Foetal alcohol syndrome

[Sasaferrato]

there have always been mechanical and medical abortions. as far as we can tell, they have happened as long as we have had human societies. It's only in the last 50 years or so that they have been safe... but women have always desperately sought ways to control their reproductive life.

Aye, but now we have:

The pill.
The coil.
Effective condoms.
Vasectomy.
Contraceptive implants.
The somewhat ineffective 'rhythm method'.

We also have:

http://www.worldometers.info/abortions/

ETA:

I went to school in Tarbert with children from two large families, one had 15 children, the other 19. I'll bet that the mothers of both families would have welcomed effective contraception. No such thing as rape within marriage (in law) then either.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Oh well. That's this one for another year, when we will no doubt do it again.

 

[laptop]

The law is rather muddled on abortion to term unfortunately. It should be clear cut.

[Leaps into thread at this point]

Clear-cut is not necessarily good.

As early as possible, as late as necessary.

This is not clear-cut and is what is required - esp. to deal with the tragic cases in which "as late as necessary" is invoked.

 

[Sasaferrato]

So you want to punish people for momentary stupidity? Lumber them with the burden of a child they don't even want? Is that good for the child do you think?

Pardon? I don't recollect saying that, in fact, I didn't, did I?

What I did say was that women should and must have the absolute right to choose. (My personal dislike of casual abortion is my view, just that, my view.)

I don't mind being 'pulled up' for what I did say, but do tend to be a bit miffed when grossly misrepresented.

 

[toggle]

Aye, but now we have:

The pill.
The coil.
Effective condoms.
Vasectomy.
Contraceptive implants.
The somewhat ineffective 'rhythm method'.

We also have:

http://www.worldometers.info/abortions/

so
the only thing close to fully reliable for women is the mierna coil which can give nasty side effects and not everyone can cope with the idea of a coil insertion. and without free coverage, it's almost unavailable. mine cost me a couple of trips to the clinic, answering some questions and a couple of hours of my time. If I had to pay market costs for the service and kit I was given, I'd be looking at a bill of well over a thousand pounds, or risking something I know is less reliable.

but that's not the only method that is effectively unavailable due to cost worldwide.

 

[Sasaferrato]

[Leaps into thread at this point]

Clear-cut is not necessarily good.



This is not clear-cut and is what is required - esp. to deal with the tragic cases in which "as late as necessary" is invoked.

I'll bet money, that were you in theatre for an 'as late as necessary', you wouldn't eat for a while. It is not at all nice. It is the thing that theatre staff dread most.

 

[Thora]

I'll bet money, that were you in theatre for an 'as late as necessary', you wouldn't eat for a while. It is not at all nice. It is the thing that theatre staff dread most.

I expect the theatre staff would dread more having to go through that themselves.

 

[toggle]

I'll bet money, that were you in theatre for an 'as late as necessary', you wouldn't eat for a while. It is not at all nice. It is the thing that theatre staff dread most.

I'd take loosing my lunch over having to consider making the decision to have a late abortion.

 

[Sasaferrato]

so
the only thing close to fully reliable for women is the mierna coil which can give nasty side effects and not everyone can cope with the idea of a coil insertion. and without free coverage, it's almost unavailable. mine cost me a couple of trips to the clinic, answering some questions and a couple of hours of my time. If I had to pay market costs for the service and kit I was given, I'd be looking at a bill of well over a thousand pounds, or risking something I know is less reliable.

but that's not the only method that is effectively unavailable due to cost worldwide.

I know.

The birth rates in third world countries are a whole different and separate issue though.

I'm going to go into the garden for a bit, even with a fan and the window open, it's 27C* in here. I'm Scottish, not used to this bloody heat.

*Could be more, all the beasties in the thermometer have sunk.

 

[_angel_]

How is it gross misrepresentation when you openly say you are against "casual abortion"?

I have been through the motions of trying to find out in what circumstances you think abortion is acceptable, or not, and you didn't answer so I came to my own conclusion.

He doesn't like it but doesn't want to see it outlawed. As far as I can tell. What's the problem?

 

[equationgirl]

And coils aren't suitable for everybody in any case, even in the UK. And how have we ended up at 'casual abortions' anyway?

There's one thing missing from the list that Sass gave - the morning-after pill. It's not a true contraceptive as it's not meant to be taken on a regular basis but it's incredibly useful. I was part of a study around 15 years ago which looked at accessibility of this, and those of use in the study were given a pack to take home (one pack being one dose). Mine was never used and eventually thrown away but if something had happened where I would have felt the need to use it, it would have been a godsend to already have it in the house.

