Women's Right to Choose

CamMc · May 23, 2019

Ok, so I haven't seen this brought up yet, and as not a nursing student yet, maybe I'm missing something, but if a person is in a coma or unable to make decisions for themselves, they have a medical power of attorney who acts in their best interest. That person may decide that the individual in question wouldn't want to live hooked up to machines to stay alive and to risk the potential of coming out of the coma even worse off; so isn't it reasonable to say that the person who is carrying the child/fetus who clearly can't make that decision for themselves, should be granted the same authority? Especially given that it requires that person to carry the child/fetus for 9 months which can and does cause great stress and physical changes to the person carrying. If someone is pregnant and knows that they live a lifestyle that would be harmful for them to carry out the pregnancy, whether that's because they are a drug addict, are so low-income they can barely care for themselves, know the mental stress would be too severe, or whatever other reason they should be able to decide that a child born having to overcome those challenges in utero would be better off not going through that. So many people argue that the "woman" should have to live with the consequences, but what kind of world do we live in that a person's mental health is so devalued that they should have to carry an unwanted pregnancy through even if that may end up causing significant challenges to the child. We have far too many people with not enough access to resources and children in foster care who are abused and neglected, let the person carrying decide what to do with their body.

subee, MSN, CRNA · May 23, 2019

Who said using abortion as birth control was a good idea? My flip opinion is that everyone should be allowed an anesthetic for one and then you can do without the next time. It is not pleasant to be in the room, BUT I didn't see much "baby killing" for convenience. A lot of teenagers between 14 and 17, women who took teratogenic drugs for another illness. I don't know...are these for convenience? Should children be forced to bear children? I have read the statistics on this forum re: most abortions are done on women in their 20's and while disheartening, they shouldn't be forced to bear children regardless of age. There are two sets of rights here....those of the mother and those of the fetus and legally, the rights of the living will prevail. I've seen some very traumatized kids in family court and wished the mothers would have aborted. What some people do to their children is chilling and the consequences are tragic for most of these kids. Their brains are forever changed from all the trauma they have survived. And the public, in general, isn't disposed to taking care of them either. Nobody wants to pay more taxes so there's so few recources available to these kids.

Scrunchkin78, ADN, BSN, MSN · May 23, 2019

1 minute ago, CamMc said:
Ok, so I haven't seen this brought up yet, and as not a nursing student yet, maybe I'm missing something, but if a person is in a coma or unable to make decisions for themselves, they have a medical power of attorney who acts in their best interest. That person may decide that the individual in question wouldn't want to live hooked up to machines to stay alive and to risk the potential of coming out of the coma even worse off; so isn't it reasonable to say that the person who is carrying the child/fetus who clearly can't make that decision for themselves, should be granted the same authority? Especially given that it requires that person to carry the child/fetus for 9 months which can and does cause great stress and physical changes to the person carrying. If someone is pregnant and knows that they live a lifestyle that would be harmful for them to carry out the pregnancy, whether that's because they are a drug addict, are so low-income they can barely care for themselves, know the mental stress would be too severe, or whatever other reason they should be able to decide that a child born having to overcome those challenges in utero would be better off not going through that. So many people argue that the "woman" should have to live with the consequences, but what kind of world do we live in that a person's mental health is so devalued that they should have to carry an unwanted pregnancy through even if that may end up causing significant challenges to the child. We have far too many people with not enough access to resources and children in foster care who are abused and neglected, let the person carrying decide what to do with their body.

Apples and oranges. A person designated as a healthcare power of attorney is legally a "surrogate" meaning that they are making decisions as the comatose patient would have chosen for themselves if they were conscious. A baby hasn't developed to the point to be able to make choices so therefore a woman cannot be a "surrogate" decision-maker. The woman is either making choices based on her own needs or desires or she is acting as a guardian.

Also - is it really okay to kill a baby just so they don't have to grow up poor? Is being poor really so bad that we should kill people rather than have them live that way??? The same goes for fostering... is the foster care system so bad that we should just kill any kids that are in it and put them out of their misery? It is not ethical or moral to kill something based on a POTENTIAL life they may experience. That's like killing a "criminal" before they can possibly commit the crime... it doesn't work.

kidzcare · May 23, 2019

On 5/20/2019 at 9:18 PM, FullGlass said:
Men must pay child support unless they are dead or in prison.

