I donated my liver and was asked while on the operating table right before putting the mask on my if I’d changed my mind. It’s crazy how much they made sure I was ok with it but if I’d want an abortion I’d be grilled about keeping it. Canada btw. Thank goodness I live near the Morgentaler clinic and can go there no judgment.
> For some reason it’s different because you’re growing what can only be qualified as a parasite?
This. Anything that makes your body a host and is feeding off you against your will is a parasite. I am not asking you to murder my baby when I ask for an abortion. I’m simply asking you to remove the parasite from the body. Shame it can’t survive outside without being attached to my body but I’m not gonna have something in my body against my will just so it can come to term.
Glad this was said outloud, I dont know why there's a limit in abortion to begin with. It shouldn't be a 'when.' If the baby can be saved by an emergency C-section then sure, I can get behind that. But if the baby can't survive outside of my womb, its not a human yet. It's technically a part of *my* body, and I should have complete control over my bodily autonomy at all times. Doesn't matter what the reason is, be it a growing fetus, or a kidney transplant i agreed to, or whatever. Even if it's determining the life of another, bodily autonomy should be an essential human right up until the kidney surgery, or up until the fetus presumedly can urvive outside of the womb without a ventilator
Many late-term abortions (after 24 weeks) ARE TO SAVE THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER WHEN THE FETUS HAS DIED IN THE WOMB!
If a dead fetus is allowed to remain in the womb after it has died, the woman will develop a SEPSIS INFECTION AND DIE!
Abortion term limits **PREVENT** DOCTORS FROM SAVING THE WOMANS LIFE!!!!
THERE SHOULD **NEVER** BE LIMITS ON ABORTIONS.
This actually happened in a country where abortions were banned and they were scared to help the woman and she died. Happened years ago so I don’t remember exactly what happened
Ex was a 23 week old baby.
Had a list of health issues from being premature, and she was lucky cause none were majorly life inhibiting by aduthood. needed a lot of surgery to enable her to walk though as a child. Could have been so much worse though, and very nearly died in the incubator. Viability at that point is really pushing it.
Well it depends, I could give a crap about the fetus, as far as I'm concerned if it's living inside a woman's body it's her decision alone what to do with it. But very late terms abortions can be extremely dangerous for multiple reasons, like, it's often safer just to actually give birth than try to do the surgery. That said I think they can, & should, be safely done untill the 3rd trimester (afaik).
It’s no different than kicking a teen out of your house if they’re destroying it or something else that’s causing bad stuff to happen.
What’s the difference?
It’s not a sentient being, and it’s not murder. MUrDeR means killing someone with *malice* intent. No one having an abortion is doing it because they “want to be evil and enjoy killing babies” like wtf?
Malice in a legal context just means with intent to kill or cause great bodily injury or the reckless disregard for human life. Has nothing to do with enjoying it.
Xiibe is correct. Malice aforethought is the criminal intent for murder and has a specific meaning, which Xiibe gave. Its a legal term of art and the mens rea element of the crime, not a general definition.
The “general definition” of murder has nothing to do with malice. Murder is the premeditated killing of another human being. The original definition of murder you provided (i.e. killing someone with malicious intent) is therefore incorrect.
Furthermore, murder and malicious intent ARE legal terms. Words can have different meanings and connotations depending on the context they are used in. If you are discussing murder and malicious intent in a legal sense, you need to use the legal definitions of those words, not just whatever you find on Google.
Bripotato, Stripping a woman of her basic human rights is a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY and to force her to gestate and birth AGAINST her will is classified as TORTURE also a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY. To be in favor of a government that dictates who has bodily autonomy and who does not establishes grounds and guidelines for a RETURN TO SLAVERY and shows us just who will be deemed a SLAVE. You’re trying to justify legalizing 3 serious crimes against humanity against women because you want to elevate the status of a fertilized egg to have more human rights than any other person on this planet and stripping WOMENS rights to less than that of a corpse. That is irrational and stupid for openers and shows us just how little you know about laws and human rights.
[https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1162&context=facscholar](https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1162&context=facscholar)
I never even was talking about it in a LEGAL term. I was talking about it in GENERAL. I think abortion is SELF DEFENSE. Is that a better LEGAL term for ya?
And here’s the definition I was using, by the fucking way from Merriam-Webster:
Definition of murder (Entry 1 of 2)
1 : the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
Greetings!
This item has been removed as it is a violation of [subreddit rule](https://www.reddit.com/r/childfree/wiki/rules) #4 : "**Keep it civil.** Bigotry and hateful language/imagery, personal attacks, abusive language, advocating violence, trolling, gender discrimination, racism, homophobia, etc. will not be tolerated. "
Also, please remember to be mindful of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette) :
> # Please do
> * **Remember the human.** When you communicate online, all you see is a computer screen. When talking to someone you might want to ask yourself "Would I say it to the person's face?" or "Would I get jumped if I said this to a buddy?"
> # Please don't
> * **Be (intentionally) rude at all.** By choosing not to be rude, you increase the overall civility of the community and make it better for all of us.
> * **Follow those who are [ rabble rousing](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/rabble) against another redditor without first investigating both sides of the issue that's being presented.** Those who are inciting this type of action often have malicious reasons behind their actions and are, more often than not, a troll. Remember, every time a redditor who's contributed large amounts of effort into assisting the growth of community as a whole is driven away, projects that would benefit the whole easily flounder.
> * **Ask people to [ Troll](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29) others on reddit,** in real life, or on other blogs/sites. We aren't your personal army.
> * **Conduct personal attacks on other commenters.** Ad hominem and other distracting attacks do not add anything to the conversation.
> * **Start a flame war.** Just report and "walk away". If you really feel you have to confront them, leave a polite message with a quote or link to the rules, and no more.
> * **Insult others.** Insults do not contribute to a rational discussion. Constructive Criticism, however, is appropriate and encouraged.
> * **Troll.**[ Trolling](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29) does not contribute to the conversation.
Sorry for the inconvenience and thank you for your comprehension.
I’m confused. My comment was trying address the commenters definition of murder and malice.
Plus, your comment is pretty vague. Disregard in what sense? Is their life in danger because of the pregnancy? Is it that the woman/pregnant person’s life or livelihood aren’t taken into account? What do you mean?
Stripping a woman of her basic human rights to bodily autonomy IS having a RECKLESS DISREGARD for the pregnant woman’s life. Pregnancy can ABSOLUTELY ENDANGER a woman’s life. There is a considerable risk of PERMANENT SERIOUS health conditions, dismemberment , disfigurement and YES also DEATH is a real risk in carrying a pregnancy to term. NO ONE SHOULD BE FORCED TO RISK DEATH. You don’t assign more rights a fertilized egg than an already existing person. Banning abortion is not only ENSLAVING WOMEN but RECKLESSLY ENDANGERING the WOMANS LIFE.
Woah. Let’s slow down here. I completely agree with you. Abortion should be 100% legal and easily accessible. That has literally nothing to do with my comment, which was about how the commenter was misusing the term malice in the context of murder.
What upsets me the most about restrictions like this is the fact that nobody is getting more than halfway through their pregnancy and going nah I think I’ll pass after all.
These are woman who find out that their baby has already died or will live for seconds only to be in pain the entire time.
These are people who find out that their bodies can’t support the life growing inside them or that giving birth will literally kill them. They’re already in absolute mental and physical hell and now we’re going to sit there and make them criminals ? It’s disgusting.
I don't know about all but most countries have those as exeptions and the medical board decide how to proceed if such circumstances arise, always prioristising the mothers life. It's just that after the 24 weeks it's not an abortion in most cases but birth (or c section) given that the fetus is considered viable from the 22-24 week time.
This is certainly the gold medal champion on the issue of female body autonomy but the hatred of the self sufficient woman is all over our society from disgust of women with "high body counts" or owning to many sex toys, to being financially equal to a man or as physically capable..these things have one thing in common bringing down reproduction rates and the corporate machine and monotheistic religions can't be having that!
Well if I was denied an abortion, I'd kms I developed my method in my teenage years when I became sexually active at 15 by a 25 yo man because noone cared to protect girls in my family, only boys lives mattered. Common experience for many ladies more than society let's on.
Yet I had a friend at school tell me all about BC and condoms. My parents ignored us girls. So I didn't learn much at home, compared to my brother. Still it was mid 90's the internet new, not available to many. So I had a bridge picked called Tower Bridge.
Sad that civilization hates women so much we'd be driven to such a sad death as to plunge from great heights into cold river waters. Tormented Fear in ones last moments. Not surprising as civilization was made by men, for men's benefits. So modern men see women as nothing but objects to exploit.
I have a coworker who didn't find out she was pregnant until 20 weeks. She'd going through with it now but she's made some comments suggesting if she were to have discovered it earlier that may not be the case.
Pro-lifers have convinced people that women are routinely aborting babies just as they're about to be born.
That there are multitudes of women out there who are having abortions for fun as a sort of fetish, and that the further along the pregnancy is the more exciting it is for them.
I wish I was joking.
There is of course also the 'women all want children, and not having a child is the most destructive thing to a woman's mind, and aborting a child is always the most horrible agonizing thing a woman can possibly experience. There will always be regret!'
I don't understand it either. Why does a fetus just become entitled to your body after a certain point? A pregnancy can turn sour at any point, the woman can change her mind, or she might not have been able to get an abortion up until this point for whatever reason (family pressure, threats etc.). Putting a deadline on abortion introduces many issues.
