But the ONLY reason anyone should prescribe a medical procedure is because it contributes to the well-being of the patient, and that is obviously not the case here.
consider the possiblity that proponents of this may consider the procedure to be in the best interest of the well-being of the woman. there are health risks to having an abortion since it is a medical procedure. and, as stated vehemently by many in this thread, the psychological well-being of the woman seems to be a huge issue. some might think that she'd be better of mentally in the long run having made the choice to keep the baby or give it up for adoption instead of aborting it...
maybe, seriously now, maybe there are some altruistic motives and not simply puritannical control-freaks attempting to legislate sexual activity. those who are against abortion are not all religious fundamentalist zealots
and, i would argue that an ultrasound is barely a "medical procedure". it's less than an xray. it's just a picture...
and, as stated vehemently by many in this thread, the psychological well-being of the woman seems to be a huge issue. some might think that she'd be better of mentally in the long run having made the choice to keep the baby or give it up for adoption instead of aborting it...
Do you honestly think that seeing or not seeing an ultrasound is going to make a big difference here? I know quite a few women who have had abortions, I have had one myself, and none of us suffer any trauma. Of course there are those who do, but they are a minority.
maybe, seriously now, maybe there are some altruistic motives and not simply puritannical control-freaks attempting to legislate sexual activity. those who are against abortion are not all religious fundamentalist zealots
Quite true, as farfromglorified has made quite apparent in this thread. However, those proposing legislation typically ARE the control-freaks ... hence their compulsion to control people.
and, i would argue that an ultrasound is barely a "medical procedure". it's less than an xray. it's just a picture...
If I have to go to a doctor, get undressed, lay down and let them hook machines up to me, that's a medical procedure in my book, and one I'd just as soon pass on. It's a gross violation of privacy.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
Will it benefit her medically? Ultrasound is not a screening procedure utilized by mental health professionals.
possibly. for example, if you choose not to have the abortion, you have eliminated any physical complications that could occur.
i'm not arguing in favor of the legislation, only suggesting alternate persepctive...
Do you honestly think that seeing or not seeing an ultrasound is going to make a big difference here? I know quite a few women who have had abortions, I have had one myself, and none of us suffer any trauma. Of course there are those who do, but they are a minority.
honestly? it might. while you may feel no remorse, the couple of women i know who have had them have expressed it. not that it rules their daily lives necessarily, but that it occurs to them at times....what would the child have turned out like? would they have been able to be adopted and live a good life with adoptive parents? (as most who are adopted do. yes, there are exceptions, but they are a minority) ....if seeing the living being/cell clump inside them causes them to make another choice, it's possible that they might feel that they at least contributed to the child having a decent life in some small way. again, just trying to offer another way of looking at the situation..
Quite true, as farfromglorified has made quite apparent in this thread. However, those proposing legislation typically ARE the control-freaks ... hence their compulsion to control people.
i don't know, i just can't believe that everyone in government is evil and looking to control others. i know there are people like that. i guess i naively prefer to believe in the innate goodness and compassion in humans
If I have to go to a doctor, get undressed, lay down and let them hook machines up to me, that's a medical procedure in my book, and one I'd just as soon pass on. It's a gross violation of privacy.
there's no hooking up machines. there's no undressing, either...just pull up your shirt a little and show your tummy. it's a little scanner they rub across your belly. it just takes a picture based on sound echoes.
which makes me think that even though you have had an abortion, you never had an ultrasound. if you never saw it before you aborted, how can you say you wouldn't have been affected by seeing it? isn't that the same argument some are using against trau here? he's a virgin. he doesn't have kids. which makes him unqualified to comment in some people's opinions....well, you didn't have an ultrasound, so does that make you equally as unqualified to comment?
please don't take this confrontationally. this is a serious attempt at an exchange of ideas....not judging, not trying to convert....trying to show that there are different ideas
ARE the control-freaks ... hence their compulsion to control people.
If I have to go to a doctor, get undressed, lay down and let them hook machines up to me, that's a medical procedure in my book, and one I'd just as soon pass on. It's a gross violation of privacy.
C'mon, HM. Really. i'm not trying to start a fight. In all due respect, aren't you being overly dramatic with this? yiu hardly have "Machines hooked up to you". A little jelly and a camera! You don't even have to be fully "undressed". its just your belly. Gross violation of privacy? You have to admit that assessment is a smidge exaggerated. Besides, a person considering an abortion for God's sake is already in line for a much more intensive "medical procedure".
