Suing for ‘Abortion Regret’

There are many things that make me proud of my home state. For one, Iowa was the third U.S. state to legalize equal marriage. Every state has their political morons, however, and I think we can count Rep. Greg Heartsill among them. This bozo has proposed a bill that would allow women to sue their doctor for ‘abortion regret.’

This photo, “Abortion Anniversary” is copyright (c) 2014 giraffebacon and made available under an Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic license

What the actual fuck?

This is the most insane thing I’ve heard since the concept of ‘legitimate rape.’ If I go to a doctor because I want fake boobs and then decide 10 years late that I regret my fake boobs, I don’t get to sue my doctor.

The craziest thing about the whole abortion debate is that people seem to think it’s black and white. If you are pro-life, then you want all babies to be born regardless of complications. If you are pro-choice, you should always abort all the fetuses because being pregnant is such an inconvenience. Those pro-choice people are no better than murders!

The point of being pro-choice, though, is having the choice. Women deserve the freedom to make their own decisions about their own bodies. With great power, however, comes great responsibility. A women gets to make her decision and she then has to face the consequences. You don’t get to sue someone for doing exactly what you wanted them to do because you now regret that you had them do it.

Yet, I am now curious. Are there laws like this for other conditions? Is there such thing as a law that allows a person so sue if they regret a procedure they agreed to? Obviously you can sue if the doctor does something wrong, but if everything goes exactly like planned, can they still sue? If laws like this exist, what is the logic behind them?

Do you think a person should be able to sue if they regret a having a medical procedure performed on them?


30 thoughts on “Suing for ‘Abortion Regret’”

  1. Its a tricky issue because a lot of people I’ve talked with feel as though they were coerced by their doctor. Not just with regard to getting an abortion but with a lot of issues;

    —) One person was talked into taking a particular prescription drug (a psychotropic) and it ended up wreaking havoc on his life that took nearly 10 years to recover from

    —) one person I talked with felt that the doctor talked her into getting the abortion

    —) One person I talked with felt as though the doctor talked them into having his daughter get a particular surgery… and it ended up having devastating consequences on his daughters life

    So, specifically; suing for regret. Well I wonder how much of the lawsuit is connected to ‘regret’ in the context of feeling pushed into making a decision.

    Many doctors talk down to the patient; as though the doctor is a supreme authority and knows everything and that the patient is stupid and doesn’t know anything.

    In psychology classes we talked about this issue a lot back in college, its a growing concern among people like myself that doctors are misusing their authority…….. its why a lot of medical students these days are pursuing degrees in alternative medicine; because they believe traditional western medicine has taken the attitude of ‘we are above reproach and above being questioned’

    On NPR two weeks ago I heard a debate between a doctor who wants women to have mandated breast exams with those machines that are linked to causing problems in women, and a doctor who believes women are just fine doing self-breast exams….. it was a fairly heated debate and it reminded me of the bias that many doctors demonstrate.

    We know that having an abortion is nowhere in the same ballpark as getting a tooth extracted. There are a lot of psycho-social and philosophical issues involved in getting an abortion, and so I can understand women having regret following the procedure, who perhaps didn’t fully comprehend what was going on.

    Does that mean the women should have a right to legally sue the doctor? Probably not. Being a libertarian, I tend to shy away from the whole lawsuit mentality…….. but the liberal part of me believes in heavier regulations surrounding abortion because of the clearly documented psychological ramifications involved.

    Most medical procedures involve an initial exam and consultation; in which the patient is given all of the information related to the procedure and I don’t think its unreasonable to expect an extra little bit of attention involved in the psychological ‘after-effects’ being discussed with the patient.

    Of course, as a libertarian, I’m supposed to oppose most regulations; but I think there are enough studies that have found high percentages of women who deal with depressing following an abortion that I don’t think its unreasonable to give that information to women who are seeking an abortion.

    But to answer your question; should they be allows to sue for regret…… probably not.

    1. This is the kind of information I was looking for. Because people obviously sue doctors for various reasons. Can they sue for regret in other cases. I won’t start on the medical establishment because I have my problems with that. I’m pretty sure a doctor is suppose to inform patients about side effects and consequences. Even the free clinics I went to had pamphlets on the risks and benefits of adoption, abortion and pregnancy. That isn’t to say that doctors don’t try to force their opinion on patients, it just comes down to who made the final decision. If you sign on the dotted line that you do agree to have this surgery, you don’t get to sue if you regret having it (unless there is malpractice).