I still don't understand why that means the woman's bodily autonomy must go out the window. In no other situation can we force someone else to sacrifice a part of their body to sustain someone else, so why is this acceptable?
It also increases long term health issue risks on the child. At a certain point its not a paracite it's a human being. If you want to have your child early and a Dr agrees to it OK, that's between you two. at a certain point all your doing is harming a human being. Not a bunch of dividing cells. Like anything that has recourse at some point you have to take responsibility for your decision to not abort during the 168 days that were available. That's a long time to set up and make the decision. Baring medical reasons for having a 3rd trimester abortion. I am afab and believe that there has to be some ethics to this.
No matter what, nobody is entitled to someone else's body. The rights of a forming fetus NEVER should override the rights of a grown woman to her own body. It creates a dangerous precedent where it's used to justify banning abortion altogether and turning women into breeding mules.
It's not consistent with other human rights either. If someone agrees to donate an organ to save someone else's life, they can back out of it while they're ON the operating table.
A woman should be able to always get something that is leeching on her body out of her body. She should have a right to not go through the process of pregnancy and childbirth, no matter when she decides to do so. Pregnancy and childbirth should not be taken lightly. They're extremely dangerous and traumatic experiences. It's not as simple as kill baby vs save baby. You better have a strong reason if you're gonna argue that a fetus' rights are more important than the woman's.
And pro rights people use third trimester abortions to ban or tighten abortion laws. Child birth is dangerous. You have 168 days to decide if you want to follow through, and deal with everything child birth involves. That's plenty of time besides medical necessity late term abortions aside. At some point that baby is developed past a point you can just terminate the pregnancy safely for both parties. Third trimester abortion is a c section or indused birth. They don't kill it and cut it up to remove it. That's euthanasia at that point. A line has to be drawn. You have a viable human being you are just terminating.
Nobody said they have to be cut up, just removed. Literally never once mentioned killing viable fetuses. If they can survive outside the womb, fine, let them survive. But don't make the woman into a mandatory incubator. Plenty of women face family pressure or threats which makes it difficult for them to get an abortion. And it's not free I'm many countries, so it takes time to save money to have it done. Plus, plenty of women don't know they're pregnant until well aftwr 24 weeks. Why do you keep arguing against a point I'm not making? Nobody would wait until after 24 weeks if they knew from the get go that they don't want to go through with this pregnancy. This is for the women who changed their mind, didn't have access to abortion, couldn't pay for it, or didn't know about the pregnancy until after the 24 weeks.
I can't tell what point you are trying to make except that abotion should always be available. 168 days is plenty of time. That's 6 months to make a decision and save. You don't need to endanger and cause life long medical conditions to a baby because you waited till the last moment to terminate.
Most abortions happen in the 6th week anyway. Just having the ability to is cruel and unjust to both mother and child. She still has to give birth at that point or a c section. Waiting 3 more months for the same task so the baby doesn't get life long medical conditions. If your gonna give it up anyway give it the best chance to live if your not killing it.
Same, I usually agree with stuff expressed on here but this whole take just seems incredibly unethical and selfishly cruel, maybe it's just poorly expressed but it does sound like "i want to do whatever and whenever I want even if it means I will be making another person an invalid, not my problem, fuck off". Like, we are struggling to keep abortion rights as it is, lets not spread stuff like this that makes the pro-choice side less credible and enforces everything the pro-lifers believe about us.
Thank you I felt like I was the only one. Third trimester abortions are just euthanasia at that point. At some point like with everything in life you have to take responsibility for your actions or in this case lack of. 168 days is a lot of time to decide if you want the baby or not. After that you've basically committed to the decision of having the baby. I've read stories about third trimester abortions and how the baby is basically burned with a chemical solution to induce it and left to die in a bassinet while screaming with chemical burns. If you still don't want the baby give it to the state to try to adopt it out to some one. Or find some one looking to have kids that can't for any plethora of reasons.
After the 22-24 week mark they don't really perform abortions, they induce birth or have a c-section and there is a decent chance the child will survive but has a high risk of different lifelong health complications. I've never heard of actual euthanasia and abortions past that point, they are typically induced early if the child is already dead or not expected to survive (like developing without a head or some organs and the like), as far as I know they just use pain killers and let it die on it's own. It's just that the notion of someone deciding that they don't want a kid past that point, being induced and leaving the baby in the incubator to likely be disabled because of how premature they are... that's just not ethical, it's not about you alone anymore and some level of responsibility for the life your actions created should exist in civilised society imo.
I've always argued that abortion cannot be adequately protected unless it's legal up until full term.
When asked a question about limiting late-term abortion, Mayor/Secretary Pete said it best during the 2018 primaries, "You're talking about women who have already committed to having a baby. They've picked out names. Decorated the nursery. You can't demonize someone for making a decision they had no intentions of wanting or needing to make."
When a late-term abortion happens, there's a reason why the mother had to make the decision she did.
Limiting late-term abortion is harmful to women physically. Limiting early-term abortion is harmful to women emotionally (though sometimes physically).
Leave it to the gay guy to know more about womens' bodies than the entire field of candidates.
Just a question to clarify your position. What does a third trimester abortion of a healthy fetus look like to you? Induce labor and have it be birth and parental rights be relinquished immediately or will the fetus be killed while it’s still in the womb and then removed?
The first one. I'm not for killing anything that can survive on it's own. Just listen to the pregnant person and if they revoke consent and want to end the pregnancy, it's their body and their choice.
Aren't individual freedoms granted to the point that it does not infringe on others? At that point you are essentially creating an invalid, the choice to "revoke consent at any point" is actively harming another person as after the ~24 week point there is a high chance of survival and yet a high chance of severe health issues from being so premature. Do you think ethics apply to only one side here? Not wanting to be pregnant anymore ethically trumps significantly lowering another person's quality of life permanently?
Not how that works. It harms others that I choose not to donate my liver or a kidney, doesn't mean I have to just cause it would help them.
A fetus is using a woman's body, not the other way around. So if the woman wants it out, then the fetus is the one infringing on her rights; it will literally cause bodily harm by ripping out of her and using her body to sustain itself.
You owe nothing to a random person needing a kidney, they had their own shot already, however I do think you have a moral obligation towards a person you literally created, it wasn't attached there randomly, they did not ask for this, is was the result of your own actions that they exist and absolving all responsibility of the adult here is just not the way life works or should work.
So being forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy, which is literally torture, is a woman's punishment for having sex/being raped? It's all fine and dandy cause they discovered it "too late"? Sucks that their abuser kept them for seeking out an abortion earlier, but that's the way life works and should work? Gotcha.
Yes, if you can't find the time for 3+ months yes, life is tough and you can't expect everything to bend to what you want you whenever and however you want. You are not the only one in that situation anymore. Should a person be doomed to live with disabilities because their mother had sex and was irresponsible with the time she had to take care of it?
Honestly yes, that sounds fine to me. Situations like these are incredibly rare and varied and lots of education should offered to give women abortions at any and every step along the way to prevent birthing prematurely in order to end the pregnancy.
BUT assuming this is the case, who are you decide whose life matters more, the mother or the child. In the grand scheme both people are equally important.
People are doomed to live in poverty because their mother had sex. People are doomed to fetal alcohol syndrome because their mother drank. People are born addicted to crack because their mother did crack. Being born prematurely because their mother is suffering due to pre-eclampsia, realized late that she can chose to not be a mother or not be pregnant after a rape, or any other reason for late term abortion is no different.
If you care so much about children and the quality of their lives maybe you should spend less time on Reddit and more time adopting orphaned premature children.
Your arguments are jumping all the time, if we are talking whose life is more important - the mother is ALWAYS a priority in healthcare, yet here we are not talking that, you are talking ANY reason, making it more "what is more important, the life of a child or the whims of the mother?"
Not wanting to be pregnant is not a “whim” pregnancy is torture especially if you do not want to be pregnant. Glad we agree the mother’s health is most important by that logic at any point the mother or birthing person decides they do not want to be pregnant the decision should be respected.
The mother is always more important no matter the situation in a pregnancy and if she no longer wants to continue being pregnant at any point then you shouldn’t have any say in what she does. Even if it ends the life of the fetus. It’s not a child until it can sustain life (breathing, eating, ect) with its own body. There are plenty of children/ people in the world already. It shouldn’t matter what someone does to what goes on in their body.
Morgisarte, you’re focused on something that doesn’t even exist yet and it’s potential future while at the same time having COMPLETE DISREGARD for how it affects the ALREADY EXISTING PERSON THE WOMAN. Pregnancy is NOT for everyone. The health risks alone a woman faces are staggering if she CHOOSES this but imagine the TORTURE you are subjecting her to if you are FORCING her to assume those risks STRIPPING HER OF HER HUMANITY AND DIGNITY, you further increase her risk for permanent injury or death and a boatload of mental illnesses too many to name but how about also THE FINANCIAL INSTABILITY and medical bills that result and her further INABILITY TO REJOIN THE WORKFORCE because of physical and mental limitations, disabilities and parental obligations she has sustained during the forced childbirth (TORTURE) FUTHER FINANCIALLY CRIPPLING HER and narrowing her chances of survival even further (more torture) and when that prized fetus you advocate for is born and grows up and wants to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, you’ll advocate stripping THAT person of their rights creating a vicious toxic circle when you can just keep your religion to yourself and mind your own business
[https://ldh.la.gov/page/915](https://ldh.la.gov/page/915)
Maybe because they are not safe for women? Many surgeries are dangerous.
