How much jail time for women who've had abortions?

hippiemom wrote:

Perhaps you'd be so kind as to refer me to the studies that show the great suffering among women who have had abortions.

I already gave you the info. You just need to look it up for yourself.

gue_barium wrote:

Some of the hardest chargers against abortion are those that have had an abortion.

...exactly why they are the ones who deserve to be listened to.

Juberoo wrote:

I already gave you the info. You just need to look it up for yourself.

Ok, here we go ....

Google results for "PASS": http://www.google.com/search?q=PASS&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official
Nothing abortion related on the first page, and I'm not about to scroll through 344,000,000 results looking for it.

Safehaven website: http://www.safehavenministries.com/
If there are any scientific studies there, they are pretty well concealed.

Exhale website: http://www.4exhale.org/
See above.

Planned Parenthood website: http://www.plannedparenthood.org/birth-control-pregnancy/abortion/risks-and-side-effects.htm
No science, but they do attempt to present a list of possible risks and side-effects. Not surprisingly, they claim that they are minimal.

Google Results for "Abortion Conservation Project": http://www.google.com/search?q=abortion+conservation+project&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

Backline website: http://www.yourbackline.org/
Again, I don't see any studies.

Google results for "Australia/New Zealand Journal of Medicine": http://www.google.com/search?q=Australia%2FNew+Zealand+Journal+of+Medicine&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official
Possibly "JM" meant something else? Or you don't have the correct title?

Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/searchres.asp
Finally! Yes indeed, there may be something there, but I'll never know because I'd have to pay to read any of it.

Keep 'em coming, that was very useful :rolleyes:

Juberoo wrote:

Jeane I totally get what you are saying. I agree, if the male counterpart was agreeable or participated in the decision to abort, he should be held accountable as well. The problem here is, first how do you prove that? Second, we as a gender have fought so hard for the right to deny the men any involvement in the decision, that we have stabbed ourselves in the foot so to speak. Our bodies, our choice...remember?

DNA? Surely the products of conception could be tested? Supposing it came to that. Why if it's good enough to start contemplating jail terms for women who have aborted is it not also good enough for the man named as the father to have to prove that he isn't? Prove that he isn't also guilty and requiring a jail term? And I don't think it's enough to say that if he participated in the decision to abort that he should be held accountable. Men know that if they have sex without a condom that it's reasonable to assume that a pregnancy could be the end result and that if they do not want children then they have a responsiblity to ensure that they do not allow that to happen. They are also well aware that it is a woman's body and a woman's right to choose so bearing that in mind, I don't see how going in without a condom makes you any less culpable. If people are not going to discuss potential pregnancy and outcomes before they have sex, and they're not going to do that, then they each have to take responsiblity for their actions. Just because the pregnancy doesn't occur in the man's body doesn't mean that he is absolved of all responsibility once conception occurs. And if he doesn't agree with abortion then I think that's something he needs to discuss with the woman before they get naked. Ultimately it is her body and her choice but this is not new information. So for every woman out there today procuring an abortion there is a man, who participated and who knew the law as it stands. And I don't necessarily agree that women have fought hard to deny men any involvement in the decision. As I said it's not like we aren't all well aware of the law as it stands. For all the women that I know that have had one I would have to say a greater many of them have been hung out to dry and left the minute pregnancy became a reality. What I'd like stats on is how many women out there would have continued with the pregnancy if the father of the child had showed any inclination to support the pregnancy and the subsequent child. And just how many men are there that actually do want their child and are denied by the woman? These are stats I'd like to see. I can quite imagine how they'd go here.

Oh and I'm not "bashing" men here. Just in case any of the fellas think I am.

Jeanie wrote:

DNA? Surely the products of conception could be tested? Supposing it came to that. Why if it's good enough to start contemplating jail terms for women who have aborted is it not also good enough for the man named as the father to have to prove that he isn't? Prove that he isn't also guilty and requiring a jail term? And I don't think it's enough to say that if he participated in the decision to abort that he should be held accountable. Men know that if they have sex without a condom that it's reasonable to assume that a pregnancy could be the end result and that if they do not want children then they have a responsiblity to ensure that they do not allow that to happen. They are also well aware that it is a woman's body and a woman's right to choose so bearing that in mind, I don't see how going in without a condom makes you any less culpable. If people are not going to discuss potential pregnancy and outcomes before they have sex, and they're not going to do that, then they each have to take responsiblity for their actions. Just because the pregnancy doesn't occur in the man's body doesn't mean that he is absolved of all responsibility once conception occurs. And if he doesn't agree with abortion then I think that's something he needs to discuss with the woman before they get naked. Ultimately it is her body and her choice but this is not new information. So for every woman out there today procuring an abortion there is a man, who participated and who knew the law as it stands. And I don't necessarily agree that women have fought hard to deny men any involvement in the decision. As I said it's not like we aren't all well aware of the law as it stands. For all the women that I know that have had one I would have to say a greater many of them have been hung out to dry and left the minute pregnancy became a reality. What I'd like stats on is how many women out there would have continued with the pregnancy if the father of the child had showed any inclination to support the pregnancy and the subsequent child. And just how many men are there that actually do want their child and are denied by the woman? These are stats I'd like to see. I can quite imagine how they'd go here.