"When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
honestly? it might. while you may feel no remorse, the couple of women i know who have had them have expressed it. not that it rules their daily lives necessarily, but that it occurs to them at times....what would the child have turned out like? would they have been able to be adopted and live a good life with adoptive parents? (as most who are adopted do. yes, there are exceptions, but they are a minority) ....if seeing the living being/cell clump inside them causes them to make another choice, it's possible that they might feel that they at least contributed to the child having a decent life in some small way. again, just trying to offer another way of looking at the situation..
and how many parents occasionally wonder what might have been if they had waited or chosen not to have children? does this mean they should have aborted becos at random moments they think about their past decisions?
C'mon, HM. Really. i'm not trying to start a fight. In all due respect, aren't you being overly dramatic with this? yiu hardly have "Machines hooked up to you". A little jelly and a camera! You don't even have to be fully "undressed". its just your belly. Gross violation of privacy? You have to admit that assessment is a smidge exaggerated. Besides, a person considering an abortion for God's sake is already in line for a much more intensive "medical procedure".
then how about my alternative example? let's do screenings before people sign up for the military... show soldiers with legs blown off by roadside bombs, children slaughtered in the streets, and men's brains all over the road after being shot by iraqi snipers.... they SHOULD know what they're getting into right?
let's show shark attacks before people can surfboard, so they know what they're risking losing by choosing to surf.
and how many parents occasionally wonder what might have been if they had waited or chosen not to have children? does this mean they should have aborted becos at random moments they think about their past decisions?
sorry, i'm not sure i follow your line of thought here....
in hindsight, should they have chosen to abort if they had kids too young and feel that they missed out on some part of their own lives because of it?
if that's your question, then imho: no. to me, that falls under the selfishness/convenience argument.
sorry, i'm not sure i follow your line of thought here....
in hindsight, should they have chosen to abort if they had kids too young and feel that they missed out on some part of their own lives because of it?
if that's your question, then imho: no. to me, that falls under the selfishness/convenience argument.
my point is, you're saying women who have had abortions occasionally look back and wonder what the kid might have been like and if they made a mistake. you say this is a reason for outlawing abortion and doing this ultrasound thing: that becos women occasionally feel some doubt or second guessing, they clearly feel guilty and know deep down they committed murder. im pointing out that that argument is bullshit. just becos women look back and wonder if they made the wrong decision means nothing in terms of the morality of abortion. women can have the child and look back and wonder if they made the wrong call. ever hear of post-partum depression? shit, men AND women in married relationships very happy with their lives and children will occasionally look back and think "i wonder if id waited another year or two so we coulda gone to europe just the two of us." it means nothing. just that humans occasionally reminisce and doubt themselves. your argument is flawed.
I will always support the right of people to have the control to make choices and decisions over their own bodies. And that this above all else is a basic human right.
I've heard nothing here to make me change my mind about that.
I have, however, been heartened to hear the compassion and humanity of many of you on this thread.
So I do not support the decision to forcibly have women take ultrasounds, for the purposes of showing them a potential life they may be planning to terminate. I would not support any medical procedure sanctioned by the state.
There are just too many of these cases. A few years back during July 4th a mom threw her two year old sons off a bridge into a river in St Paul. One was saved the other died a tramatic death. How about all the poor little babies born with addictions? The abused and tortured children around this world.
Someone mentioned Playing God -where is God? Why are these little one's not protected by God? What about all the sick people who now live long lives because of medical advances who may have died much earlier or more inhumanely without medical help. Is that playing God?
I think Trau's motivation here is to make pro-choice folks feel guilty and admit that abortion is murder. Problem is there is a line in the sand for pro-choice folks and the only thing to do is agree to disagree.
Yeah, A lot of anti abortionists women live in perfect little jesus cotton candy worlds with fluffy clouds and white picket fences....
Reminds me of angry, sexually frustrated stepford wives
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
A) Would open the abortion issue for men to decide.
C) Would open the abortion issue for men to decide.
D) Would open the abortion issue for men to decide.
This only leaves you option , is this really the best you have!!
my answer was not in response to abortion. it was in response to trau's statement that he/she was unaware that having children can drive you insane. see post #234.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
my point is, you're saying women who have had abortions occasionally look back and wonder what the kid might have been like and if they made a mistake. you say this is a reason for outlawing abortion and doing this ultrasound thing: that becos women occasionally feel some doubt or second guessing, they clearly feel guilty and know deep down they committed murder.
i never said anything like either of those points you are trying to force into my words.
im pointing out that that argument is bullshit. just becos women look back and wonder if they made the wrong decision means nothing in terms of the morality of abortion. women can have the child and look back and wonder if they made the wrong call. ever hear of post-partum depression? shit, men AND women in married relationships very happy with their lives and children will occasionally look back and think "i wonder if id waited another year or two so we coulda gone to europe just the two of us." it means nothing. just that humans occasionally reminisce and doubt themselves. your argument is flawed.
the rest of your post is irrelevant, as it began on a false pretense. i simply stated that if a woman considering abortion decided to opt for giving it up for adoption instead because she saw an ultrasound, she might not have some of the same psychological side effects later in life as if she had aborted. (not all women, i understand. hippiemom for example has no regrets at all). i was merely presenting another viewpoint, one which considers the mental health of the woman, not speaking of the morality of abortion.