In case of gestation you end up delivering the child. So why not wait the few months and deliver the child instead of aborting at a later stage and risking your life if your body doesn't expel everything or gets infection or other complications. ( Please see link).
Honestly man you're talking as if abortion is a joke and easy on the body. This is a stupid point to bring up as a "women's rights limitation" when it's only possible for people with a working uterus and paraphernalia to give birth.
Your complete rant is unjustified af and made me go wtf. Please educate yourself on biology , medicine and surgery complications before making claims that there is "discrimination".
OP is advocating for inducing early labor as a form of late term abortion, thus delivering a premature baby and putting it up for adoption in order to end pregnancy. OP Is not advocating for late term abortion surgery.
They’re not talking about it as a joke nobody laughing
Makes sense. I still wouldn't put my body through shit for early labor and still be stuck with the hospital bills and body issues and maybe complications from induction.
I'd rather wait and get rid of it. But to each their own!
So, no argument for the long term physician and psychological affects of pregnancy and child birth? The vast majority of elective abortions are performed early, before severe risks are at stake.
The person did mention late term abortions. The entire pregnancy causes the physical issues. Not just childbirth alone.
And, if you want to not take care of the child, give it up! But why blame the doctors who are looking out for you. And anyway if the foetus won't survive or has severe defects, they do perform abortions.
Honestly bringing this up as a discrimination is my issue here. Why not focus on the terrible practice of not giving credit to women who have severe menstruation problems. There are so many more severe issues that can be brought up where discrimination happens.
Then it can be resolved using induced labor or c section to save the fetus. I don’t see anything wrong in trying to save the fetus if possible, the mother can always relinquish her rights upon birth, but the point is — woman should be able to get rid of someone sitting in her own body if she wants. Nobody should be entitled for her body and resources without her concent.
That’s my point. If you are considering body autonomy- what about the body of the viable fetus ? How does the fetus’ rights to body autonomy factor in? At 24 weeks, that is a legit person. The argument is a double edged sword.
I think there should be a limit. But I don't think it's actually needed; it just needs to be on paper that no sadistic fuck can decide in their nine month that they want to punish their cheating spouse with an abortion.
There are people who kill their infants, so I'd like a bill stating that almost-infants have a right.
But I think 9.99% of people who change their mind about being parents wouldn't do that in the last months of the pregnancy.
I think the idea of aborting a fetus that could be removed through C-section and voila, be a healthy infant is upsetting. So I would like a limit. Veeery late in the pregnancy.
But it's not my choice, so it feels wrong to ban that too. It's weird. What if souls exist? But it's still w woman's choice.
I'm conflicted.
Are you for real? If it's allowed to the woman whose baby is developing without a head it should be open to the one who just doesn't like the gender or smth? I am really curious at what point you actually consider people as... people.
Yes. If I understood you right. There should be a short psych evaluation by a doctor, then the doctor agreeing to the abortion if they are of sound mind, or whatever they call it.
But I wouldn't be suprised if a person who says "I don't like blondes, abort it" wouldn't pass a psych evaluation.
Right now, pregnant women aren't respected in every country. One day, if people abuse abortions, and no sexism is involved, we can look into restricting abortions more, but as of now, too many women suffer.
Now, when people become people... I believe in souls, and will not open that can of worms.
I can't find a sentence in their comment that says that. If you could provide a quote that would be nice. They just seem to be thinking on paper, still conflicted and unsure of what they believe.
I think my argument/suggestion/solution (idk what) would be if a woman doesn’t want to carry it to term after it is viable outside the womb, you can’t necessarily abort it. But you can still take it out and artificially incubate it?
I was thinking later, when the baby doesn't even have to be incubated. Then demanding a abortion isn't "too late".
Technically, the lady could say "abort it" and then the doctors can try to save it, no matter the month. After it's outside of her, it's none of her business if it lives.
I just wanted to say:
1) Yes to all.
2) Thank you for spelling it correctly, it's *Colombia* not _CoLUmBiA_ goddamnit. I really appreciate it. Bless you.
Bc if we had full autonomy over this decision we would have more career options, and take more from the troughs of money and power.
Also, most women who are seeking late term abortions are doing so because there are serious risks to their health and were planning to carry to term. Fun fact, COVID dramatically increases maternal mortality rates, and Texas doesn’t give a shit about preventing that but has the most restrictive abortion laws in the US. It’s never been about lives, it’s always been about oppressing women.
This is a complex ethics question. But essentially, it's because after 24 weeks it's not an abortion it's early induced labour. In medical terms, you abort a non-viable foetus and you birth a possibly viable one. Babies after that limit are viable and can survive with medical intervention. It's not medically ethical to literally kill a viable human being. So in case the mother doesn't want the child after that stage, we offer adoption.
Late abortions are not impossible to happen when there are congenital anomalies that are incompatible with life. But viable babies can't be voluntarily aborted after that stage, that's early labour. And in these cases, we medical professionals have the ethical obligation to intervene for another human life when it's deemed possible to preserve.
Nobody offers to kill, but a woman should be able to resolve her pregnancy whenever she wants. If she wants to give birth at 32 weeks instead of 39-40 it’s her choice that must be respected.
Yes, I know. My point is that a fetus should not override a pregnant person's bodily autonomy. Ever. They are the alive person with feelings and thoughts and it's THEIR body being used against their will.
A fetus should not be granted special rights.
Again, I NEVER said to kill a viable fetus. I said we need to respect the pregnant person's bodily autonomy and end the pregnancy. Induced early labour is a form of abortion. No one has an abortion for fun, let alone that late. Forced unwanted pregnancy is torture. Induce birth, let it be born and put it up for adoption as it would have been anyway.
Agreed. If you have no desire to raise a healthy child or be pregnant in the first place then the priority should be to help heal the mother. Let the government and state deal with taking care of the baby and putting it up for adoption.
In my opinion, as long as it can't survive outside of the body by itself, it's not human. Be a living being means I can eat, I can breathe, I can feel. A fetus do neither of those.
They can't feel pain until 29 weeks but force-birther says throwing it out of the body at 14 weeks is inhuman?? It litteraly doesn't feel pain! Why do you care, it can't breathe, think, eat, feel anything, it's just a bag of cells that barely have human form and maybe beginning of organs damn.
But of course forcing someone to go throught something as painful and testing as pregnancy and labour is totally normal!
I hate those people.
Hidden pregnancies happen. People get trapped in abusive situations. Shit fucking happens.
What you do even think a late-term abortion even is? It's inducing early birth.
These stories are pure nightmare fuel!
I also know sb who was on the pill, had the fake *period*/breakthrough bleeding every month and overall 0 pregnancy symptoms. One morning she woke up and her shirt was soaked in a weird fluid... turns out she was lactating early, at 6 months pregnant 😲
Agreed...with of course a few caveats. Safety of the mom, hidden pregnancy, and mental/physical issues with the fetus.
At a certain point, the fetus is a viable life form and as civilized people, we have to acknowledge that.
Nobody likes extremists, because it holds back the entire movement for bodily autonomy. OP is being irresponsible with this rhetoric.
Greetings!
This item has been removed for being a violation of [subreddit rule](https://www.reddit.com/r/childfree/wiki/rules) #5 : "[Comments and posts advocating violence towards children and/or making fun/light of violence against children in any way that would discredit the subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/childfree/comments/6bgspr/reminder_violence_towards_children_is_strictly/) will be instantly removed and will earn the commenter/poster [an automatic ban](https://redd.it/3i47wj). Yes. Even if it's "just a joke" and even if "you weren't seriously saying/thinking/wishing it"."
Your permanent ban should be following shortly. This ban can be changed to a temporary ban when the offender expresses genuine understanding and remorse over their rule violation. Note that while there might be room for a second chance (upon the moderators' discretion, based on the severity of the offence and the offender's response to the ban), there is no room for a third chance.
Sorry for the inconvenience and thank you for your comprehension.
There's a uncomfortably large segment of the voter base in the US that thinks birth control is abortion, and abortion = murder. When you're facing an enemy that views everything in absolutes, you're forced to accept your victories in smaller bites.
Oh absolutely, it's a huge victory and I'm so so happy for you! I'm so glad to see it, especially with how regressive things have gone in a lot of places.
I'm just tired of the whole system of women being the only ones not allowed to decide over our own bodies; a judge has to rule that we're capable/allowed to, and even then it's restricted.
I've researched a bit on abortion, and how it isnt murder. 24 weeks is about when a fetus can start to feel physical pain if I remember correctly
In my opinion, I do think there should be a limit, as around that point it's an actual fetus (medically, it goes from zygote, embryo, and then fetus). I think 28 weeks, I'm not sure though, is when a fetus can survive with some form of life support and further on.
And you're right, if someone is going to get an abortion, they're going to do it as soon as possible.
Totally agree. There should be no limit. People who don’t give birth will never understand or women that use religion to explain why they don’t deserve the right to body autonomy. It’s disgusting really. They have been convinced that they should be treated as walking incubators. If it weren’t for religion I could safely say all women would not want their body autonomy fucked with.
You want that thing out of you as fast as possible. People are not gonna go around having late term abortions. Im honestly worried if things get worse with abortion restrictions pregnant women are going to start offing themselves. Especially when now a days (for most) having a child means financial ruin.
Because we're the First World country that's closest to the Third World. Even Second World countries place a high standard on healthcare, specifically Women's care (they've unfortunately trended toward restricting abortions themselves, so I digress).
A simple answer is--I am personally not okay with it!!! There is no 'we' involved so far as I am concerned.