      It really comes down to how the law is written. One of the things I don’t like about this one is that you can sue up to ten years after having an abortion. So, if six years after an abortion you find Jesus and suddenly regret your decision, you can sue. That just seems like too much to me. It doesn’t seem like a law seeking to protect women from malpractice in relation to abortion. It seems like a law to scare doctors into refusing to perform abortions.

      I can see certain regulations surrounding abortions that would act as a benefit, but I wouldn’t agree with anything that is mandated. For example, I would not say a women seeking an abortion must see a therapist before and after an abortion. However, I would support a law that said hospitals and clinics must provide information and access to at least one therapy session before and after an abortion.

      Information is always the key. People getting any medical procedure done should be informed of the physical and mental risks. They should go into it with as much understanding as possible. But, since a person knows the risk, I don’t think they should sue if that risk become a reality for them.

      I think part of laws like these, along with scaring doctors, is that religiously inclined people feel that others are misinformed. Even if women are provided with information on the physical and mental ramifications of abortions (which they are in Iowa. I looked into some stuff for a potential article when in journalism school), the religious right takes issue with part of that information not including ‘also, there’s a soul in there. You’re killing a baby. You’re killing a human being and God will hate you for it.’ That’s not in there, of course, because people believe different things. There is no medical fact that says there is a soul in there and, in terms of life, a fetus has less brain activity that that of a brain dead person until around weeks 23 – 26. No one can say ‘God will hate you’ in an abortion pamphlet without trying to force religious dogma on someone.

  2. One of the problems with the abortion issue is that a lot of double standards circulate around the issue;

    —) Its against the law to have your kidney removed and sell it to highest bidder in order to make some extra cash

    —> yet we say women have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies

    —) Its against the law to get castrated (I read a newspaper article about three different men who were arrested for going to a doctor and privately getting castrated)

    —> yet we say women have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies

    —) a man or woman that wants to get a ‘sex’ change is required by law to get therapy

    —> yet we say women have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies

    —) its against the law for someone to sell one of their eyeballs or other body parts to make some extra cash (and if it were legal you could make a LOT of money selling a body part and pay off all your debts and get a good start on life)

    —> yet we say women have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies

    —) Its against the law to commit suicide in nearly every state but Oregon

    —> yet we say women have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies

    —) and in the states where doctor assisted suicide is legal; we require the clients to get therapy before they kill themselves

    —>yet we say women have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies

    So do you see the double standards? What society is saying is not that women have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies…. what we’re really saying is when it comes to one issue, and one issue alone; abortion, women have the right to do whatever they want……

    So little old me the libertarian sitting in the corner who doesn’t like to involve himself in politics anymore, just tilts my head back and sighs, because I see these double standards that to me are simply unfair. Because I believe that if we’re really going to practice in our society the idea that people have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies then it has to include; selling body parts, committing suicide, castration, fill-in-the-blank…….

    You can’t say, “well women should be able to get abortion without being mandated to get therapy” and then say “people who want to get a sex change or commit suicide have to be mandated to get therapy”

    To me its a double standard; we either are consistent across the board…… OR we enact Kenneth-Libertarianism where each state gets to have different laws, and then we get to choose which state we live in based on the laws that best reflects our personal beliefs.

    Cause then I would live in the state that sets a limit on abortion after all the body parts of the baby are formed……. and other states can have laws where they allow abortion right up to 9 months…… to each their own I say.

    So when the subject of abortion comes up I think we need to realize that we’re not really talking about women having the right to do whatever they want with their bodies…..we’re really only talking about women having the right do abort the baby or not.

    1. In each contradictory case you present, I would argue that’s wrong. I’m a fan of “you can do whatever you want so long as your not interfering with another’s rights.” So, if you want to get castrated or kill yourself, go right ahead. Those actions don’t effect another person’s rights. If people want therapy before or after, they can choose that option. They should not be forced. The only thing you list which I would agree to any law on is the selling of body parts. Specifically, if you are selling a body part for someone else to use, there needs to be certain quality standards and you can’t suddenly take your eye back once you sell it. This is because it effects the rights of others. Someone who thought they were getting a perfectly healthy eye should not have to deal with infections or diseases caused by the doner. There’s a reason why they don’t give away just any organ. It has to be a healthy, functioning organ.

