want... abortion, IVF with genetic testing, etc.  Hard for me to judge someone for that.Sorry... just hittin' a little too close to home today.

CaliopeSpidrman

How is that even offensive to you?  Mouse in no way said she thinks any baby with Downs should be aborted.  For some people, Downs is a strong enough reason to abort.  While I agree that this is a totally stupid reason, that's their perogative.

FallinAgain

I think she's taking issue with the comment that Down's = a severe fetal abnormality.

CaliopeSpidrman

I believe it was listed in the article as a severe abnormality.  I thought it was weird.

BrideBuddies

Exactly, Fallin.   And who said the word "offensive?"

FallinAgain

May I ask what you mean by having a high chance?

BrideBuddies

Well, medically speaking, it is an abnormality.  No argument there.  But I beg to differ on the use of "severe,"  even in the article itself.  But my perspective is a little skewed on that.I just think you can't lump things like Downs and SB in such a manner.  There are varying degrees/shades of gray to consider.

CaliopeSpidrman

Okay, not "offensive" but it obviously bothered you. 

BrideBuddies

Cali.. like I said, I'm extremely high risk for having a Downs child.   In fact, I have a 1:5 chance of it.  So yeah, it's a little personal at this point.  We opted not to do an amnio or other invasive testing.  So far, everything looks great and there are no indications of problems at all.  And even if there were, we still wouldn't have terminated.   It is what it is.  Another factor I had to consider is my husband's wishes.  He is a very devout Catholic.And again, I can't fault anyone else who would not make the same decision as me.   Fallin.. I think that answers your question as well.

SarahBethBR

Thanks for the link Fenton.  I stayed up to read it after being at work over 16 hours yesterday, and it really hit me.  Great read.I'm not going to go into my views on abortion, as it's all already been said, but now I've learned I'm part of the radical of the radical.  I didn't realize my views were that extreme.

SarahBethBR

I guess you're right Fallin.  I'm in the legal at any time, for any reason camp, but what I find moral or not is a little more gray than black and white. Abotring at 20+ weeks because you don't like the sex?  That's morally reprehensible, but I'm pretty sure I'm not comfortable with criminalizing it.

pdxmouse

BrideBuddies- I meant severe as opposed to something like a cleft palate that can be repaired after birth. In no way do I think Down's babies should be aborted against the parents wishes. To me pro-choice means just that- I would want to see a caring, compassionate world where these children would be given every opportunity and protection so the parents would make the choice without constraints of resources. Regardless of whether I mean offense, I'm still sorry that what I said seemed to dismiss the value of children facing challenges, I don't want to add to that burden at all.

pdxmouse

Gaaah, if it's not clear- not that the kids are a burden, but the burden of dealing with an unhelpful society.