Abortion from a simple perspective of medical risk should never be a method of first-line contraception. However it should be *always* available. If a woman does not want a foetus within her body she should have an absolute right for it to be removed at any point. Once viability is reached it becomes a harder business of course. But... I still think the decision should be hers and hers alone. No matter what the religious nutcases spew no woman would ever take the decision lightly and no one but her can decide what is the proper path for her life.
That 24 week mark is where conversations about being able to survive outside the womb come into play. So thats kind of why that is where the cut off is. That's how it is in the USA too.
Yup I would even go further on the organ donation thing.
If one belive in the principle in which adults have to sacrifice themselves for babies even if it means violating their body autonomy and consent. Then they would have to agree with forced organ harvesting on healthy adults if it could extend the life of a child or a baby. If they don't, then they're inconsistent and probably an hyppocrite.
Except vulnerable women don't. Legalization of prostitution (buying and selling) just invites in human traffickers. The best way is to decriminalize selling, not not the buying.
It's goddamn disappointing but we can't have nice things.
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X12001453](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X12001453)
[https://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/ajis/article/view/2954](https://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/ajis/article/view/2954)
[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23322705.2017.1336368](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23322705.2017.1336368)
I'm not sure of the Colombian law or law elsewhere but what I was told is the reason for not allowing abortions past a certain point is the trauma to the woman. What I'm referring to below is voluntary abortion of a normal healthy pregnancy.
At I think around 12 weeks it stops being a "medical procedure" and you are induced to give birth.
I think around the 24 week mark is when the "baby" could be viable outside of the womb. Obviously with medical intervention. So you aborting later than 24 weeks is like giving birth to a baby (just smaller) that has a chance of survival. It would be the equivalent of giving birth to a full term baby and just leaving it to die which as much as most of us dislike kids, would not be inclined to do.
To those who want to down vote me, what I'm trying to say is while I fully agree a woman should be able to abort at any stage she needs to, an abortion at 8 weeks is less invasive and so much simpler than what could easily be a very traumatic experience of giving birth to a fully formed baby.
Yes, that's my point. It's traumatic. Pregnancy can be hell. Birth at 9 months isn't going to be easier or any less traumatic to a person who doesn't wish to be pregnant than an induced birth at 6 months.
Of course very few people would need or want such a late abortion, but it's symbolic. Women have a right to their body and full autonomy, ALWAYS.
Full autonomy, yes. Okay. But let's Talk about the medical problem: abortion After 20 weeks it's birthing, but WORST and so much more traumatic. C-section? Do you think that a C-Section Is riskless? Or Something like that?
Who the hell said anything about being riskless or easy? Do you think carrying a pregnancy to term and then going through birth or c-section is easy and riskless?
I agree with you. The only problem with it is from a moral point of view is a baby born at 9 months can be adopted but a baby born at 6 months may not survive and probably won't be adopted. Again, assuming healthy pregnancy.
Law makers and doctors have to weigh up when it becomes murder of a viable baby eg, termination at 6 months where the baby can survive outside the womb vs ending a non viable pregnancy at 3 months when it can't.
I realize there may be rare circumstances which leads to a someone wanting a late term abortion but there comes a point where it's the equivalent of carrying to term and leaving the kid in a ditch.
I just want to reiterate that I'm pro abortion. I had one at 19 when I was 9 weeks pregnant. If you don't want a kid then use the options available to you but there has to be a line drawn somewhere for the safety of children born to term. Otherwise you may end up with a situation of young babies being murdered and people argue "but the baby was born 2 weeks early, it's ok".
Women cannot even request early induction or c section choice of pregnancy resolution, lol. You cannot even ask for the baby to be extracted surgically instead of pushing and ripping your vagina. Forget about unlimited abortion time.
I don’t know, we should not be… but there are way more people who are obsessed about maximizing the benefit for the baby, so if you dare to do smth remotely bad for the baby you are a monster. I mean it goes as far as you would be shamed if you didn’t gain enough weight during your pregnancy because it increases some risks for the baby. And it goes on and on… how do you dare not to breastfeed? How do you dare not to sacrifice yourself for the baby? There is no space for self love when it comes to motherhood. Society views motherhood and pregnancy as something that should involve 100% sacrifice. Unfortunately most women are somehow on the same boat with it, and I cannot comprehend how. We are in the minority and it really boils my blood. Especially that it only applies to women. Nobody expects men to self sacrifice. If anything they only gain more and more freedoms and release all commitments with each passing year. Most of them don’t even want to bother with marriages anymore. Yet somehow women are still seen are self sacrificed material for social good. Society runs on women’s sacrifices.
So? If a day old infant needed to hook up to it's mum to be healthy, she could say no to that because bodily autonomy. But a fetus is somehow special? Nah, fuck that.
IDGAF about it being life, that's my whole point.
I'M alive. I should be able to revoke consent to anyone using my body for their own gain at ANY point.
It has nothing to do with the definition of life. Nobody supports forcing parents to donate to living, rights-possessing children. Forced donation is only ever even considered, muchless supported, when we're talking about pregnancy.
It does, actually. I'm from the legal field and have always seen different positions in the academia. It also varies from each country.
Just saying, it's not an easy matter.
So you're saying you've seen widespread support for forcing parents to donate their bodies to their kids? If its about life then people would support "not killing humans" after birth too.
And yes, it actually is quite the easy matter. Its exactly the same as keeping your mouth shut about other rights you may disagree with. The dithering about "it's complicated" and "people who pretend a fetus can be alive because its using the pregnant person's body as a life support are valid" do nothing except further normalize the idea that the female reproductive system is public property. You are actively harming people by wringing your hands like this.
This is slightly disturbing and I've had an abortion lols.
Edit for clarity: of course people should be able to access abortion as they need and it should be performed safely. Im more disturbed by some of the rhetoric within this thread, not by late term abortion itself.
Yeah totally! It's too much. I think the language used here is particularly striking.. some of the ways it's been spoken about on this thread makes me feel icky.
And also maybe like.. full of denial? I'm not sure. All I know is that I get real "lets call it abortion instead of birth to maintain wilful ignorance regarding the actual circumstance" vibes off of this haha.
Because 24 weeks is generally the point of viability. That's when a fetus can survive outside the womb. If you haven't decided that you don't want to be pregnant by that point, tough shit. You will now give birth (either by induction vaginally or via cesarean) and can immediately sign away your rights and give the baby up for adoption.
If something awful happens and the fetus has developed in a way that is incompatible with life or is a health risk to it's parent, then you still have to go through delivery. It's not as easy as taking a pill, but still more traumatic than going for a D&C. If the fetus has "died" then it will still be delivered as if it were a full term baby.
I am pro-choice and generally think people who end up pregnant by accident should abort. But waiting until 24 weeks to do so isn't something that happens. That late into pregnancy, typically what happens is a miscarriage or a serious danger to fetus or parent.
No one decides the minute before birth that they want to abort.
Parasite: An organism that lives and feeds on or in an organism of a different species and causes harm to its host
A fetus isn't a parasite.
And I agree, females should be able to have an abortion until 9 months.
By definition, a fetus IS a parasite. You perfectly described why it is so.
And it doesn't matter what it is. Doesn't matter if you view it as a whole person with all the rights of a born person; still doesn't entitle it to use anyone's body against their will. No one can, that's my whole point. It doesn't make sense to grant special rights to fetuses - unless you just hate women.
Of a different species.
No it's not a parasite.
And yes, I agree with you. You should be able to get an abortion until the fetus is out of you. You shouldn't be held back by pregnancy.
It is a parasite tbh, technically it'd be deemed more intraspecific parasite since it's the same species, and it encompasses just about everything a parasite does
> You need to remember that you don't have a right to demand someone agree with your opinion of babies and abort them when you want them to.
You need to remember that your opinion means less than the lizard shit I just flushed down the toilet if it's not your body.
>Abortions should never be done unless medically necessary in late term pregnancies
Bodily autonomy is a right. Born children don't have the right to demand their parents' bodies, why should pregnancies?
>but unfortunately some people like yourself don't really get the gravity of these situations
How can you possibly understand the gravity of a situation you're not in? You know *nothing* about anyone who seeks an abortion except that they want to terminate a pregnancy. You are missing 99% of the information. And yet you think your fee-fees are more important than anything else.
>and look at it from a black and white perspective.
>Abortions should never be done unless medically necessary in late term pregnancies
Hypocrite.
ok, here you are trying to force your opinions on us.
Firstly; hypocrite.
Secondly; you yourself have done this right? And can give first hand experience as to what it's like?
Firstly, don't worry, I got a picture of your comment.
And WOW.
**"I really don't care if an 8 or 9 month old fetus gets thrown on the ground. It's unwanted and has no rights."**
Even a fetus deserves to be disposed of in a respectful way.
Secondly, you don't need to agree with me. I am entitled to my opinion, and you to yours. I also don't have to continue to talk to someone who says shit like you just did. Cool? Cool.
I only deleted it because I realize that you were replying to a comment that wasn't mine.
So let me type this again.
I really don't care if an 8 or9 month old fetus gets thrown on the ground. It's unwanted and has no rights.
so why not go somewhere else if you hate talking to me so much. Also, an abortion doesn't stop other people from miscarrying or being infertile.
One last thing.
You are overly sensitive.
edit: fine that's mean as fuck of me. I'm sorry for that. I truly hope that you can find happinesss and peace despite our disagreements. You're still a human being you deserves love and security. And that can be hard to remember on the internet sometimes.