      People come to me with these arguments all the time. “But what about all these similar things that are illegal? ” And I tell them what I am telling you. They shouldn’t be illegal. Unless they are violating the rights of others through their action, anyone can do whatever they want.

      On more note… how old are law against castration? I can only imagine they are really old, from back in the day when the purpose of marriage was childbearing or they are recent in an attempt to make being trans illegal without actually making it illegal.

      1. Castration actually used to be rather normal and a part of most cultures; because kings, princes, leaders, etc would specifically hire eunuchs in order to make sure that their personal attendants would screw their wife lol

        And I think you are being pretty fair :-). As long as you are okay with everything being legal… then you are at least being consistent.

        1. Don’t get me wrong. If someone asked me if I thought getting castrated was a good idea, I would most likely say no. But I’m not going to to make that opinion into law because I think that’s how men should be.

          1. I would NEVER do it…. but I’ve often thought to myself that if I never had to think about sex…. gosh, I probably would be able to do 100 times more things with my life lol

            1. I could think of a handful of medical reasons. There’s a show on Netflix called ‘Strange Sex’ that’s about people with various medical conditions in the genital regions. One was about a man who fell hard on his penis. He shook it off and woke up the next day to find it swollen and colorful. There was no helping him aside from removing it before gangrene set in. Another had a condition that has only recently been recognized where a man suffers intense flu like symptoms when he ejaculates. No one is sure what causes it, but the theory is that it might be an allergic reaction to one’s own semen. He took a chance and had his testicles removed. He no longer suffers. After seeing that, I can imagine reasons to desire castration.

                1. If it makes you feel any better, there were horror stories for me as well. One was a woman born without a vaginal canal. Dude, they had to make one for her. I cringe just thinking about it. Then there was another woman who had unusually long menstrual cycles. Turns out she has two uteruses, each with their own cycle and exit. I have no complaints about life after watching that.

                  All that said, I recommend the show. For the most part, it’s just interesting from a biological standpoint that some of these conditions even exist

                  1. When I used to have cable I’d watch Discovery Health all the time and they had similar shows….. for awhile I got addicted to the uncensored surgeries and I think I got a weird satisfaction out of grossing myself out….. probably the same reason people like watching horror movies that are really gross..

                    1. Probably, although, when it comes to things like surgery shows, my wonder for the things we can do takes over.

                      It’s all fascinating, but this show wasn’t overly graphic. It was only the topic that was graphic.

                    2. I used to bitch and whine when certain shows would blur out certain things because of censors….. my daughter always makes jokes about stuff like that, like if we’re listening to the radio and the station bleeps out the F-word out of a song she will say sarcastically, “oh I’m so glad they bleeped out the cuss word cuz now I have no clue that it was the F-word:”…. censorship stuff like that annoys me; show me the blood and guts during surgery! I can handle it!…. okay, maybe not always.Like this one time the doctor removed this kid’s nose (and they didn’t’ blur it out) and it was so weird I had to change the channel

        1. I’m sure there are some who would argue having one or both testicles removed is a bit different than castrations. Just the same, I agree. There was a show I watched called Strange Sex that was all about odd medical conditions involving sexual organs. One man had a condition that is so rare, it’s only recently been recognized and given a name. He had sever flu like symptoms after orgasm. It’s speculated the condition is caused by an allergic reactions to one’s own semen. Despite the fact nothing has been proven, he decided to have his testicles removed and now appears cured. It just goes to show you how much more we have to learn about our own bodies. Whose to say there isn’t a similar condition that would require castration? It’s not really anyone else’s business whether or not a person follows through with it or not. The only person’s rights being affected by the procedure are those of the individual making the choice.

  3. I vote no. This would be a dumb law and would be opening the doors for trouble. The doctor is NOT responsible for a decision you (hopefully) thought long and hard about and decided on. Even if it was impulsive, it still has nothing to do with the doctor. They are simply providing a service that YOU asked for.