But many still don't. And going to court is exhausting and expensive. And some dads take their frustration with that out on the mother in front of the kids so those moms (like me) choose to not bring it up in order to keep that kind of drama away from the kids.

And what about the kids who's fathers have died or are incarcerated? Mom shoulda thought of that, amirite??

On 5/20/2019 at 9:24 PM, Rose_Queen said:
Doesn't mean they do. My sister's ex-husband is $16,000 behind on child support.

Just tallied up and my ex is $40,000+ behind. ~26% of custodial parents receive none of the child support they are supposed to receive and 28.5% received only a portion of what they were supposed to receive. https://www.verywellfamily.com/us-child-support-statistics-2997994

23 hours ago, morte said:
please get a refund from your nursing school.

Hahahahaha. This really made me laugh!

20 hours ago, catladyx8 said:
Abstinence is the best policy and when society began saying it was okay to have sex outside of marriage and promoting that kind of thinking, the problems only intensified. When I went to school we did not have sex education classes because we knew sex was something special that happened with the right person, sex was not just to have fun or get your name on the school sex roster. Abstinence does not cause abortions, not using some form of birth control causes abortions. There are many women that use abortion as a means of birth control. They get pregnant over and over and go for abortions. Where is the education for this person that killing a growing child is not birth control?? Somewhere these abortion clinics or Planned Parenthood are not doing a very good job of educating the women who use their services.

Abstinence is the best policy for you but that doesn't mean it is right for everyone.

Where are your stats/sources for the "many women that... get pregnant over and over and go for abortions?"

Here.I.Stand, BSN, RN · May 23, 2019

I’m not saying my experience is why it should be banned; I recognize the limitations of anecdotes and the necessity of EBP as much as the next person.

I have no idea if my experience is the norm or not. I truly hope it’s not because I wouldn’t wish the pain it caused on anyone.

I clearly stated... or at least in my mind I was clear... that I can’t judge someone who DOES choose it for herself, because I don’t know her whole situation. One woman’s life may be in danger because of a cardiac condition ... another’s may be in danger because her father thinks an honor killing is a good idea.

What I WAS saying is that I have experienced nursing and medical practices in this area that were wrong... and I hope that individual women’s health practitioners will hear what I have to say and ensure through their practice that this NOT happen to someone else.

Scrunchkin78, ADN, BSN, MSN · May 23, 2019

5 minutes ago, subee said:
Who said using abortion as birth control was a good idea? My flip opinion is that everyone should be allowed an anesthetic for one and then you can do without the next time. It is not pleasant to be in the room, BUT I didn't see much "baby killing" for convenience. A lot of teenagers between 14 and 17, women who took teratogenic drugs for another illness. I don't know...are these for convenience? Should children be forced to bear children? I have read the statistics on this forum re: most abortions are done on women in their 20's and while disheartening, they shouldn't be forced to bear children regardless of age. There are two sets of rights here....those of the mother and those of the fetus and legally, the rights of the living will prevail. I've seen some very traumatized kids in family court and wished the mothers would have aborted. What some people do to their children is chilling and the consequences are tragic for most of these kids. Their brains are forever changed from all the trauma they have survived. And the public, in general, isn't disposed to taking care of them either. Nobody wants to pay more taxes so there's so few recources available to these kids.

I think that teratogenic deformities, depending on the severity, is a reasonable use of abortion, as is mental health. If a girl/woman may commit suicide because of the pregnancy then absolutely save the woman. Saving one life is better than losing two. But what you are saying is it is better to be dead than experience trauma. If that were the case then you might as well wipe out the entire human race - trauma, to one degree or another, is a fact of life. Experiencing trauma creates resilience. While trauma in of itself is not a good thing, however learning and growing from it is. You are choosing to kill a human based on the presumption of a type of life they may have.

CamMc · May 23, 2019

On 5/23/2019 at 3:13 PM, Scrunchkin78 said:
Apples and oranges. A person designated as a healthcare power of attorney is legally a "surrogate" meaning that they are making decisions as the comatose patient would have chosen for themselves if they were conscious. A baby hasn't developed to the point to be able to make choices so therefore a woman cannot be a "surrogate" decision-maker. The woman is either making choices based on her own needs or desires or she is acting as a guardian.
Also - is it really okay to kill a baby just so they don't have to grow up poor? Is being poor really so bad that we should kill people rather than have them live that way??? The same goes for fostering... is the foster care system so bad that we should just kill any kids that are in it and put them out of their misery? It is not ethical or moral to kill something based on a POTENTIAL life they may experience. That's like killing a "criminal" before they can possibly commit the crime... it doesn't work.