I will always support the right of people to have the control to make choices and decisions over their own bodies. And that this above all else is a basic human right.
i agree with this wholeheartedly! common ground!
where we differ is that i believe there's an innocent bystander, whose choices and decisions about their own existences are not being considered.
i suppose it comes down to our definitions of the beginning of life
What do you mean that's not my call? I'm not making one. It is for convenience in every case except for when the physical health of the mother is threatened.
not surprisingly i disagree with you. a woman's mental state MUST be taken into account. it is not for convenience that an abortion be performed because the woman suffers some type of psychiatric ailment that puts her life or the life of her baby at risk if the pregnancy is continued to term.
if it is acceptable by law as a defense when accused of murder or some other such crime, then it is acceptable when considering the reason for terminating a pregnancy.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Hypothetical. A girl is drugged beaten and gang raped... she get pregnant. The sick thing is some people would treat her like a POS for thinking about or getting an abortion.
They think she should have the baby as a constant reminder.
That goes to show you the kind of delusional mental cases some anti-abortionists are.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
i never said anything like either of those points you are trying to force into my words.
whatever. you understand the point. you were arguing that this is a good law that will somehow help mothers avoid regretting an abortion down the lin and saying that your basis for this conclusion is that you know women who had abortions and occasionally think about what might have been if they'd had the child. my point was that's ridiculous becos it can just as easily cut any other way.
the rest of your post is irrelevant, as it began on a false pretense. i simply stated that if a woman considering abortion decided to opt for giving it up for adoption instead because she saw an ultrasound, she might not have some of the same psychological side effects later in life as if she had aborted. (not all women, i understand. hippiemom for example has no regrets at all). i was merely presenting another viewpoint, one which considers the mental health of the woman, not speaking of the morality of abortion.
or she might still go through with the abortion and have even worse mental health consequences down the road becos of it. or she might not have the abortion and regret it and kill herself or the baby due to postpartum depression. or it might have no effect whatsoever. or it could deter women and they will be grateful for it. the point is, we dont know and this is a stupid and pointless little law that accomplishes nothing. it will do nothing with respect to abortion and is a waste of money. it is only good for people like you, who can now pat themselves on the back for another strike against abortion. yahoo. well done sir.
C'mon, HM. Really. i'm not trying to start a fight. In all due respect, aren't you being overly dramatic with this? yiu hardly have "Machines hooked up to you". A little jelly and a camera! You don't even have to be fully "undressed". its just your belly. Gross violation of privacy? You have to admit that assessment is a smidge exaggerated. Besides, a person considering an abortion for God's sake is already in line for a much more intensive "medical procedure".
most clinics i know use transvaginal probes because they offer superior imaging and better looks at issues like ectopic pregancies and other uterine abnormalities that you don't get with the transabdominal. transvaginal are a bit more invasive than the transabdominal ultrasounds (which you cannot be clothed for), and the difference is in the force. this person in your scenario is choosing to have the abortion procedure, but not choosing to have a probe inserted into her vagina and then forced to see the pictures.
if you wanna be a friend of mine
cross the river to the eastside
most clinics i know use transvaginal probes because they offer superior imaging and better looks at issues like ectopic pregancies and other uterine abnormalities that you don't get with the transabdominal. transvaginal are a bit more invasive than the transabdominal ultrasounds (which you cannot be clothed for), and the difference is in the force. this person in your scenario is choosing to have the abortion procedure, but not choosing to have a probe inserted into her vagina and then forced to see the pictures.
Euch!! Well if we are talking transvaginal ultrasound then I'm completely, totally and utterly against this law then. Transvaginal ultrasounds blow!! :eek:
Euch!! Well if we are talking transvaginal ultrasound then I'm completely, totally and utterly against this law then. Transvaginal ultrasounds blow!! :eek:
i don't know if the law mandates one or the other, but it's common for doctors to use transvaginal because of the other issues they need to see. regardless of the type of US, i think the law is ridiculous. but i just wanted to point out that the ultrasound isn't just about exposing one's belly. ultimately it's absurd to force any type of procedure upon a woman and shove the pictures in her face.
if you wanna be a friend of mine
cross the river to the eastside
where we differ is that i believe there's an innocent bystander, whose choices and decisions about their own existences are not being considered.
i suppose it comes down to our definitions of the beginning of life
Woohoo!! Common ground!! What a great place to be with you db!