    Most women go through a period of grief and, for some, a lifetime of it after having an abortion. But their grief comes from having to have made that decision for whatever reason. Their grief comes from the SITUATION and having to go through that process of falling pregnant at the wrong time and having to make that difficult choice.

    OF COURSE they would be happier if they didn’t have to go through that. The best thing would be if the unwanted pregnancy never happened at all- but unfortunately it did and for whatever their reasons were at the time, they made the decision that they could not keep it. At what point is the doctor involved in that decision making process enough to be justifiably blamed? Unless we’re talking about some sadistic doctor who pressured women into doing it. That’s a whole other issue. In fact if a woman feels pressured to have an abortion, it’s usually because of a partner or family members or their job.

    In that case, it would really make more sense for women to start suing the men who got them pregnant in the first place rather than to sue the doctor who terminated the pregnancy they decided they didn’t want.

    This is along the lines of people who have sued McDonald’s for making them fat. Unfortunately, if memory serves, some of those people actually won…

    If Harvard offers you a scholarship that you accept, but 5 years down the road you decide that you actually wanted to go to Yale, are you going to sue Harvard for offering you that scholarship?? If you get lung cancer after smoking for 20 years, are you going to sue your regular 7-11 clerk for selling them to you?

    Back to the original topic, admittedly I don’t know much about Greg Heartstill but it seems to me that this law was proposed with the intention to further complicate the lives of the doctors and establishments who provide this service. Sounds like the work of a pro-lifer masquerading as a champion of women’s rights to me.

    1. I completely agree. There are situations where I would agree with suing doctors and when I wouldn’t. This is far too broad. If you go to a doctor for an abortion and they make a mistakes, that is, they do something different than what you asked for, then you can sue. You can’t sue just because you don’t like YOUR decision ten years later.

      In a perfect world, there would be no need for abortions, but we don’t live in that world. What I think those who are against abortion misunderstand are the myriad of issues that could complicate a pregnancy. With our technology, it is now safer to have an abortion than it is to go through with a pregnancy. How to we then judge the risk to a woman’s life. Why should the government have a say in that. Around 60% of women who get abortions already have one or more children. Regardless of the circumstances, doesn’t she get to decide how much she is will to risk leaving her children?

      Even if we magically eradicated unwanted pregnancies, it would not change the need for abortions. I have read heartbreaking stories about couples who wanted to get pregnant only to find out the fetus had a condition that either made it unlikely it would survive to term or unlikely it would survive out of the womb. There is a lot to consider in those situations and it is, again, not the place of the government to decide whether or not that family should give birth and accept the emotional, financial and social consequences. I’m not saying all fetuses with a problem should be aborted; I’m only saying the choice should be with that family, not with the government.

      What makes some of those stories so terrible is the laws they have to go through. I once read a story about a couple whose fetus had Anencephaly. It was missing a significant amount of it’s skull. The likelihood it would survive to birth wasn’t good, and the chance it would survive long after birth was even more bleak. They decided to save it from a short, painful life and have an abortion (a decision they thought long and hard about). That decision alone filled them with pain. They wanted a child, but they didn’t want to subject it to suffering. Unfortunately, in the state they lived in, the woman had to have three different ultrasounds using invasive methods (i’m not sure what that rod they shove up you is called). Each time, the law required the nurse to provide a detailed description of the fetus. Three times, the couple heard, in detail, how deformed and sick the child they very much wanted was. It really was a horrible story. It would have been terrible enough if they would have had easy access to abortion services. The emotional pain was drawn out because of stupid laws.

      Oh… look at that. Sorry. I’m a tiny bit passionate about this I guess. Long story short, I have no problem holding doctors accountable for their mistakes. That’s not what this does, though. All it does is provide a vague law meant to prevent women from having safe access to abortions. That’s not helping women’s health in the least.

      1. This reply is going to be completely inadequate in its depth and length, but I just wanted to say I agree with everything you’ve said and enjoyed reading your opinions on the topic! It is clear that its something you’re very passionate about- as am I!

        The story about the fetus with Anencephaly is heartbreaking. I can’t even imagine the emotional damage the parents endured.