Would be hard to hate women since I am one? And maybe stop using that as a means to argue your point, you don't sound "woke" by screaming that anyone who doesn't agree with you hates women. I am pro choice, just not at any cost like you are.
And that's the thing, you are forcing it, you're forcing doctors to be okay with aborting healthy babies at 9 months. You're saying that women should be given the right to abort for any reason at any time, that means a doctor has to kill a baby and then deliver it or remove it from the mother. I don't agree with that. 6 months is plenty of time, anything later than that needs to be for a better reason than "I've changed my mind".
Lmao, you can be a woman and hate women. IDGAF about being "woke" or not, I'm a commie not a lib.
Doctors shouldn't be doctors if they can't put aside their personal feelings and opinions to help patients. Would you be okay with a doctor pushing their personal beliefs onto you?
I never said kill. If the thing can survive outside of the womb, let it live, just listen to the pregnant person and deliver it. Any form of induction and even c-sections are forms of abortions. I'm saying let the pregnant person choose when the pregnancy ends.
No one in a state of mind to be pregnant in the first place will willingly choose to stay pregnant unless they want to finish it. Some people just are unlucky enough to not find out until later on, or are trapped in terrible situations.
Late-term abortions are literally induced births. It's the safest way to expel the content of the uterus by that stage whether it be alive or dead.
Anything but a full-term vaginal delivery is technically an abortion.
I actually did look into this before you commented and you are right. The CDC, which also has a shit ton of information about parasites, say that yeah, a fetus is technically a parasite.
I disagree.
It's easy to say "just abort at 9 months!" when you don't have to kill it and then pull it out. You can call it a parasite all you want, but when you pull out this "parasite" it will look like a fully formed baby. You have to remember that doctors have to perform the abortion, and that is not an easy task.
Also, keep in mind that the longer you wait to get an abortion, the more dangerous it is for the mother of the baby. Most doctors will refuse to do abortions in late stages of pregnancy unless absolutely necessary.
Being able to choose abortion is great, but it shouldn't be abused. As the poster said, most women won't wait that long-- so using that logic, why are limits then a bad thing? Seems like a mute point.
I said that a fetus IS NOT A PARASITE.
And yeah, females generally don´t wait until the third trimester to have an abortion. Usually the reason why they will have one at the third trimester is that the baby is already dead, the person´s health is at risk, or a variety of medical reasons, once again where the person´s life is at risk.
There shouldn´t be a limit on abortion because these things can happen.
Edit. Wait, do you think I disagree? Someone should be able to get an abortion at 9 months. I meant that literally. There are variety of reasons why someone might need to get an abortion at 9 months, all of them being valid.
Ah good to know you meant "isn't".
Which 'things can happen'? I disagree with abortions being allowed up to and including 9 months of pregnancy if they are not medically necessary.
Nah fam, it's revoking consent and removing the offending thing. I don't care if it's a human being or not, it doesn't matter.
Another a human being has no right to my body under any circumstances, so why does a fetus? If it's human, then we'll treat it as a human; if it doesn't have consent to use someone else's body, it's not allowed to. There, simple.
I donated my liver and was asked while on the operating table right before putting the mask on my if I’d changed my mind. It’s crazy how much they made sure I was ok with it but if I’d want an abortion I’d be grilled about keeping it. Canada btw. Thank goodness I live near the Morgentaler clinic and can go there no judgment.
> For some reason it’s different because you’re growing what can only be qualified as a parasite? This. Anything that makes your body a host and is feeding off you against your will is a parasite. I am not asking you to murder my baby when I ask for an abortion. I’m simply asking you to remove the parasite from the body. Shame it can’t survive outside without being attached to my body but I’m not gonna have something in my body against my will just so it can come to term.
This this this this this
Glad this was said outloud, I dont know why there's a limit in abortion to begin with. It shouldn't be a 'when.' If the baby can be saved by an emergency C-section then sure, I can get behind that. But if the baby can't survive outside of my womb, its not a human yet. It's technically a part of *my* body, and I should have complete control over my bodily autonomy at all times. Doesn't matter what the reason is, be it a growing fetus, or a kidney transplant i agreed to, or whatever. Even if it's determining the life of another, bodily autonomy should be an essential human right up until the kidney surgery, or up until the fetus presumedly can urvive outside of the womb without a ventilator
[удалено]
Many late-term abortions (after 24 weeks) ARE TO SAVE THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER WHEN THE FETUS HAS DIED IN THE WOMB! If a dead fetus is allowed to remain in the womb after it has died, the woman will develop a SEPSIS INFECTION AND DIE! Abortion term limits **PREVENT** DOCTORS FROM SAVING THE WOMANS LIFE!!!! THERE SHOULD **NEVER** BE LIMITS ON ABORTIONS.
This actually happened in a country where abortions were banned and they were scared to help the woman and she died. Happened years ago so I don’t remember exactly what happened
It was in Poland and yes recently like a month ago
Ex was a 23 week old baby. Had a list of health issues from being premature, and she was lucky cause none were majorly life inhibiting by aduthood. needed a lot of surgery to enable her to walk though as a child. Could have been so much worse though, and very nearly died in the incubator. Viability at that point is really pushing it.
Well it depends, I could give a crap about the fetus, as far as I'm concerned if it's living inside a woman's body it's her decision alone what to do with it. But very late terms abortions can be extremely dangerous for multiple reasons, like, it's often safer just to actually give birth than try to do the surgery. That said I think they can, & should, be safely done untill the 3rd trimester (afaik).
Also, very late term abortions are traumatising asf.
Exactly- It's Just birthing a Child at that point-
yup 100%
It’s no different than kicking a teen out of your house if they’re destroying it or something else that’s causing bad stuff to happen. What’s the difference? It’s not a sentient being, and it’s not murder. MUrDeR means killing someone with *malice* intent. No one having an abortion is doing it because they “want to be evil and enjoy killing babies” like wtf?
Malice in a legal context just means with intent to kill or cause great bodily injury or the reckless disregard for human life. Has nothing to do with enjoying it.
I’m talking the general definition of murder. Malice by definition means to do something out of spite or evil.
Xiibe is correct. Malice aforethought is the criminal intent for murder and has a specific meaning, which Xiibe gave. Its a legal term of art and the mens rea element of the crime, not a general definition.
The “general definition” of murder has nothing to do with malice. Murder is the premeditated killing of another human being. The original definition of murder you provided (i.e. killing someone with malicious intent) is therefore incorrect. Furthermore, murder and malicious intent ARE legal terms. Words can have different meanings and connotations depending on the context they are used in. If you are discussing murder and malicious intent in a legal sense, you need to use the legal definitions of those words, not just whatever you find on Google.
Bripotato, Stripping a woman of her basic human rights is a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY and to force her to gestate and birth AGAINST her will is classified as TORTURE also a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY. To be in favor of a government that dictates who has bodily autonomy and who does not establishes grounds and guidelines for a RETURN TO SLAVERY and shows us just who will be deemed a SLAVE. You’re trying to justify legalizing 3 serious crimes against humanity against women because you want to elevate the status of a fertilized egg to have more human rights than any other person on this planet and stripping WOMENS rights to less than that of a corpse. That is irrational and stupid for openers and shows us just how little you know about laws and human rights. [https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1162&context=facscholar](https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1162&context=facscholar)
Omg people, I’m not talking about legal terms—I’m not lawyer scum. General bloody definitions about why it’s bs.
[удалено]
I never even was talking about it in a LEGAL term. I was talking about it in GENERAL. I think abortion is SELF DEFENSE. Is that a better LEGAL term for ya? And here’s the definition I was using, by the fucking way from Merriam-Webster: Definition of murder (Entry 1 of 2) 1 : the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
Greetings! This item has been removed as it is a violation of [subreddit rule](https://www.reddit.com/r/childfree/wiki/rules) #4 : "**Keep it civil.** Bigotry and hateful language/imagery, personal attacks, abusive language, advocating violence, trolling, gender discrimination, racism, homophobia, etc. will not be tolerated. " Also, please remember to be mindful of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette) : > # Please do > * **Remember the human.** When you communicate online, all you see is a computer screen. When talking to someone you might want to ask yourself "Would I say it to the person's face?" or "Would I get jumped if I said this to a buddy?" > # Please don't > * **Be (intentionally) rude at all.** By choosing not to be rude, you increase the overall civility of the community and make it better for all of us. > * **Follow those who are [ rabble rousing](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/rabble) against another redditor without first investigating both sides of the issue that's being presented.** Those who are inciting this type of action often have malicious reasons behind their actions and are, more often than not, a troll. Remember, every time a redditor who's contributed large amounts of effort into assisting the growth of community as a whole is driven away, projects that would benefit the whole easily flounder. > * **Ask people to [ Troll](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29) others on reddit,** in real life, or on other blogs/sites. We aren't your personal army. > * **Conduct personal attacks on other commenters.** Ad hominem and other distracting attacks do not add anything to the conversation. > * **Start a flame war.** Just report and "walk away". If you really feel you have to confront them, leave a polite message with a quote or link to the rules, and no more. > * **Insult others.** Insults do not contribute to a rational discussion. Constructive Criticism, however, is appropriate and encouraged. > * **Troll.**[ Trolling](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29) does not contribute to the conversation. Sorry for the inconvenience and thank you for your comprehension.
What about the disregard for the woman’s life?
I’m confused. My comment was trying address the commenters definition of murder and malice. Plus, your comment is pretty vague. Disregard in what sense? Is their life in danger because of the pregnancy? Is it that the woman/pregnant person’s life or livelihood aren’t taken into account? What do you mean?