I don't disagree that there is potentially an innocent bystander, but I do believe that they are most definitely being considered. I trust most women to make informed choice and to consider the rights and choices of the existence of said potential human.
And I do agree that it does appear to be coming down to our definition of the beginning of life.
i don't know if the law mandates one or the other, but it's common for doctors to use transvaginal because of the other issues they need to see. regardless of the type of US, i think the law is ridiculous. but i just wanted to point out that the ultrasound isn't just about exposing one's belly. ultimately it's absurd to force any type of procedure upon a woman and shove the pictures in her face.
Yes, I understand the importance from a diagnostic point of view for the use of transvaginal. I just don't like being on the receiving end of them. In my experience they are extremely painful, and degrading, even with an excellent technician. :eek: And you bringing it up has made me realise that it is more likely that they would need to use a transvaginal because I doubt they'd see much with the standard anyway. Would defeat the purpose of them doing it. You mentioning it just kinda freaked me out because I hadn't even considered the use of the transvaginal.
And I could never support this law regardless of what type of ultrasound is used. BUT if they did plan or need to use transvaginal, then I would consider that to be utterly barbaric.
Yes, I understand the importance from a diagnostic point of view for the use of transvaginal. I just don't like being on the receiving end of them. In my experience they are extremely painful, and degrading, even with an excellent technician. :eek: And you bringing it up has made me realise that it is more likely that they would need to use a transvaginal because I doubt they'd see much with the standard anyway. Would defeat the purpose of them doing it. You mentioning it just kinda freaked me out because I hadn't even considered the use of the transvaginal.
And I could never support this law regardless of what type of ultrasound is used. BUT if they did plan or need to use transvaginal, then I would consider that to be utterly barbaric.
yeah i find them to be degrading too, and can you imagine how much more degrading and painful it would be if you knew after submitting to the probe, you'd have to see the pictures--after you just made a very difficult decision in your life? geez. this law is so insulting to the woman involved. it comes across as either, 'oh we can't trust you to make your own decisions, so even though you've 'put a lot of thought' into this, we're just going to put those pictures in your face to make sure you're absolutely sure' OR 'well you made your decision and now we're going to rub your face in it'.
although that probably doesn't mean much to those who use quotes around "medical procedure" when referring to abortion.
if you wanna be a friend of mine
cross the river to the eastside
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
yeah i find them to be degrading too, and can you imagine how much more degrading and painful it would be if you knew after submitting to the probe, you'd have to see the pictures--after you just made a very difficult decision in your life? geez. this law is so insulting to the woman involved. it comes across as either, 'oh we can't trust you to make your own decisions, so even though you've 'put a lot of thought' into this, we're just going to put those pictures in your face to make sure you're absolutely sure' OR 'well you made your decision and now we're going to rub your face in it'.
although that probably doesn't mean much to those who use quotes around "medical procedure" when referring to abortion.
It's just a disgrace. Anyway you look at it. And anybody that is advocating it can't truly be as humane as they would like us to believe.
Perhaps those who do refer to TOP or abortion as "medical procedure" with quotes are too young to remember the bad old days in the western world of backyard abortions or have never heard of horrific things like Abortion Trees and similar in the underdeveloped world? Or maybe they are old enough to remember and they just care more about cell clusters than actual humans.
I find the whole anti abortion debate, to be so cruel sometimes.
And this whole ultrasound business has far greater ramifications for the privacy and rights of all people than I think some folk are realizing.
Abortion is just plain wrong. I'm not going to argue the point everybody has already argued. I'm just going to say that it was not the baby's choice to be conceived, and if a person doesn't want the kid that much they should adopt it.
I guess when we all die, we'll find out how okay it really is to get abortions. That's all I'm going to say.
When life gives you lemons, throw them at somebody.
Abortion is just plain wrong. I'm not going to argue the point everybody has already argued. I'm just going to say that it was not the baby's choice to be conceived, and if a person doesn't want the kid that much they should adopt it.
I guess when we all die, we'll find out how okay it really is to get abortions. That's all I'm going to say.
and by 'we', you mean women right? those whores who find themselves pregnant in the first place.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
whatever. you understand the point. you were arguing that this is a good law that will somehow help mothers avoid regretting an abortion down the lin and saying that your basis for this conclusion is that you know women who had abortions and occasionally think about what might have been if they'd had the child. my point was that's ridiculous becos it can just as easily cut any other way.
or she might still go through with the abortion and have even worse mental health consequences down the road becos of it. or she might not have the abortion and regret it and kill herself or the baby due to postpartum depression. or it might have no effect whatsoever. or it could deter women and they will be grateful for it. the point is, we dont know and this is a stupid and pointless little law that accomplishes nothing. it will do nothing with respect to abortion and is a waste of money. it is only good for people like you, who can now pat themselves on the back for another strike against abortion. yahoo. well done sir.