        “All it does is provide a vague law meant to prevent women from having safe access to abortions.” Exactly. My point exactly. That was a very good way to sum it all up!

  4. An emphatic No! As long as the person having the procedure was well informed and knew all of the risks and complications and understood that once this is done it can’t be undone. You would be surprised how many people go through something and then Wow..what do you mean you can’t undo it! Abortion of course is something else entirely. I can say from personal experience that it is devastating enough to have to make the decision. To have to go through the procedure. If you are a caring, feeling human being you never forget. I believe in limits on abortion for sure. Such as no abortion over 20 weeks if it does not involve rape, incest, health of the mother and/or child. I worked in labor and delivery and saw viable babies born at 22 weeks, it was rare, but it did happen. With the ability to tell when you are pregnant within the first month there is no reason to carry on the pregnancy to half way and decide you don’t want it except for reasons of the mother’s health or the baby is severely deformed.

    I would actually prefer no abortions after 12 weeks. That is three months that a woman has to think about it and decide. It is rare that you don’t know you are pregnant by 8 weeks. The laws being passed are to make the process as difficult as possible and to cause as much shame and embarrassment for the woman as possible. It is always easier for men to make the laws because they don’t have to go through it. And women who want to revoke the laws are traitors to their kind in my opinion. Maybe a little harsh, but that it how I see it.

    Also, there is no denying that if a rich politician’s daughter got pregnant and needed an abortion that they wouldn’t find someway to do it. They have the money to pay someone under the table and the money to fly them anywhere they need to get it done. The burden of unwanted pregnancy will fall upon those who are already victims of the system. The poor and underprivileged. Just as it always has been.

    The best way to do away with abortion is to promote self-respect of girls for themselves and respect for women of boys. That they should not pressure girls into having sex and girls should not pressure boys into having sex. Sex does NOT equate love. Love is when you respect your partner enough to ensure that each is protected and safe. Sex will happen it always does, but can we at least teach the kids to use protection.

    1. While I certainly think safe legal abortions should be available, that’s not really my problem with this law. It’s just stupid that a person should be allowed to sue after a procedure they agreed to have and that goes exactly as planned. Right or wrong, you agreed to it and you agreed to the list.

      I think even pro-choice people agree that a world with no abortions would be lovely. Even if we eliminated unwanted pregnancies, though, there would still be a need. The word abortion is a blanket term for a wide range of operations and there are always going to be cases where they are necessary. I have read heartbreaking stories of parents who, desperately wanting their child, found themselves in a position where terminating the pregnancy was necessary. The heartbreaking part was all the crap they had to go through because of some of the laws put in place. It only elongated the pain for them.

      Long story short, I have two opinions. Morally, abortion is a bit of a grey area for me. It’s so grey, that I’m hesitant to put a time stamp on it. I think morally abortions should happen earlier rather than latter, but I also think it’s unfair to force a woman to carry a child she doesn’t want just because she didn’t notice for too long… but if it were me and I suddenly found out I was 5+ months pregnant… I just don’t know. I don’t know if I can know without being there.

      When it comes to making laws, I don’t like the idea of putting limits on when an abortion can happen because it’s such a blanket term. How much at risk does the mother’s life have to be for her to be allowed to make her own decision? What if, before 12 weeks, a woman wanted an abortion, but because of laws preventing safe easy access she couldn’t get to a clinic until long after that? More than anything else, the rich will always be able to get abortions, just like you mention. All these laws really affect the poor. I imagine most, if not all, women who choose to have an abortion would have it early in the process.

      In a perfect world that will probably never exist, there would be no stigma of having a child out of wedlock. No fear of being cast out from your family or church or having your child live with a label. In that world. There would also be no shame in using things like condoms and birth control, further reducing unwanted pregnancies. Then we wouldn’t need to fear women having abortions out of fear or shame and would only be left with medical necessity.

      1. Thank you for your response. I did get off of topic. I still feel an emphatic NO!. Especially when it comes to abortion. You can get up and walk out anytime. However, I do have to acknowledge with this particular procedure the fear, the stigma and a host of other reasons could keep you from leaving. It is amazing how many persons show up to talk you out of it then condemn you when you have the child and are pro-legislation that would reduce or completely take away any programs there are that will help you raise that child. There are not enough adoptive parents out there. There are not enough foster parents out there. There are women spending time in jail right now for having a baby and then killing it afterwards because they couldn’t get an abortion, but couldn’t bring it home to take care of it either. The problems are complex and sad.