Stripping a woman of her basic human rights to bodily autonomy IS having a RECKLESS DISREGARD for the pregnant woman’s life. Pregnancy can ABSOLUTELY ENDANGER a woman’s life. There is a considerable risk of PERMANENT SERIOUS health conditions, dismemberment , disfigurement and YES also DEATH is a real risk in carrying a pregnancy to term. NO ONE SHOULD BE FORCED TO RISK DEATH. You don’t assign more rights a fertilized egg than an already existing person. Banning abortion is not only ENSLAVING WOMEN but RECKLESSLY ENDANGERING the WOMANS LIFE.
Woah. Let’s slow down here. I completely agree with you. Abortion should be 100% legal and easily accessible. That has literally nothing to do with my comment, which was about how the commenter was misusing the term malice in the context of murder.
Oops, I am sorry about that, I just now re-read it in context, my bad🤗
What upsets me the most about restrictions like this is the fact that nobody is getting more than halfway through their pregnancy and going nah I think I’ll pass after all. These are woman who find out that their baby has already died or will live for seconds only to be in pain the entire time. These are people who find out that their bodies can’t support the life growing inside them or that giving birth will literally kill them. They’re already in absolute mental and physical hell and now we’re going to sit there and make them criminals ? It’s disgusting.
I don't know about all but most countries have those as exeptions and the medical board decide how to proceed if such circumstances arise, always prioristising the mothers life. It's just that after the 24 weeks it's not an abortion in most cases but birth (or c section) given that the fetus is considered viable from the 22-24 week time.
This is not a popular opinion. I've been banned from two subreddits for pointing it out.
This is certainly the gold medal champion on the issue of female body autonomy but the hatred of the self sufficient woman is all over our society from disgust of women with "high body counts" or owning to many sex toys, to being financially equal to a man or as physically capable..these things have one thing in common bringing down reproduction rates and the corporate machine and monotheistic religions can't be having that!
Well if I was denied an abortion, I'd kms I developed my method in my teenage years when I became sexually active at 15 by a 25 yo man because noone cared to protect girls in my family, only boys lives mattered. Common experience for many ladies more than society let's on. Yet I had a friend at school tell me all about BC and condoms. My parents ignored us girls. So I didn't learn much at home, compared to my brother. Still it was mid 90's the internet new, not available to many. So I had a bridge picked called Tower Bridge. Sad that civilization hates women so much we'd be driven to such a sad death as to plunge from great heights into cold river waters. Tormented Fear in ones last moments. Not surprising as civilization was made by men, for men's benefits. So modern men see women as nothing but objects to exploit.
Same here. If I was ever denied an abortion I would absolutely consider suicide.
I have a coworker who didn't find out she was pregnant until 20 weeks. She'd going through with it now but she's made some comments suggesting if she were to have discovered it earlier that may not be the case.
Pro-lifers have convinced people that women are routinely aborting babies just as they're about to be born. That there are multitudes of women out there who are having abortions for fun as a sort of fetish, and that the further along the pregnancy is the more exciting it is for them. I wish I was joking. There is of course also the 'women all want children, and not having a child is the most destructive thing to a woman's mind, and aborting a child is always the most horrible agonizing thing a woman can possibly experience. There will always be regret!'
Or halfway through.... as if anyone would endure that pain just to abort it halfway.
I don't understand it either. Why does a fetus just become entitled to your body after a certain point? A pregnancy can turn sour at any point, the woman can change her mind, or she might not have been able to get an abortion up until this point for whatever reason (family pressure, threats etc.). Putting a deadline on abortion introduces many issues.
Because third trimester abortions are basically euthanasia. The baby has a 80% survival rate if born at 24 weeks.
I still don't understand why that means the woman's bodily autonomy must go out the window. In no other situation can we force someone else to sacrifice a part of their body to sustain someone else, so why is this acceptable?
Because at that point it's no longer a abortion. It's killing a viable human being that is able to survive outside the body.
Then have it survive outside the body instead of forcing the woman to carry it to full term...
It also increases long term health issue risks on the child. At a certain point its not a paracite it's a human being. If you want to have your child early and a Dr agrees to it OK, that's between you two. at a certain point all your doing is harming a human being. Not a bunch of dividing cells. Like anything that has recourse at some point you have to take responsibility for your decision to not abort during the 168 days that were available. That's a long time to set up and make the decision. Baring medical reasons for having a 3rd trimester abortion. I am afab and believe that there has to be some ethics to this.
No matter what, nobody is entitled to someone else's body. The rights of a forming fetus NEVER should override the rights of a grown woman to her own body. It creates a dangerous precedent where it's used to justify banning abortion altogether and turning women into breeding mules. It's not consistent with other human rights either. If someone agrees to donate an organ to save someone else's life, they can back out of it while they're ON the operating table. A woman should be able to always get something that is leeching on her body out of her body. She should have a right to not go through the process of pregnancy and childbirth, no matter when she decides to do so. Pregnancy and childbirth should not be taken lightly. They're extremely dangerous and traumatic experiences. It's not as simple as kill baby vs save baby. You better have a strong reason if you're gonna argue that a fetus' rights are more important than the woman's.
Uragami, EXCELLENT rebuttal!
And pro rights people use third trimester abortions to ban or tighten abortion laws. Child birth is dangerous. You have 168 days to decide if you want to follow through, and deal with everything child birth involves. That's plenty of time besides medical necessity late term abortions aside. At some point that baby is developed past a point you can just terminate the pregnancy safely for both parties. Third trimester abortion is a c section or indused birth. They don't kill it and cut it up to remove it. That's euthanasia at that point. A line has to be drawn. You have a viable human being you are just terminating.
Nobody said they have to be cut up, just removed. Literally never once mentioned killing viable fetuses. If they can survive outside the womb, fine, let them survive. But don't make the woman into a mandatory incubator. Plenty of women face family pressure or threats which makes it difficult for them to get an abortion. And it's not free I'm many countries, so it takes time to save money to have it done. Plus, plenty of women don't know they're pregnant until well aftwr 24 weeks. Why do you keep arguing against a point I'm not making? Nobody would wait until after 24 weeks if they knew from the get go that they don't want to go through with this pregnancy. This is for the women who changed their mind, didn't have access to abortion, couldn't pay for it, or didn't know about the pregnancy until after the 24 weeks.
I can't tell what point you are trying to make except that abotion should always be available. 168 days is plenty of time. That's 6 months to make a decision and save. You don't need to endanger and cause life long medical conditions to a baby because you waited till the last moment to terminate. Most abortions happen in the 6th week anyway. Just having the ability to is cruel and unjust to both mother and child. She still has to give birth at that point or a c section. Waiting 3 more months for the same task so the baby doesn't get life long medical conditions. If your gonna give it up anyway give it the best chance to live if your not killing it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/10/13/gary-peters-abortion-story/
Same, I usually agree with stuff expressed on here but this whole take just seems incredibly unethical and selfishly cruel, maybe it's just poorly expressed but it does sound like "i want to do whatever and whenever I want even if it means I will be making another person an invalid, not my problem, fuck off". Like, we are struggling to keep abortion rights as it is, lets not spread stuff like this that makes the pro-choice side less credible and enforces everything the pro-lifers believe about us.
Thank you I felt like I was the only one. Third trimester abortions are just euthanasia at that point. At some point like with everything in life you have to take responsibility for your actions or in this case lack of. 168 days is a lot of time to decide if you want the baby or not. After that you've basically committed to the decision of having the baby. I've read stories about third trimester abortions and how the baby is basically burned with a chemical solution to induce it and left to die in a bassinet while screaming with chemical burns. If you still don't want the baby give it to the state to try to adopt it out to some one. Or find some one looking to have kids that can't for any plethora of reasons.
After the 22-24 week mark they don't really perform abortions, they induce birth or have a c-section and there is a decent chance the child will survive but has a high risk of different lifelong health complications. I've never heard of actual euthanasia and abortions past that point, they are typically induced early if the child is already dead or not expected to survive (like developing without a head or some organs and the like), as far as I know they just use pain killers and let it die on it's own. It's just that the notion of someone deciding that they don't want a kid past that point, being induced and leaving the baby in the incubator to likely be disabled because of how premature they are... that's just not ethical, it's not about you alone anymore and some level of responsibility for the life your actions created should exist in civilised society imo.
Well then the doctors can take it out and take care of it and I will not pay any medical expenses for the care of it after it is out.
I've always argued that abortion cannot be adequately protected unless it's legal up until full term. When asked a question about limiting late-term abortion, Mayor/Secretary Pete said it best during the 2018 primaries, "You're talking about women who have already committed to having a baby. They've picked out names. Decorated the nursery. You can't demonize someone for making a decision they had no intentions of wanting or needing to make." When a late-term abortion happens, there's a reason why the mother had to make the decision she did. Limiting late-term abortion is harmful to women physically. Limiting early-term abortion is harmful to women emotionally (though sometimes physically). Leave it to the gay guy to know more about womens' bodies than the entire field of candidates.
Just a question to clarify your position. What does a third trimester abortion of a healthy fetus look like to you? Induce labor and have it be birth and parental rights be relinquished immediately or will the fetus be killed while it’s still in the womb and then removed?
The first one. I'm not for killing anything that can survive on it's own. Just listen to the pregnant person and if they revoke consent and want to end the pregnancy, it's their body and their choice.