the venom towards me in your posts is unfounded. i did not, repeat, and you can go back and read that i practially disclaimed every paragraph, DID NOT argue that this is a good law. i merely presented some rational thoughts from a differing oint of view. i have not commented on whether or not i personally think it's a good law. (honestly, it's probably a waste of time and money imho. we should be, as someone else wisely posted earlier in the thread, making abortion unnecessary instead of waiting until the bell has been rung and adding yet another torment to someone's already upset life)
you have totally misrepresented what i've said and used that as a basis for condemning me personally. you can pat yourself on the back as you have certainly struck another great blow against the big, facist oppressor: man. yahoo. well done sir. or madam. sorry, i don't know you well enough to be sure...
from now on, i will reply only to those who actually seem to want to converse, instead of condemn. it's not so much a matter of trying to convince others to change their minds so much as it is an effort to get people to realize that there are rational people on both sides, and that the stereotypes the majority here (everyone admits this place leans left, don't they?) have about those who are against abortion are not always true. some people actually do care about others, not just themselves, and yet they still arrive at an anti-abortion stance
Woohoo!! Common ground!! What a great place to be with you db!
I don't disagree that there is potentially an innocent bystander, but I do believe that they are most definitely being considered. I trust most women to make informed choice and to consider the rights and choices of the existence of said potential human.
And I do agree that it does appear to be coming down to our definition of the beginning of life.
i hope so, too. for the sakes of all involved.
i would like to say again that i am not trying to convert you, but rather to help you better understand those with differing opinions as i try to understand those opinions that differ from mine.
the venom towards me in your posts is unfounded. i did not, repeat, and you can go back and read that i practially disclaimed every paragraph, DID NOT argue that this is a good law. i merely presented some rational thoughts from a differing oint of view. i have not commented on whether or not i personally think it's a good law. (honestly, it's probably a waste of time and money imho. we should be, as someone else wisely posted earlier in the thread, making abortion unnecessary instead of waiting until the bell has been rung and adding yet another torment to someone's already upset life)
you have totally misrepresented what i've said and used that as a basis for condemning me personally. you can pat yourself on the back as you have certainly struck another great blow against the big, facist oppressor: man. yahoo. well done sir. or madam. sorry, i don't know you well enough to be sure...
from now on, i will reply only to those who actually seem to want to converse, instead of condemn. it's not so much a matter of trying to convince others to change their minds so much as it is an effort to get people to realize that there are rational people on both sides, and that the stereotypes the majority here (everyone admits this place leans left, don't they?) have about those who are against abortion are not always true. some people actually do care about others, not just themselves, and yet they still arrive at an anti-abortion stance
then i misread your posts. if you read back, ive been doing precisely what you claim to be doing (saying this isn't a black and white issue and both sides have some reasonable justifications for their stances). in fact, the quote about making abortion unnecessary that you refer to was written by... me. im not spitting venom at you, i was trying to point out that the analogy you used to support these ultrasounds is flawed. maybe i came on too strong. for that i apologize. im just saying, regardless of which side of the divide you stand on, this particular law is stupid and serves no real purpose except to make health care providers richer. it doesn't advance the agenda or beliefs of either side.
possibly. for example, if you choose not to have the abortion, you have eliminated any physical complications that could occur.
i'm not arguing in favor of the legislation, only suggesting alternate persepctive...
True. However, you've let yourself in for a whole host of other, more severe complications that could occur in carrying a pregnancy to term, so this is a wash at best.
honestly? it might. while you may feel no remorse, the couple of women i know who have had them have expressed it. not that it rules their daily lives necessarily, but that it occurs to them at times....what would the child have turned out like? would they have been able to be adopted and live a good life with adoptive parents? (as most who are adopted do. yes, there are exceptions, but they are a minority) ....if seeing the living being/cell clump inside them causes them to make another choice, it's possible that they might feel that they at least contributed to the child having a decent life in some small way. again, just trying to offer another way of looking at the situation..
Sure, it's possible. Lots of things are possible. It's also possible that she has no interest in viewing an ultrasound, and since it's not medically necessary, that should be her option.
i don't know, i just can't believe that everyone in government is evil and looking to control others. i know there are people like that. i guess i naively prefer to believe in the innate goodness and compassion in humans
I don't believe that everyone in government is evil either, and I doubt those in favor of this type of legislation see themselves as evil. I certainly don't see them as evil. I DO see them as busybody control freaks.
there's no hooking up machines. there's no undressing, either...just pull up your shirt a little and show your tummy. it's a little scanner they rub across your belly. it just takes a picture based on sound echoes.
which makes me think that even though you have had an abortion, you never had an ultrasound. if you never saw it before you aborted, how can you say you wouldn't have been affected by seeing it? isn't that the same argument some are using against trau here? he's a virgin. he doesn't have kids. which makes him unqualified to comment in some people's opinions....well, you didn't have an ultrasound, so does that make you equally as unqualified to comment?