        You are correct that in the laws that we make it is making it so hard, almost impossible to exercise a right that was granted by the supreme court. It is a painful and difficult decision to make for anyone at any time.

        This goes for any procedure as well. I worked for a Dr. that was sued because a cyst returned. Even though the patient was told it would return and that the surgery would offer temporary relief only. They went ahead with it anyway and then tried to sue when the cyst grew back. So, no. I don’t believe in “take back” so to speak.

  5. “If you are pro-life, then you want all babies to be born regardless of complications. If you are pro-choice, you should always abort all the fetuses because being pregnant is such an inconvenience. Those pro-choice people are no better than murders!”

    I would need to understand what “complications” is supposed to mean before I know what you intended to say about what pro-lifers want. The majority of pro-choice people I have encountered have been the type that call the unborn babies “parasites” and think that women should at any time be able to decide to kill them if they feel like it. Not all people identify who call themselves pro-choice have that attitude though.

    I have a problem with the majority of pro-lifers too because most of them ARE anti-women. I am not, but I still don’t think abortion is a “choice” in the same way that someone chooses what color shirt to wear.

    1. What I really intended to convey in that statement was the lack of a middle ground on both sides.

      Complications can mean anything. My main issue with the who abortion debate is that abortion is a blanket terms for different procedures. There are too many possible complications to list. Complications with the development of the fetus, complications with the health of the woman, and combination of the two. Some are simple and some are extreme. All affect that woman and her family. She should be able to choose what she can and can’t handle.

      I separate my opinion on abortion into two categories. What I think should be legal isn’t the necessarily same as what I think is moral. In America, we tend to equate pro-choice with the ability to choose abortion, but it also means the ability not to choose abortion. In places like China where they force women to have abortions, the pro-choice movement would say no, she deserves to choose what happens to her body.

      I feel like the whole debate could use some cleaning up. Specifically, I wish states would stop with the restrictions. They don’t understand the huge amount of services to the poor a lot of places provide. Planned Parenthood gets a bad rap when less than 10% of their actions have anything to do with abortion. I guess what I’m saying is, being pro-choice myself, I’d agree to making abortions illegal after – say – 21 weeks, if women didn’t have to jump through weeks of hoops in order to get abortions before then.

      Some education on contraceptives would be nice as well. A lot of pro-lifers (not all, just the one’s I’ve met) are also against all forms of birth control. I have one friend who calls them ‘aboragenics.’ To me, that shows a lack of understanding of what those methods actually do. Not even Plan B destroys, kills or harms an zygote, embryo or fetus.

      This comment is starting to get long, I apologize. Let me just end by saying that I’m not trying to turn this into a personal attack against anyone. Yes, I’m pro-choice, but my view of a perfect would would be one were abortion is unnecessary. More specifically, I would like to see a reduction in unexpected pregnancies. Even if every woman wanted to give birth to every fetus ever put into existence, there would still be a need for abortion. Again, I have to say because of complications here because there are just so many. But even the most expectant parents can’t always predict or prepare for unexpected complications. And when those problems occur, they should be able to choose what happens to their family, not the government.

      1. I happen to agree with the reasoning of pro-choicers like you. My main problem is people who want to kill completely healthy fetuses when there is not a risk to the mother’s health. For example, those who abort because the fetus is not the gender they wanted. Another thing that personally cuts into my heart is when people kill their children just because they may have a disability like autism or down syndrome.

        1. the main problem with the abortion debate is that we try to restrict our options into two camps. Unfortunately, there are situations in this world outside of the health of either party where abortion may still be considered. There are people out there who are at risk of losing their jobs or entire social networks if word gets out they are pregnant. There are women who have already have children (about 60% of women who choose abortion have already given birth at least once)they are struggling to feed, who can’t afford to take time off work for the doctors visits because they already have a family to feed. Again, I am not saying that any of those reasons sit with me morally, but that I can understand why those sort of pressure my influence a woman’s decision. I’ve seen it. My father told me in high school my parents would get divorced if I ever got pregnant. What am I supposed to do with that information? I just don’t think it’s my place or the government’s place to make that moral decision for someone else. We can walk away to attend to the next big social issue, but they have to survive with the decision.