That situation can 100% apply to a guardian so I don’t see how it’s any different. If a child is on life support the parent has to make the decision at what point to continue or end that care, someone carrying the child can also make that choice. I’m by no means suggesting that this is the best choice, but this whole conversation is based on these laws preventing people from having any choice. When you take away the choice you are taking away people’s rights. I am a transgender man who still has a uterus, if I were to become pregnant (which would only happen if I were raped at this point because the thought of being pregnant is so terrifying to be that I avoid any situation that could lead to me becoming pregnant) my mental health would be very significantly impacted and with the way this country is heading taking away people’s rights all over the place, yes I would probably have to choose to abort because the trauma would leave me unable to care for myself much less try to carry a reminder of that trauma.

And no i’m not saying that if a child is going to be born poor they shouldn’t be born that’s a ridiculous over exaggeration of my point. There’s no sense is reasoning with you because you see this as a matter of killing a child and I see it as a person having control over what is happening to their body. I’m by no means advocating that people should be able to have abortions when a baby has made it past the point of viability, maybe even a few weeks before that, the only exception would be in cases of medical necessity, but if someone doesn’t find out they’re pregnant until they’re 7 weeks pregnant and they should have the option to do what is best for THEIR situation, not what you believe is the right thing for them to do. Taking away this right to choose isn’t going to stop abortions, it’s going to make it unsafe for those who do choose it and going to add additional stress to our already faulty system for helping people.

LilPeanut, MSN, RN, NP · May 23, 2019

On 5/23/2019 at 2:44 PM, Scrunchkin78 said:
And morality is missing you. Asking planned parenthood to do their "supposed" job is a pretty modern and reasonable request. They "say" they provide healthcare - if they aren't teaching about contraception before they scrape the baby out of the egg donors uterus then they aren't doing their jobs and are undeserving of their funding.

Planned parenthhood does a lot of sex ed. Abortions are an incredibly small part of the services they offer.

On 5/23/2019 at 2:52 PM, Scrunchkin78 said:
And this is why we can't have civilized discussions about this topic. You automatically assume that anyone who doesn't agree with you has some kind of bad motivation. How about I just assume you hate babies and want to kill them all?? Is that really a productive mindset to find some resolution to this issue?

I think a lot of people do not examine their motivations. Like with the border wall with Mexico. Many people love the idea and don't think they're being racist, but they have no concern with canadian illegal immigrants. They don't want a border wall with Canada. It's racism that's been hidden in a lot of different ways, even to the person.

When you come down to it though, if your concern is only on fertilized eggs in women, and not the fertilized eggs on ice, it's a double standard. Because you don't judge her reasons to be "good enough".

On 5/23/2019 at 3:23 PM, Scrunchkin78 said:
I think that teratogenic deformities, depending on the severity, is a reasonable use of abortion, as is mental health. If a girl/woman may commit suicide because of the pregnancy then absolutely save the woman. Saving one life is better than losing two. But what you are saying is it is better to be dead than experience trauma. If that were the case then you might as well wipe out the entire human race - trauma, to one degree or another, is a fact of life. Experiencing trauma creates resilience. While trauma in of itself is not a good thing, however learning and growing from it is. You are choosing to kill a human based on the presumption of a type of life they may have.

And what about women who would need to forgo their college education, or high school education and get trapped in a cycle of poverty? Or they would lose their job because of pregnancy complications?

The fetus doesn't experience the trauma.

You cannot remove the ability to govern ones own life because you want them to be a life support system for another person.

The risk of death with kidney donation is about the same as pregnancy. Should we be requiring people to donate kidneys? That's someone's life that needs a kidney!

This has zero to do with the life of the child.

I will keep repeating:

Until a fetus doesn't require a specific person for life support (ie it can be removed from the woman), then you cannot tell her that she can't do whatever she wants with her body.

Finally, it is a well established fact that outlawing abortion does not decrease the number of abortions, it only makes them more dangerous. So, what people want to do again is punish women who are doing things they don't agree with. Social programs, education about sex, educational opportunities in general, free birth control, those things all decrease the rates of abortion.

