Reducing the number of abortions

mrmufin · Post by **mrmufin** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 6:55 pm

Otseng has mentioned this topic a few times, and I think it's worthy of discussion:

How can the number of abortions be lowered?

Remember, folks: this forum is for discussion toward a common objective, not for debate on the issue of abortion...

Regards,
mrmufin

AClockWorkOrange · Post by **AClockWorkOrange** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 3:03 am

Post by **otseng** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:16 am

As a reminder, this topic is not meant for debating, but for problem solving. The focus should be on reaching a solution, not debating differences. Thanks.

Post by **otseng** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:34 am

Moderator note:

I deleted several posts between AClockWorkOrange and ken1burton. If you two would like to continue debating about abortion, either start a debate thread or use PM.

Nick_A · Post by **Nick_A** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:55 pm

How can the number of abortions be lowered?

Abortions of convenience are just a symptom of the loss of what should be our normal respect for life and the life processes.

Abortion is just a place along the line that begins at conception and has the potential to continue on through birth, maturity and finally death. The fact that abortions of convenience seem fine only indicates a lack of understanding, respect for, and the value of life.

So if people really want to put their heads together as easily as their genitals, the question becomes how to discover or rediscover the respect for life which would honor the whole process beginning at conception and ending with death. Such nrespect would lower abortions virtually by definition.

With secular egotism as influential as it has become, I don't know if this self importance it has generated could ever allow the majority to willingly acquire a perspective that does not glorify self importance. But its worth a shot IMO.

Beto · Post by **Beto** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:08 pm

I know I'm being lazy, but has the use of the next-day pill been considered "abortion", in the thread?

Intrepidman · Post by **Intrepidman** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 2:03 am

Beto wrote:I know I'm being lazy, but has the use of the next-day pill been considered "abortion", in the thread?

Although scientists aren't completely sure how it works, they believe that levonorgestrel prevents pregnancy either by

1) stopping the ovulation process or by
2) disrupting the ability of sperm and egg to meet in the fallopian tubes.
3) Some speculate that the drug may prevent the fertilized egg from implanting as well, perhaps by making the uterine lining less receptive to the egg.

1 & 2 are definitely not abortion IMHO.

3) would be an interesting debate.

catalyst · Post by **catalyst** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 5:30 pm

Intrepidman wrote:
Beto wrote:I know I'm being lazy, but has the use of the next-day pill been considered "abortion", in the thread?
Although scientists aren't completely sure how it works, they believe that levonorgestrel prevents pregnancy either by

1) stopping the ovulation process or by
2) disrupting the ability of sperm and egg to meet in the fallopian tubes.
3) Some speculate that the drug may prevent the fertilized egg from implanting as well, perhaps by making the uterine lining less receptive to the egg.

1 & 2 are definitely not abortion IMHO.

3) would be an interesting debate.

It works much the same as 'The Pill", but the levels of the hormones in the M-A Pill are higher. Some morning-after pills contain only one hormone, levonorgestrel, and others contain two, progestin and estrogen. Progestin prevents the sperm from reaching the egg and keeps a fertilised egg from attaching to the wall of the uterus (implantation). Estrogen stops the ovaries from releasing eggs (ovulation) that can be fertilised by sperm.

Morning-after pills aren't the same as mifepristone (Mifeprex), the so-called abortion pill.

-----------------------

There is something that needs to be clarified here as well.

Voluntary medically assisted termination (over spontaneous abortion) of a pregnancy, I am assuming, is what is being discussed here and how to avoid it?

It should be realised that even a miscarriage (spontaneous) is abortion. Even when a woman or girl has a miscarriage, if the miscarriage happens any time from weeks 6- 8 into the pregnancy, a VOLUNTARY D&C is performed on the woman/girl, which is the exact same procedure as medically assisted termination.
On the medical records of the female in question, it is written as ABORTION even at miscarriage stage. Even removal of an eptopic pregnancy is listed as abortion. The voluntary "bit" means only that the patient signed off to have the NECESSARY post miscarriage/eptopic pregnancy procedure done.

So to assume that these may be the reasons:

otseng wrote:

I was also trying to think of some root issues of why people have abortions. Why are there unwanted pregnancies? Seems like there are several situations where a pregnancy would be unwanted:
- Partners are not married
- Partners are not "ready" for children
- Partners cannot support the child
- Partners do not want more children

Is not necessarily the case.

MANY a termination procedure and I would say the majority, are due to necessity, over desire. The pregnancies MAY have been wanted even in all or any the above circumstances.

I will check around to see if I can see any statistical research has been done on the numbers of UNWANTED pregnancy and subsequent termination ONLY and check out their numbers, vs the number of "voluntary" abortions performed.

I reckon only then it can be determined which way to go as to suggestions as to curbing the issue.

^---- What do you think Osteng? Is it viable given the POHT topic?

It really does have to be realised that many a girl or woman going to a clinic to have a D&C done, is not necessarily a "baby killer" and could well be grieving the loss of her WANTED child.

I did mention all of the above because as I read through the thread it was apparent that the majority of contributors to this discussion, are men. I was not sure if any or all were aware of this.

Intrepidman · Post by **Intrepidman** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:44 pm

catalyst wrote:
Intrepidman wrote:
Beto wrote:I know I'm being lazy, but has the use of the next-day pill been considered "abortion", in the thread?
Although scientists aren't completely sure how it works, they believe that levonorgestrel prevents pregnancy either by

1) stopping the ovulation process or by
2) disrupting the ability of sperm and egg to meet in the fallopian tubes.
3) Some speculate that the drug may prevent the fertilized egg from implanting as well, perhaps by making the uterine lining less receptive to the egg.