I've had two ultrasounds. I was told to undress except for my underwear, and put on a gown. I didn't particularly want to have either of them, but I had complications in both of my pregnancies that necessitated it. I'm a "leave me alone unless absolutely necessary" type of person, and the less I see of doctors, the better. I would be pissed off beyond belief if anyone attempted to force me to have ANY unnecessary procedure, no matter how benign.
please don't take this confrontationally. this is a serious attempt at an exchange of ideas....not judging, not trying to convert....trying to show that there are different ideas
I understand. There's very little on these boards, or even in a face-to-face debate, that I take personally
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
Comments
consider the possiblity that proponents of this may consider the procedure to be in the best interest of the well-being of the woman. there are health risks to having an abortion since it is a medical procedure. and, as stated vehemently by many in this thread, the psychological well-being of the woman seems to be a huge issue. some might think that she'd be better of mentally in the long run having made the choice to keep the baby or give it up for adoption instead of aborting it...
maybe, seriously now, maybe there are some altruistic motives and not simply puritannical control-freaks attempting to legislate sexual activity. those who are against abortion are not all religious fundamentalist zealots
and, i would argue that an ultrasound is barely a "medical procedure". it's less than an xray. it's just a picture...
ebay isn't evil people are
The South is Much Obliged
And I'm adamantly in favor of women being informed of those risks, as well as the risks involved in bringing a pregnancy to term.
Do you honestly think that seeing or not seeing an ultrasound is going to make a big difference here? I know quite a few women who have had abortions, I have had one myself, and none of us suffer any trauma. Of course there are those who do, but they are a minority.
Quite true, as farfromglorified has made quite apparent in this thread. However, those proposing legislation typically ARE the control-freaks ... hence their compulsion to control people.
If I have to go to a doctor, get undressed, lay down and let them hook machines up to me, that's a medical procedure in my book, and one I'd just as soon pass on. It's a gross violation of privacy.
possibly. for example, if you choose not to have the abortion, you have eliminated any physical complications that could occur.
i'm not arguing in favor of the legislation, only suggesting alternate persepctive...
honestly? it might. while you may feel no remorse, the couple of women i know who have had them have expressed it. not that it rules their daily lives necessarily, but that it occurs to them at times....what would the child have turned out like? would they have been able to be adopted and live a good life with adoptive parents? (as most who are adopted do. yes, there are exceptions, but they are a minority) ....if seeing the living being/cell clump inside them causes them to make another choice, it's possible that they might feel that they at least contributed to the child having a decent life in some small way. again, just trying to offer another way of looking at the situation..
i don't know, i just can't believe that everyone in government is evil and looking to control others. i know there are people like that. i guess i naively prefer to believe in the innate goodness and compassion in humans
there's no hooking up machines. there's no undressing, either...just pull up your shirt a little and show your tummy. it's a little scanner they rub across your belly. it just takes a picture based on sound echoes.
which makes me think that even though you have had an abortion, you never had an ultrasound. if you never saw it before you aborted, how can you say you wouldn't have been affected by seeing it? isn't that the same argument some are using against trau here? he's a virgin. he doesn't have kids. which makes him unqualified to comment in some people's opinions....well, you didn't have an ultrasound, so does that make you equally as unqualified to comment?
please don't take this confrontationally. this is a serious attempt at an exchange of ideas....not judging, not trying to convert....trying to show that there are different ideas
ebay isn't evil people are
The South is Much Obliged
C'mon, HM. Really. i'm not trying to start a fight. In all due respect, aren't you being overly dramatic with this? yiu hardly have "Machines hooked up to you". A little jelly and a camera! You don't even have to be fully "undressed". its just your belly. Gross violation of privacy? You have to admit that assessment is a smidge exaggerated. Besides, a person considering an abortion for God's sake is already in line for a much more intensive "medical procedure".
and how many parents occasionally wonder what might have been if they had waited or chosen not to have children? does this mean they should have aborted becos at random moments they think about their past decisions?
then how about my alternative example? let's do screenings before people sign up for the military... show soldiers with legs blown off by roadside bombs, children slaughtered in the streets, and men's brains all over the road after being shot by iraqi snipers.... they SHOULD know what they're getting into right?
let's show shark attacks before people can surfboard, so they know what they're risking losing by choosing to surf.