It is bad faith to outlaw abortion if all you want is a decrease in abortions. Outlawing it does nothing except make it more likely the woman will die with the fetus.

osceteacher · May 23, 2019

2 hours ago, Scrunchkin78 said:
And morality is missing you. Asking planned parenthood to do their "supposed" job is a pretty modern and reasonable request. They "say" they provide healthcare - if they aren't teaching about contraception before they scrape the baby out of the egg donors uterus then they aren't doing their jobs and are undeserving of their funding.

I don't think I've said anything anywhere about planned parenthood so not sure why you're quoting me with this. I don't know how effective they are.

Orion81RN · May 23, 2019

On 5/23/2019 at 9:03 AM, OldDude said:
I have never had an abortion and I never will so EVERYTHING I think or say is conceptual...I can only "imagine" the experience; just like everyone else who has an opinion about abortion but has never experienced one. Here.I.Stand comes from real life experience and understands the dynamics, pro and con, and was thoughtful and courageous enough to share with us...so yes hopefully, that would cause someone, in my position, to reevaluate their thoughts about abortion - pro or con. It reinforces to me that every pregnancy is unique as well as the circumstances and the dynamics, but I understand, and accept, "its completely inconsequential" to you.
Simply stated...if you've never actually played the game of football your're input about the game simply makes you an "armchair quarterback."

It goes both ways. That's why this particular anecdote is meaningless as far as convincing anyone to change their minds. Millions of women have had abortions with their own tragic stories, and it was the best decision they ever made and will forever stand by that.

Not to mention abortion is often still devastating for a woman who knows it's what's best for her life and will never regret it. All of you acting as if it's so easy to do. Like, "Whoops, I'll just have an abortion. Anyway, can't wait to go to the beach next week. Woohoo!"

I have a story. I consented to a surgery in my prime child bearing age. A simple laparoscopy to LOOK for the cause of bladder pain. Afterwards was told the surgeon ablated endometrial tissue NOT associated with my bladder condition.

It wasn't til years later when trying for a baby that I learned that endometrial ablation should occur right before trying to get pregnant. As the procedure can in itself cause scar tissue that can later prevent pregnancy. I. Was. Livid. I did NOT give consent for that ablation. I gave consent for a laparoscopy only. To LOOK. That's it. To confirm dx of interstial cystitis. Had NO idea that if I ever wanted kids my best chances were to try to conceive in the months after the surgery.

So of course I'm obviously advising anyone and everyone to NEVER have a laparoscopy because that ONE surgeon did something wrong without my consent ?

Orion81RN · May 23, 2019

2 hours ago, Scrunchkin78 said:
Asking someone to back up a statement they used to assert that "Jesus is okay with abortion" has nothing to do with shaming or being devoid of facts. It is actually asking for a factual basis for the comment (which is utterly ridiculous). BTW, I don't need the bible to tell me that human life is valuable. If you need a book to grasp that basic concept then you are in the wrong profession.

You are not superior to ANYONE. I simply do not believe an embryo is a "human being." I do not choose to believe this. I just do. I couldn't change that belief if I wanted to. Bc it is a belief system for which there is no scientific data to 100% confirm or deny. Just as you have your beliefs that you couldn't change if you wanted to. And I'm Christian, and it's because I'm Christian that I WILL NOT judge others. On THAT the Bible is VERY clear.

I don't hope to change anyone's mind. My only hope is to give perspective to people to not judge others.

Orion81RN · May 23, 2019

2 hours ago, Scrunchkin78 said:
And morality is missing you. Asking planned parenthood to do their "supposed" job is a pretty modern and reasonable request. They "say" they provide healthcare - if they aren't teaching about contraception before they scrape the baby out of the egg donors uterus then they aren't doing their jobs and are undeserving of their funding.

I'm not going to do the research for you. But, I will tell you that Planned Parenthood has saved lives by catching cancer that would have gone undiagnosed in uninsured women. So, yes. They are in fact "doing their jobs."

Several of my friends in my 20's obtained birth control from Planned Parenthood when they couldn't afford an OB. My own OB refused to refill my birth control without a pelvic exam every THREE MONTHS. I didn't have the THOUSANDS of dollars that adds up to. Birth control from Planned Parenthood prevented pregnancies that WOULD ABSOLUTELY have led to abortions. So to say planned Parenthood doesn't provide invaluable services is so incredibly ignorant. You live in a bubble. And you CHOOSE to live in that bubble.