1 & 2 are definitely not abortion IMHO.

3) would be an interesting debate.
It works much the same as 'The Pill", but the levels of the hormones in the M-A Pill are higher. Some morning-after pills contain only one hormone, levonorgestrel, and others contain two, progestin and estrogen. Progestin prevents the sperm from reaching the egg and keeps a fertilised egg from attaching to the wall of the uterus (implantation). Estrogen stops the ovaries from releasing eggs (ovulation) that can be fertilised by sperm.

Morning-after pills aren't the same as mifepristone (Mifeprex), the so-called abortion pill.

-----------------------

There is something that needs to be clarified here as well.

Voluntary medically assisted termination (over spontaneous abortion) of a pregnancy, I am assuming, is what is being discussed here and how to avoid it?

It should be realised that even a miscarriage (spontaneous) is abortion. Even when a woman or girl has a miscarriage, if the miscarriage happens any time from weeks 6- 8 into the pregnancy, a VOLUNTARY D&C is performed on the woman/girl, which is the exact same procedure as medically assisted termination.
On the medical records of the female in question, it is written as ABORTION even at miscarriage stage. Even removal of an eptopic pregnancy is listed as abortion. The voluntary "bit" means only that the patient signed off to have the NECESSARY post miscarriage/eptopic pregnancy procedure done.

So to assume that these may be the reasons:

otseng wrote:
I was also trying to think of some root issues of why people have abortions. Why are there unwanted pregnancies? Seems like there are several situations where a pregnancy would be unwanted:
- Partners are not married
- Partners are not "ready" for children
- Partners cannot support the child
- Partners do not want more children
Is not necessarily the case.

MANY a termination procedure and I would say the majority, are due to necessity, over desire. The pregnancies MAY have been wanted even in all or any the above circumstances.

I will check around to see if I can see any statistical research has been done on the numbers of UNWANTED pregnancy and subsequent termination ONLY and check out their numbers, vs the number of "voluntary" abortions performed.

I reckon only then it can be determined which way to go as to suggestions as to curbing the issue.

^---- What do you think Osteng? Is it viable given the POHT topic?

It really does have to be realised that many a girl or woman going to a clinic to have a D&C done, is not necessarily a "baby killer" and could well be grieving the loss of her WANTED child.

I did mention all of the above because as I read through the thread it was apparent that the majority of contributors to this discussion, are men. I was not sure if any or all were aware of this.

Maybe it's a problem with a poorly worded OP? What does the OP mean by 'abortion'? My guess is terminating a healthy pregnancy voluntarily because the female (I use the word 'female' because can we consider a 12 year old a 'woman'?) did not want to be pregnant any more.

IMHO, God does not consider the female a murderer for having an ectopic pregnancy terminated. The baby is not going to come to term anyway, and it could kill the mother. Something has gone horribly, horribly wrong. Life is not perfect and clean, and sometimes people have to make impossible decisions.

This is not the same as a supermodel who doesn't want to lose her figure.

catalyst · Post by **catalyst** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 9:56 pm

IM wrote:

Maybe it's a problem with a poorly worded OP? What does the OP mean by 'abortion'? My guess is terminating a healthy pregnancy voluntarily because the female (I use the word 'female' because can we consider a 12 year old a 'woman'?) did not want to be pregnant any more.

But too rape could result in a "healthy" pregnancy, but in that case I could not blame the rape victim for wanting to terminate the pregnancy. Certainly it is unwanted, but so was the violation of her body in the first place to cause the pregnancy.

IMHO, God does not consider the female a murderer for having an ectopic pregnancy terminated. The baby is not going to come to term anyway, and it could kill the mother. Something has gone horribly, horribly wrong. Life is not perfect and clean, and sometimes people have to make impossible decisions.

I am glad you have that opinion IM, but many a placcard-holding pro-lifer standing outside FP clinics, calling the exiting females "baby-killers", do not know the circumstances behind the termination. The assumption is, they made a gleeful choice to kill their baby.

This is not the same as a supermodel who doesn't want to lose her figure.

Many a supermodel have babies they have given birth to. Elle MacPherson, Heidi Klum, Cindy Crawford..Yasmin Le Bon..etc..just a few examples. So perhaps the other "supermodels" who may have had voluntary terminations, it too may have been a case of miscarriage or eptopic pregnancy over vanity.

We don't know. We just know that the "abortion numbers" are put out there, not taking the variables as to reasons into account.

Intrepidman · Post by **Intrepidman** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:34 pm

catalyst wrote: But too rape could result in a "healthy" pregnancy, but in that case I could not blame the rape victim for wanting to terminate the pregnancy. Certainly it is unwanted, but so was the violation of her body in the first place to cause the pregnancy....

That is a really tough one. The 'morning-after' remedies would be a good choice. I'm guessing there are things that can be done the next day or 2 to make certain that the victim is not pregnant.

I hate to sound like a heartless hard-a$$, but if a victim has been raped the first things I would think that would come to mind would be 'what I get a disease? What if I get pregnant?'. If they wait until the baby has a heartbeat things get really nasty indeed. Then we have to try to figure out just why is the baby different from a person in a coma on life support?

catalyst wrote:Many a supermodel have babies they have given birth to. Elle MacPherson, Heidi Klum, Cindy Crawford..Yasmin Le Bon..etc..just a few examples. So perhaps the other "supermodels" who may have had voluntary terminations, it too may have been a case of miscarriage or eptopic pregnancy over vanity.

We don't know. We just know that the "abortion numbers" are put out there, not taking the variables as to reasons into account.

I don't know, but I doubt that pregnancies that were biologically threatening to the mother were illegal before '72 in the USA. I would compare the number of abortions before '72 and now.