 

[Sasaferrato]

How is it gross misrepresentation when you openly say you are against "casual abortion"?

I have been through the motions of trying to find out in what circumstances you think abortion is acceptable and you didn't answer so I came to my own conclusion.

Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...

OK.

When the conception has taken place by an act that the woman did not consent to.
Where continuance of the pregnancy is putting the mother's life at risk. After all, if the mother dies, so does the foetus, generally.
Where there is severe foetal abnormality.
Where the mother is not able to carry through a pregnancy and give birth, i.e. a woman with sufficient mental capacity to give consent, but not to give birth to, and raise a child. This again is an issue all of its own.

 

[laptop]

I'll bet money, that were you in theatre for an 'as late as necessary', you wouldn't eat for a while. It is not at all nice. It is the thing that theatre staff dread most.

And... so?

Plenty of other necessary procedures would make me temporarily anorexic, too.

Doesn't make them any less necessary

 

[Sasaferrato]

And coils aren't suitable for everybody in any case, even in the UK. And how have we ended up at 'casual abortions' anyway?

There's one thing missing from the list that Sass gave - the morning-after pill. It's not a true contraceptive as it's not meant to be taken on a regular basis but it's incredibly useful. I was part of a study around 15 years ago which looked at accessibility of this, and those of use in the study were given a pack to take home (one pack being one dose). Mine was never used and eventually thrown away but if something had happened where I would have felt the need to use it, it would have been a godsend to already have it in the house.

Yes, of course, I'd forgotten about that one. Used to dish it out as well. (We actually used 4 tablets of a high strength contraceptive pill, as it was exactly the same dose but a fraction of the price. (We used to dispense Maxalon with it, to make sure it stayed down.)

 

[Sasaferrato]

And... so?

Plenty of other necessary procedures would make me temporarily anorexic, too.

Doesn't make them any less necessary

I used to delight in looking into a good open abdomen. It doesn't look much like the book at all. I enjoyed theatre.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Ah. Its just a moral thing then.

Morals are something alien to you?

 

[toggle]

I know.

The birth rates in third world countries are a whole different and separate issue though.

it's not just 'third world' countries that charge for contraception.

and there are real issues in accessibility and reliability. a lot of methods don't work for some women.

personally, the next step I'd like to see is to give pharmacists the ability to prescribe the pill. and there must be something done about the right to a moral objection to dispensing contraception limiting access to those drugs. I think that has to be done by insisting that an open dispensery has to have someone prepared to dispense that medication, unless there's another pharmacy with a dispenser who will do all of their job within 200 yards.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Enough already! I'm melting. If its still going, I might come back later.

 

[laptop]

I used to delight in looking into a good open abdomen. It doesn't look much like the book at all. I enjoyed theatre.

Nobody wants me to list the procedures I had in mind. Nor for you to guess them. Trust me.

The point is, it's not about your preferences, nor your anecdotes.

It's about ensuring that the least-worst solutions to unbearable problems are available when necessary.

 

[8115]

Do you honestly not see how declaring a foetus to be a person, and making it criminal for a woman to harm that person, has a massive impact on abortion?

I'm not a lawyer, I do not think they would make a ruling that made women responsible for "a crime against a person" while she was pregnant, that simultaneously made abortion illegal. As I have said before, I don't think the law is the best thing for this, but I also don't see why it's immediately anti-feminist to think that women should have their rights somewhat restricted while they are pregnant at least morally.

As far as personhood goes. In my eyes a foetus is a future (potential) person. I have no problem with someone stopping this future person becoming an actual person (abortion). If someone did something to damage that future person, knowing that would mean, in 5 or 10 years there would be a harmed person, yes I do have a bit of a problem with that. I don't see there's a contradiction in my views there. The person being harmed is not the foetus, it's the 5 year old, with a time delay. I don't know how the law deals with that, like I said it doesn't mean that abortion is wrong, or is a crime against a person.

You mentioned mountain climbing, I think that's interesting. It's all on a spectrum probably. Because if an unborn baby was harmed mountain climbing, chances are the pregnant woman is, so that's her decision. And it's probably a lot safer for the baby than drinking to excess. But drinking to excess the baby could potentially be much more harmed that the mother, and the liklihood is higher. I don't want people going around telling pregnant women what to do all the time but your idea that pregnant women have a right to harm their child, otherwise it's unfeminist, no.

eta, that's just my opinion, but also I think I'm a feminist nevertheless.