is this our government's responsbility?
sorry, i'm not sure i follow your line of thought here....
in hindsight, should they have chosen to abort if they had kids too young and feel that they missed out on some part of their own lives because of it?
if that's your question, then imho: no. to me, that falls under the selfishness/convenience argument.
ebay isn't evil people are
The South is Much Obliged
my point is, you're saying women who have had abortions occasionally look back and wonder what the kid might have been like and if they made a mistake. you say this is a reason for outlawing abortion and doing this ultrasound thing: that becos women occasionally feel some doubt or second guessing, they clearly feel guilty and know deep down they committed murder. im pointing out that that argument is bullshit. just becos women look back and wonder if they made the wrong decision means nothing in terms of the morality of abortion. women can have the child and look back and wonder if they made the wrong call. ever hear of post-partum depression? shit, men AND women in married relationships very happy with their lives and children will occasionally look back and think "i wonder if id waited another year or two so we coulda gone to europe just the two of us." it means nothing. just that humans occasionally reminisce and doubt themselves. your argument is flawed.
I've heard nothing here to make me change my mind about that.
I have, however, been heartened to hear the compassion and humanity of many of you on this thread.
So I do not support the decision to forcibly have women take ultrasounds, for the purposes of showing them a potential life they may be planning to terminate. I would not support any medical procedure sanctioned by the state.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Yeah, A lot of anti abortionists women live in perfect little jesus cotton candy worlds with fluffy clouds and white picket fences....
Reminds me of angry, sexually frustrated stepford wives
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
my answer was not in response to abortion. it was in response to trau's statement that he/she was unaware that having children can drive you insane. see post #234.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
i never said anything like either of those points you are trying to force into my words.
the rest of your post is irrelevant, as it began on a false pretense. i simply stated that if a woman considering abortion decided to opt for giving it up for adoption instead because she saw an ultrasound, she might not have some of the same psychological side effects later in life as if she had aborted. (not all women, i understand. hippiemom for example has no regrets at all). i was merely presenting another viewpoint, one which considers the mental health of the woman, not speaking of the morality of abortion.
ebay isn't evil people are
The South is Much Obliged
i agree with this wholeheartedly! common ground!
where we differ is that i believe there's an innocent bystander, whose choices and decisions about their own existences are not being considered.
i suppose it comes down to our definitions of the beginning of life
ebay isn't evil people are
The South is Much Obliged
not surprisingly i disagree with you. a woman's mental state MUST be taken into account. it is not for convenience that an abortion be performed because the woman suffers some type of psychiatric ailment that puts her life or the life of her baby at risk if the pregnancy is continued to term.
if it is acceptable by law as a defense when accused of murder or some other such crime, then it is acceptable when considering the reason for terminating a pregnancy.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
They think she should have the baby as a constant reminder.
That goes to show you the kind of delusional mental cases some anti-abortionists are.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
whatever. you understand the point. you were arguing that this is a good law that will somehow help mothers avoid regretting an abortion down the lin and saying that your basis for this conclusion is that you know women who had abortions and occasionally think about what might have been if they'd had the child. my point was that's ridiculous becos it can just as easily cut any other way.
or she might still go through with the abortion and have even worse mental health consequences down the road becos of it. or she might not have the abortion and regret it and kill herself or the baby due to postpartum depression. or it might have no effect whatsoever. or it could deter women and they will be grateful for it. the point is, we dont know and this is a stupid and pointless little law that accomplishes nothing. it will do nothing with respect to abortion and is a waste of money. it is only good for people like you, who can now pat themselves on the back for another strike against abortion. yahoo. well done sir.
most clinics i know use transvaginal probes because they offer superior imaging and better looks at issues like ectopic pregancies and other uterine abnormalities that you don't get with the transabdominal. transvaginal are a bit more invasive than the transabdominal ultrasounds (which you cannot be clothed for), and the difference is in the force. this person in your scenario is choosing to have the abortion procedure, but not choosing to have a probe inserted into her vagina and then forced to see the pictures.
cross the river to the eastside
Euch!! Well if we are talking transvaginal ultrasound then I'm completely, totally and utterly against this law then. Transvaginal ultrasounds blow!! :eek:
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
i don't know if the law mandates one or the other, but it's common for doctors to use transvaginal because of the other issues they need to see. regardless of the type of US, i think the law is ridiculous. but i just wanted to point out that the ultrasound isn't just about exposing one's belly. ultimately it's absurd to force any type of procedure upon a woman and shove the pictures in her face.
cross the river to the eastside
Woohoo!!
I don't disagree that there is potentially an innocent bystander, but I do believe that they are most definitely being considered. I trust most women to make informed choice and to consider the rights and choices of the existence of said potential human.