Oh and I'm not "bashing" men here. Just in case any of the fellas think I am.

Jeanne...what I meant was, how would you prove that he coerced the woman to get or was involved in any way with the abortion.

Jeanie wrote:

I'm saying that's irrelevant. If it can be proven he was there, that he in fact is the father and the outcome is that she aborted and suddenly it carries a jail term for her, then he should also be found guilty and sentenced. He contributed to the situation.

I mean isn't this how drink driving laws work? If you are found to be under the influence of alcohol whilst driving a car you can be sentenced to jail for having the potential to cause an accident. Why should this be any different?

If you have sex with a woman and you don't wear a condom or protect yourself from conception and the end result is an abortion then you contributed to that outcome.

No, because maybe he didn't know of the pregnancy, maybe he didnt want the abortion.....womens rights deny the man a choice. Just because he deposited a sperm, doesn't mean he should be held accountable if she aborts the conception. The end result as far as he is concerned is conception, not abortion. So unless you are willing to prosecute men for impregnating a woman with her consent (if she is not using protection then yes she is consenting) this argument is moot. Again, our bodies, our choices...that includes getting pregnant. If we don't want to get pregnant, we have to assure that it doesn't happen....it isn't reasonable to place that responsibility on someone else. It is our womb.

Would you hold a father accountable if a mother killed her living children if he was not involved in her decision to do so? IE: Andrea Yates

Juberoo wrote:

No, because maybe he didn't know of the pregnancy, maybe he didnt want the abortion.....womens rights deny the man a choice. Just because he deposited a sperm, doesn't mean he should be held accountable if she aborts the conception. The end result as far as he is concerned is conception, not abortion. So unless you are willing to prosecute men for impregnating a woman with her consent (if she is not using protection then yes she is consenting) this argument is moot. Again, our bodies, our choices...that includes getting pregnant. If we don't want to get pregnant, we have to assure that it doesn't happen....it isn't reasonable to place that responsibility on someone else. It is our womb.

Would you hold a father accountable if a mother killed her living children if he was not involved in her decision to do so? IE: Andrea Yates

And I'm saying that if you want to have sex and you have strong feelings about abortion being wrong then as a man you do have a choice, you have the choice to protect yourself from that outcome before it eventuates. That's where your choice comes into it! You have the choice to wear a condom or have a vasectomy (heaven forbid! :rolleyes: ) or take some other form of male contraceptive or not have sex with someone that you think would have an abortion if you are against it. You do not have the right to expect that a woman should use her body as an incubator for you after the fact. This is not new information. It's really quite simple. We all have rights and we all have responsibilities. They may come at different stages in the process but they are still there for both sexes.

Men and women can take all kinds of reasonable measures not to get pregnant, but ultimately no birth control is 100% effective. So to say we have to ensure that doesn't happen really isn't reasonable either. We can do our very best to try to make sure it doesn't. But it does happen. That's why we have abortion in the first place.

I do not know the case you are speaking of, but I do not consider fully developed children and embryos to be the same thing. So on face value, knowing nothing about the case then no, I wouldn't hold the father responsible, unless of course he knew his wife had a mental illness or was showing signs of being detrimental to the health of the children and he did nothing about it, in which case then he does bare some responsibility.

catefrances wrote:

there is nothing on this earth that a man, or anyone else could ever say to me that would make me go through with a pregnancy that i for whatever reason chose not continue with. what men have no say over is what i choose to do with my body. fuck 'em, they had their fun. now all decisions are mine. I will choose to decide what is best for me, no one else.

In the end it is your choice true, but the man still has a right to speak his mind. We finished by understanding that sex could lead to pregnancy and some men even like the idea of being fathers. So to reduce their part in just "some fun" is a little unfair.

Not sure if it's been mentioned in this thread, but what about this woman in the news who has allegedly killed 4 or 5 of her unborn children? I believe there is talk of charging her. Now if abortion is legal, how can they press charges against her?

Here's the quote I found:

"Freeman was charged with murder under a state law that allows murder prosecutions of those who cause the death of a fetus that may have been able to survive outside the womb."

That is one of the more hypocritical laws out there.

know1 wrote:

Not sure if it's been mentioned in this thread, but what about this woman in the news who has allegedly killed 4 or 5 of her unborn children? I believe there is talk of charging her. Now if abortion is legal, how can they press charges against her?

if abortion is legal, why would they need to charge her? is it a crime to be fertile? is it a crime not to use birth control? admittedly perhaps she needs to look after herself better and guard against unwanted pregnancy.
and yes some woman may use abortion as birth control, but that doesn't mean the rest of us should suffer the consequences of those women's ineptitude when it comes to taking precautions.