 

[8115]

Lets just ban pregnancy.

Bit hard to enforce.

 

[8115]

Ban sex then?

I don't think that would work either.

 

[Thora]

I'm not a lawyer, I do not think they would make a ruling that made women responsible for "a crime against a person" while she was pregnant, that simultaneously made abortion illegal. As I have said before, I don't think the law is the best thing for this, but I also don't see why it's immediately anti-feminist to think that women should have their rights somewhat restricted while they are pregnant at least morally.

As far as personhood goes. In my eyes a foetus is a future (potential) person. I have no problem with someone stopping this future person becoming an actual person (abortion). If someone did something to damage that future person, knowing that would mean, in 5 or 10 years there would be a harmed person, yes I do have a bit of a problem with that. I don't see there's a contradiction in my views there. The person being harmed is not the foetus, it's the 5 year old, with a time delay. I don't know how the law deals with that, like I said it doesn't mean that abortion is wrong, or is a crime against a person.

You mentioned mountain climbing, I think that's interesting. It's all on a spectrum probably. Because if an unborn baby was harmed mountain climbing, chances are the pregnant woman is, so that's her decision. And it's probably a lot safer for the baby than drinking to excess. But drinking to excess the baby could potentially be much more harmed that the mother, and the liklihood is higher. I don't want people going around telling pregnant women what to do all the time but your idea that pregnant women have a right to harm their child, otherwise it's unfeminist, no.

eta, that's just my opinion, but also I think I'm a feminist nevertheless.

How about taking medication which is good for the mother, but will cause birth defects in the baby? Or, eating soft cheese and risking listeria? Or having pain relief in labour that puts the baby at risk, directly or indirectly?

 

[8115]

How about taking medication which is good for the mother, but will cause birth defects in the baby? Or, eating soft cheese and risking listeria? Or having pain relief in labour that puts the baby at risk, directly or indirectly?

I guess that pregnant women always do a kind of risk benefit analysis. Yeah, maybe. Still think it's a bit off to drink heavily in pregnancy though.

 

[8115]

Ban alcohol then. I'm sure that would reduce the instance of foetal alcohol syndrome.

I could go for that.

 

[Thora]

It starts getting very messy if we say abortion is ok, but if you don't abort you must avoid all risk to the foetus. A relative of mine didn't know she was pregnant until 5 months in, she could have done a lot of damage in that time. Or what about failed abortion attempts that leave the foetus damaged?

 

[Thora]

I guess that pregnant women always do a kind of risk benefit analysis. Yeah, maybe. Still think it's a bit off to drink heavily in pregnancy though.

What if you don't know you're pregnant? Maybe all women of childbearing age should abstain from alcohol, cigarettes, any medication that might damage a foetus just in case?

 

[Looby]

it's not just 'third world' countries that charge for contraception.

and there are real issues in accessibility and reliability. a lot of methods don't work for some women.

personally, the next step I'd like to see is to give pharmacists the ability to prescribe the pill. and there must be something done about the right to a moral objection to dispensing contraception limiting access to those drugs. I think that has to be done by insisting that an open dispensery has to have someone prepared to dispense that medication, unless there's another pharmacy with a dispenser who will do all of their job within 200 yards.

Exactly. My mate has to pay 30 odd quid just to see a doctor and I know has put off getting her pill as well as smears etc when she's been skint.

She lives on a wealthy island.

 

[8115]

What if you don't know you're pregnant? Maybe all women of childbearing age should abstain from alcohol, cigarettes, any medication that might damage a foetus just in case?

Well, obviously not, and most people are born ok so it can't be that risky.

Actually I looked it up and I think there are only around 250 cases of this disorder in the UK so this could be a bit of a "mountain out of a molehill" scenario. Still, at least we had the chance to go through abortion in its full gruesome glory. It's quite put me off my cider

 

[Thora]

Well, obviously not, and most people are born ok so it can't be that risky.

Actually I looked it up and I think there are only around 250 cases of this disorder in the UK so this could be a bit of a "mountain out of a molehill" scenario. Still, at least we had the chance to go through abortion in its full gruesome glory. It's quite put me off my cider

Unfortunately, if putting a foetus at risk becomes a crime against a person, then it's not just going to affect the children born with FAS and their families, is it?