          And I am definitely morally against aborting a fetus based on gender or what I would consider minor complications.

          When it comes down to it, what needs to be addressed are the root causes of problems. I once attended this church that I thought had a very healthy way of working against abortion. They set up events to collect money, food baby clothing, cribs and everything else you need to be donated to pregnant woman in need. Instead of shaming women, they were trying to be a family for them – to support them. I’ll take that over a law any day. In terms of abortions based on gender, that action usually has more to do with the value of the gender being aborted than any issues surrounding pregnancy and child rearing. Reducing and eventually preventing that would require that inequality to be addressed. As for ‘disabilities’ like autism or down syndrome, those would be best addressed by working to remove the stigma from mental illness.

          I don’t know if you have Netflix, but have you seen a documentary called “It’s a girl”? Some of the things related to gender-based abortions are just tragic… and in those countries where they don’t have the means of identifying the gender before birth, they often kill the new born if it happens to be a girl. I mean, the mother’s will do it with no remorse. It’s just insane how some cultures can justify that kind of action.

          1. Once again, I agree with you because you simply state the root causes of these things and how to deal with them. That church you mentioned which set up events to donate stuff to help women take care of their children is the kind of organization that I like. What is sad to me is that none of the churches I have been a part of ever did such things.

            It also makes me so angry that women can be fired from their jobs for being pregnant. That is probably why there are anti-discrimination laws against that. Of course it doesn’t stop it from happening. I even know someone who that happened to.

            I benefit from talking to people like you who know the right ways to reduce the problems without defending abortion, which is a result of them. I don’t find many people who have thought it through like that.

            I think that I am going to be talking to men about treating women like people. The culture tells them that they are the boss and that they can use women any way they want. The men have a lot more ability to make a change until this patriarchy ends.

            1. I think we are two sides of the same coin rolling towards the same goal. We happen to skew in different directions, but the achievement of either of our goals would take the same path.

              I think why I lean on the pro-choice side is because it has been my experience that pregnancy has been treated like a punishment. That’s what you get for being a whore, they say. That, and some of the stories I’ve read have simply been tragic. If you look at the stats, most woman who seek abortions are in the extremes of poverty, they already have at least one child and consider themselves Christians. I remember hearing a story told by a woman who working in a women’s health clinic where, among many other services for women’s health, abortions were provided. There was a woman who always walked around the front with a sign depicting a bloody fetus and yelling at every woman who dared pass her, telling them they were going to hell. Then, one day that very woman was in the clinic with her teenage daughter. She wanted an abortion. The woman telling the story said she approached her about her change of heart, to which she haughtily replied “I don’t expect you to understand our situation.”

              The rich will always be able to get abortions. All the current policies do is block services from the poor, sometimes closing down health clinics where 99% percent of services offered were something other than abortions. What good does that do anyone?

              I’ve also heard stories about couples who desperately wanted their child. I remember reading one about a couple who was so excited. They knew the gender and had started buying stuff for their child’s room. Then, there was a complications. Long story short, the fetus was developing without a skull. There were serious complications with brain development and it was highly unlikly it would survive to birth. If it did, the outlook was still bleak. Questioning their doctor’s further, it became apparent to them that if their child was even born, it would have a short life of pain and suffering before finally passing away. After significant research and deliberation, they decided to spare the child they so desperately wanted from that fate and sought abortion services. However, they lived in one of those states which required multiple appointments where the woman’s body was probed, each requiring a waiting period before the next visit. At each visit, the nurse was require by these ridiculous laws to describe the sorry state of the fetus in detail. The would-be mother cried through it all and the nurses apologized, saying they’d lose their jobs if they didn’t comply with the law.

              Wow, here I am rambling yet again. I guess what I’m saying here is that I have no problem with people being against abortion or trying to spread that idea. However, I feel like that fight does not belong in the law (which may be where we differ) because all these laws end up doing more harm than good. Abortions will see a dramatic drop when woman are truly equal, when they are educated about sex and contraceptives and when they don’t have to fear the loss of family, friends or jobs due to their pregnancy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s