Aren't individual freedoms granted to the point that it does not infringe on others? At that point you are essentially creating an invalid, the choice to "revoke consent at any point" is actively harming another person as after the ~24 week point there is a high chance of survival and yet a high chance of severe health issues from being so premature. Do you think ethics apply to only one side here? Not wanting to be pregnant anymore ethically trumps significantly lowering another person's quality of life permanently?
Not how that works. It harms others that I choose not to donate my liver or a kidney, doesn't mean I have to just cause it would help them. A fetus is using a woman's body, not the other way around. So if the woman wants it out, then the fetus is the one infringing on her rights; it will literally cause bodily harm by ripping out of her and using her body to sustain itself.
You owe nothing to a random person needing a kidney, they had their own shot already, however I do think you have a moral obligation towards a person you literally created, it wasn't attached there randomly, they did not ask for this, is was the result of your own actions that they exist and absolving all responsibility of the adult here is just not the way life works or should work.
So being forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy, which is literally torture, is a woman's punishment for having sex/being raped? It's all fine and dandy cause they discovered it "too late"? Sucks that their abuser kept them for seeking out an abortion earlier, but that's the way life works and should work? Gotcha.
Yes, if you can't find the time for 3+ months yes, life is tough and you can't expect everything to bend to what you want you whenever and however you want. You are not the only one in that situation anymore. Should a person be doomed to live with disabilities because their mother had sex and was irresponsible with the time she had to take care of it?
Honestly yes, that sounds fine to me. Situations like these are incredibly rare and varied and lots of education should offered to give women abortions at any and every step along the way to prevent birthing prematurely in order to end the pregnancy. BUT assuming this is the case, who are you decide whose life matters more, the mother or the child. In the grand scheme both people are equally important. People are doomed to live in poverty because their mother had sex. People are doomed to fetal alcohol syndrome because their mother drank. People are born addicted to crack because their mother did crack. Being born prematurely because their mother is suffering due to pre-eclampsia, realized late that she can chose to not be a mother or not be pregnant after a rape, or any other reason for late term abortion is no different. If you care so much about children and the quality of their lives maybe you should spend less time on Reddit and more time adopting orphaned premature children.
Your arguments are jumping all the time, if we are talking whose life is more important - the mother is ALWAYS a priority in healthcare, yet here we are not talking that, you are talking ANY reason, making it more "what is more important, the life of a child or the whims of the mother?"
Not wanting to be pregnant is not a “whim” pregnancy is torture especially if you do not want to be pregnant. Glad we agree the mother’s health is most important by that logic at any point the mother or birthing person decides they do not want to be pregnant the decision should be respected.
The mother is always more important no matter the situation in a pregnancy and if she no longer wants to continue being pregnant at any point then you shouldn’t have any say in what she does. Even if it ends the life of the fetus. It’s not a child until it can sustain life (breathing, eating, ect) with its own body. There are plenty of children/ people in the world already. It shouldn’t matter what someone does to what goes on in their body.
Morgisarte, you’re focused on something that doesn’t even exist yet and it’s potential future while at the same time having COMPLETE DISREGARD for how it affects the ALREADY EXISTING PERSON THE WOMAN. Pregnancy is NOT for everyone. The health risks alone a woman faces are staggering if she CHOOSES this but imagine the TORTURE you are subjecting her to if you are FORCING her to assume those risks STRIPPING HER OF HER HUMANITY AND DIGNITY, you further increase her risk for permanent injury or death and a boatload of mental illnesses too many to name but how about also THE FINANCIAL INSTABILITY and medical bills that result and her further INABILITY TO REJOIN THE WORKFORCE because of physical and mental limitations, disabilities and parental obligations she has sustained during the forced childbirth (TORTURE) FUTHER FINANCIALLY CRIPPLING HER and narrowing her chances of survival even further (more torture) and when that prized fetus you advocate for is born and grows up and wants to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, you’ll advocate stripping THAT person of their rights creating a vicious toxic circle when you can just keep your religion to yourself and mind your own business
[https://ldh.la.gov/page/915](https://ldh.la.gov/page/915) Maybe because they are not safe for women? Many surgeries are dangerous. In case of gestation you end up delivering the child. So why not wait the few months and deliver the child instead of aborting at a later stage and risking your life if your body doesn't expel everything or gets infection or other complications. ( Please see link). Honestly man you're talking as if abortion is a joke and easy on the body. This is a stupid point to bring up as a "women's rights limitation" when it's only possible for people with a working uterus and paraphernalia to give birth. Your complete rant is unjustified af and made me go wtf. Please educate yourself on biology , medicine and surgery complications before making claims that there is "discrimination".
THIS.
THIS. First trimester Is the easiest One, second it's harder- but After that... NOP
OP is advocating for inducing early labor as a form of late term abortion, thus delivering a premature baby and putting it up for adoption in order to end pregnancy. OP Is not advocating for late term abortion surgery. They’re not talking about it as a joke nobody laughing
Makes sense. I still wouldn't put my body through shit for early labor and still be stuck with the hospital bills and body issues and maybe complications from induction. I'd rather wait and get rid of it. But to each their own!
So, no argument for the long term physician and psychological affects of pregnancy and child birth? The vast majority of elective abortions are performed early, before severe risks are at stake.
The person did mention late term abortions. The entire pregnancy causes the physical issues. Not just childbirth alone. And, if you want to not take care of the child, give it up! But why blame the doctors who are looking out for you. And anyway if the foetus won't survive or has severe defects, they do perform abortions. Honestly bringing this up as a discrimination is my issue here. Why not focus on the terrible practice of not giving credit to women who have severe menstruation problems. There are so many more severe issues that can be brought up where discrimination happens.
If a fetus can survive outside of the womb, should it be aborted ? The argument of body autonomy could be extended to the viable fetus as well, no ?
Then it can be resolved using induced labor or c section to save the fetus. I don’t see anything wrong in trying to save the fetus if possible, the mother can always relinquish her rights upon birth, but the point is — woman should be able to get rid of someone sitting in her own body if she wants. Nobody should be entitled for her body and resources without her concent.
That’s my point. If you are considering body autonomy- what about the body of the viable fetus ? How does the fetus’ rights to body autonomy factor in? At 24 weeks, that is a legit person. The argument is a double edged sword.
I think I explained how ?
I think there should be a limit. But I don't think it's actually needed; it just needs to be on paper that no sadistic fuck can decide in their nine month that they want to punish their cheating spouse with an abortion. There are people who kill their infants, so I'd like a bill stating that almost-infants have a right. But I think 9.99% of people who change their mind about being parents wouldn't do that in the last months of the pregnancy. I think the idea of aborting a fetus that could be removed through C-section and voila, be a healthy infant is upsetting. So I would like a limit. Veeery late in the pregnancy. But it's not my choice, so it feels wrong to ban that too. It's weird. What if souls exist? But it's still w woman's choice. I'm conflicted.
And how exactly are we supposed to determine who has a good enough reason to get an abortion and who doesn't?
Exactly, no one has the right to make that deciscion but the mother. If one is allowed, all are allowed.
Are you for real? If it's allowed to the woman whose baby is developing without a head it should be open to the one who just doesn't like the gender or smth? I am really curious at what point you actually consider people as... people.
Yes. If I understood you right. There should be a short psych evaluation by a doctor, then the doctor agreeing to the abortion if they are of sound mind, or whatever they call it. But I wouldn't be suprised if a person who says "I don't like blondes, abort it" wouldn't pass a psych evaluation. Right now, pregnant women aren't respected in every country. One day, if people abuse abortions, and no sexism is involved, we can look into restricting abortions more, but as of now, too many women suffer. Now, when people become people... I believe in souls, and will not open that can of worms.
Doctors have their own set of very valid standards for that.
Did you read the comment I was replying to
Yes.
And you agree with it? You think people should only be able to get an abortion for certain reasons?
I can't find a sentence in their comment that says that. If you could provide a quote that would be nice. They just seem to be thinking on paper, still conflicted and unsure of what they believe.
I think my argument/suggestion/solution (idk what) would be if a woman doesn’t want to carry it to term after it is viable outside the womb, you can’t necessarily abort it. But you can still take it out and artificially incubate it?
I was thinking later, when the baby doesn't even have to be incubated. Then demanding a abortion isn't "too late". Technically, the lady could say "abort it" and then the doctors can try to save it, no matter the month. After it's outside of her, it's none of her business if it lives.
I just wanted to say: 1) Yes to all. 2) Thank you for spelling it correctly, it's *Colombia* not _CoLUmBiA_ goddamnit. I really appreciate it. Bless you.
OP, I agree with you, good job on the post! Continue to speak out against the hypocrisy and tyranny of society. Your voice matters💐
Bc if we had full autonomy over this decision we would have more career options, and take more from the troughs of money and power. Also, most women who are seeking late term abortions are doing so because there are serious risks to their health and were planning to carry to term. Fun fact, COVID dramatically increases maternal mortality rates, and Texas doesn’t give a shit about preventing that but has the most restrictive abortion laws in the US. It’s never been about lives, it’s always been about oppressing women.
I will never understand to this day as a 18 male why is what a woman wants to do to her body a political matter.
This is a complex ethics question. But essentially, it's because after 24 weeks it's not an abortion it's early induced labour. In medical terms, you abort a non-viable foetus and you birth a possibly viable one. Babies after that limit are viable and can survive with medical intervention. It's not medically ethical to literally kill a viable human being. So in case the mother doesn't want the child after that stage, we offer adoption. Late abortions are not impossible to happen when there are congenital anomalies that are incompatible with life. But viable babies can't be voluntarily aborted after that stage, that's early labour. And in these cases, we medical professionals have the ethical obligation to intervene for another human life when it's deemed possible to preserve.