And I do agree that it does appear to be coming down to our definition of the beginning of life.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Yes, I understand the importance from a diagnostic point of view for the use of transvaginal. I just don't like being on the receiving end of them. In my experience they are extremely painful, and degrading, even with an excellent technician. :eek: And you bringing it up has made me realise that it is more likely that they would need to use a transvaginal because I doubt they'd see much with the standard anyway. Would defeat the purpose of them doing it. You mentioning it just kinda freaked me out because I hadn't even considered the use of the transvaginal.
And I could never support this law regardless of what type of ultrasound is used. BUT if they did plan or need to use transvaginal, then I would consider that to be utterly barbaric.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
yeah i find them to be degrading too, and can you imagine how much more degrading and painful it would be if you knew after submitting to the probe, you'd have to see the pictures--after you just made a very difficult decision in your life? geez. this law is so insulting to the woman involved. it comes across as either, 'oh we can't trust you to make your own decisions, so even though you've 'put a lot of thought' into this, we're just going to put those pictures in your face to make sure you're absolutely sure' OR 'well you made your decision and now we're going to rub your face in it'.
although that probably doesn't mean much to those who use quotes around "medical procedure" when referring to abortion.
cross the river to the eastside
http://vidmax.com/index.php/videos/view/869
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
It's just a disgrace. Anyway you look at it. And anybody that is advocating it can't truly be as humane as they would like us to believe.
Perhaps those who do refer to TOP or abortion as "medical procedure" with quotes are too young to remember the bad old days in the western world of backyard abortions or have never heard of horrific things like Abortion Trees and similar in the underdeveloped world? Or maybe they are old enough to remember and they just care more about cell clusters than actual humans.
I find the whole anti abortion debate, to be so cruel sometimes.
And this whole ultrasound business has far greater ramifications for the privacy and rights of all people than I think some folk are realizing.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
I guess when we all die, we'll find out how okay it really is to get abortions. That's all I'm going to say.
and by 'we', you mean women right? those whores who find themselves pregnant in the first place.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
the venom towards me in your posts is unfounded. i did not, repeat, and you can go back and read that i practially disclaimed every paragraph, DID NOT argue that this is a good law. i merely presented some rational thoughts from a differing oint of view. i have not commented on whether or not i personally think it's a good law. (honestly, it's probably a waste of time and money imho. we should be, as someone else wisely posted earlier in the thread, making abortion unnecessary instead of waiting until the bell has been rung and adding yet another torment to someone's already upset life)
you have totally misrepresented what i've said and used that as a basis for condemning me personally. you can pat yourself on the back as you have certainly struck another great blow against the big, facist oppressor: man. yahoo. well done sir. or madam. sorry, i don't know you well enough to be sure...
from now on, i will reply only to those who actually seem to want to converse, instead of condemn. it's not so much a matter of trying to convince others to change their minds so much as it is an effort to get people to realize that there are rational people on both sides, and that the stereotypes the majority here (everyone admits this place leans left, don't they?) have about those who are against abortion are not always true. some people actually do care about others, not just themselves, and yet they still arrive at an anti-abortion stance
ebay isn't evil people are
The South is Much Obliged
i hope so, too. for the sakes of all involved.
i would like to say again that i am not trying to convert you, but rather to help you better understand those with differing opinions as i try to understand those opinions that differ from mine.
thank you for your respectfullness
ebay isn't evil people are
The South is Much Obliged
then i misread your posts. if you read back, ive been doing precisely what you claim to be doing (saying this isn't a black and white issue and both sides have some reasonable justifications for their stances). in fact, the quote about making abortion unnecessary that you refer to was written by... me. im not spitting venom at you, i was trying to point out that the analogy you used to support these ultrasounds is flawed. maybe i came on too strong. for that i apologize. im just saying, regardless of which side of the divide you stand on, this particular law is stupid and serves no real purpose except to make health care providers richer. it doesn't advance the agenda or beliefs of either side.
and im a guy.
Sure, it's possible. Lots of things are possible. It's also possible that she has no interest in viewing an ultrasound, and since it's not medically necessary, that should be her option.
I don't believe that everyone in government is evil either, and I doubt those in favor of this type of legislation see themselves as evil. I certainly don't see them as evil. I DO see them as busybody control freaks.
I've had two ultrasounds. I was told to undress except for my underwear, and put on a gown. I didn't particularly want to have either of them, but I had complications in both of my pregnancies that necessitated it. I'm a "leave me alone unless absolutely necessary" type of person, and the less I see of doctors, the better. I would be pissed off beyond belief if anyone attempted to force me to have ANY unnecessary procedure, no matter how benign.
I understand. There's very little on these boards, or even in a face-to-face debate, that I take personally