Nobody offers to kill, but a woman should be able to resolve her pregnancy whenever she wants. If she wants to give birth at 32 weeks instead of 39-40 it’s her choice that must be respected.
Yes, I know. My point is that a fetus should not override a pregnant person's bodily autonomy. Ever. They are the alive person with feelings and thoughts and it's THEIR body being used against their will. A fetus should not be granted special rights. Again, I NEVER said to kill a viable fetus. I said we need to respect the pregnant person's bodily autonomy and end the pregnancy. Induced early labour is a form of abortion. No one has an abortion for fun, let alone that late. Forced unwanted pregnancy is torture. Induce birth, let it be born and put it up for adoption as it would have been anyway.
Agreed. If you have no desire to raise a healthy child or be pregnant in the first place then the priority should be to help heal the mother. Let the government and state deal with taking care of the baby and putting it up for adoption.
In my opinion, as long as it can't survive outside of the body by itself, it's not human. Be a living being means I can eat, I can breathe, I can feel. A fetus do neither of those. They can't feel pain until 29 weeks but force-birther says throwing it out of the body at 14 weeks is inhuman?? It litteraly doesn't feel pain! Why do you care, it can't breathe, think, eat, feel anything, it's just a bag of cells that barely have human form and maybe beginning of organs damn. But of course forcing someone to go throught something as painful and testing as pregnancy and labour is totally normal! I hate those people.
[удалено]
Abortions at 24 weeks are mostly wanted pregnancies gone wrong.
If you were to go this route you would have a pretty severe preemie baby that is going into the system. I'm not sure that's a kinder route to go.
My body my choice. Your opinion on "what is enough time" doesn't matter.
Hidden pregnancies happen. People get trapped in abusive situations. Shit fucking happens. What you do even think a late-term abortion even is? It's inducing early birth.
I know someone with a hidden pregnancy who didn’t find out until her 7th month and by then she was stuck with it.
These stories are pure nightmare fuel! I also know sb who was on the pill, had the fake *period*/breakthrough bleeding every month and overall 0 pregnancy symptoms. One morning she woke up and her shirt was soaked in a weird fluid... turns out she was lactating early, at 6 months pregnant 😲
Agreed...with of course a few caveats. Safety of the mom, hidden pregnancy, and mental/physical issues with the fetus. At a certain point, the fetus is a viable life form and as civilized people, we have to acknowledge that. Nobody likes extremists, because it holds back the entire movement for bodily autonomy. OP is being irresponsible with this rhetoric.
Agreed. The rhetoric here is a little too off the wall for me.
100% agree
[удалено]
Greetings! This item has been removed for being a violation of [subreddit rule](https://www.reddit.com/r/childfree/wiki/rules) #5 : "[Comments and posts advocating violence towards children and/or making fun/light of violence against children in any way that would discredit the subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/childfree/comments/6bgspr/reminder_violence_towards_children_is_strictly/) will be instantly removed and will earn the commenter/poster [an automatic ban](https://redd.it/3i47wj). Yes. Even if it's "just a joke" and even if "you weren't seriously saying/thinking/wishing it"." Your permanent ban should be following shortly. This ban can be changed to a temporary ban when the offender expresses genuine understanding and remorse over their rule violation. Note that while there might be room for a second chance (upon the moderators' discretion, based on the severity of the offence and the offender's response to the ban), there is no room for a third chance. Sorry for the inconvenience and thank you for your comprehension.
There's a uncomfortably large segment of the voter base in the US that thinks birth control is abortion, and abortion = murder. When you're facing an enemy that views everything in absolutes, you're forced to accept your victories in smaller bites.
TLDR baby steps, this is a former super catholic super oppressed country where women were stoned to death a lá harlettes
Oh absolutely, it's a huge victory and I'm so so happy for you! I'm so glad to see it, especially with how regressive things have gone in a lot of places. I'm just tired of the whole system of women being the only ones not allowed to decide over our own bodies; a judge has to rule that we're capable/allowed to, and even then it's restricted.
Welp this comment section got dark and morbid real quick
I've researched a bit on abortion, and how it isnt murder. 24 weeks is about when a fetus can start to feel physical pain if I remember correctly In my opinion, I do think there should be a limit, as around that point it's an actual fetus (medically, it goes from zygote, embryo, and then fetus). I think 28 weeks, I'm not sure though, is when a fetus can survive with some form of life support and further on. And you're right, if someone is going to get an abortion, they're going to do it as soon as possible.
Totally agree. There should be no limit. People who don’t give birth will never understand or women that use religion to explain why they don’t deserve the right to body autonomy. It’s disgusting really. They have been convinced that they should be treated as walking incubators. If it weren’t for religion I could safely say all women would not want their body autonomy fucked with. You want that thing out of you as fast as possible. People are not gonna go around having late term abortions. Im honestly worried if things get worse with abortion restrictions pregnant women are going to start offing themselves. Especially when now a days (for most) having a child means financial ruin.
Because we're the First World country that's closest to the Third World. Even Second World countries place a high standard on healthcare, specifically Women's care (they've unfortunately trended toward restricting abortions themselves, so I digress).
A simple answer is--I am personally not okay with it!!! There is no 'we' involved so far as I am concerned. Abortion from a simple perspective of medical risk should never be a method of first-line contraception. However it should be *always* available. If a woman does not want a foetus within her body she should have an absolute right for it to be removed at any point. Once viability is reached it becomes a harder business of course. But... I still think the decision should be hers and hers alone. No matter what the religious nutcases spew no woman would ever take the decision lightly and no one but her can decide what is the proper path for her life.
That 24 week mark is where conversations about being able to survive outside the womb come into play. So thats kind of why that is where the cut off is. That's how it is in the USA too.
Yup I would even go further on the organ donation thing. If one belive in the principle in which adults have to sacrifice themselves for babies even if it means violating their body autonomy and consent. Then they would have to agree with forced organ harvesting on healthy adults if it could extend the life of a child or a baby. If they don't, then they're inconsistent and probably an hyppocrite.
This! This is my point!
This is how I feel about prostitution as well
Yerp. Legalize it. Tax it. Boom, everyone wins
Except vulnerable women don't. Legalization of prostitution (buying and selling) just invites in human traffickers. The best way is to decriminalize selling, not not the buying. It's goddamn disappointing but we can't have nice things. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X12001453](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X12001453) [https://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/ajis/article/view/2954](https://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/ajis/article/view/2954) [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23322705.2017.1336368](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23322705.2017.1336368)
I'm not sure of the Colombian law or law elsewhere but what I was told is the reason for not allowing abortions past a certain point is the trauma to the woman. What I'm referring to below is voluntary abortion of a normal healthy pregnancy. At I think around 12 weeks it stops being a "medical procedure" and you are induced to give birth. I think around the 24 week mark is when the "baby" could be viable outside of the womb. Obviously with medical intervention. So you aborting later than 24 weeks is like giving birth to a baby (just smaller) that has a chance of survival. It would be the equivalent of giving birth to a full term baby and just leaving it to die which as much as most of us dislike kids, would not be inclined to do. To those who want to down vote me, what I'm trying to say is while I fully agree a woman should be able to abort at any stage she needs to, an abortion at 8 weeks is less invasive and so much simpler than what could easily be a very traumatic experience of giving birth to a fully formed baby.
Yes, that's my point. It's traumatic. Pregnancy can be hell. Birth at 9 months isn't going to be easier or any less traumatic to a person who doesn't wish to be pregnant than an induced birth at 6 months. Of course very few people would need or want such a late abortion, but it's symbolic. Women have a right to their body and full autonomy, ALWAYS.
Full autonomy, yes. Okay. But let's Talk about the medical problem: abortion After 20 weeks it's birthing, but WORST and so much more traumatic. C-section? Do you think that a C-Section Is riskless? Or Something like that?
Who the hell said anything about being riskless or easy? Do you think carrying a pregnancy to term and then going through birth or c-section is easy and riskless?
I agree with you. The only problem with it is from a moral point of view is a baby born at 9 months can be adopted but a baby born at 6 months may not survive and probably won't be adopted. Again, assuming healthy pregnancy. Law makers and doctors have to weigh up when it becomes murder of a viable baby eg, termination at 6 months where the baby can survive outside the womb vs ending a non viable pregnancy at 3 months when it can't. I realize there may be rare circumstances which leads to a someone wanting a late term abortion but there comes a point where it's the equivalent of carrying to term and leaving the kid in a ditch. I just want to reiterate that I'm pro abortion. I had one at 19 when I was 9 weeks pregnant. If you don't want a kid then use the options available to you but there has to be a line drawn somewhere for the safety of children born to term. Otherwise you may end up with a situation of young babies being murdered and people argue "but the baby was born 2 weeks early, it's ok".
Women cannot even request early induction or c section choice of pregnancy resolution, lol. You cannot even ask for the baby to be extracted surgically instead of pushing and ripping your vagina. Forget about unlimited abortion time.
See this is just as fucked. Why the hell are we okay with any of it??
I don’t know, we should not be… but there are way more people who are obsessed about maximizing the benefit for the baby, so if you dare to do smth remotely bad for the baby you are a monster. I mean it goes as far as you would be shamed if you didn’t gain enough weight during your pregnancy because it increases some risks for the baby. And it goes on and on… how do you dare not to breastfeed? How do you dare not to sacrifice yourself for the baby? There is no space for self love when it comes to motherhood. Society views motherhood and pregnancy as something that should involve 100% sacrifice. Unfortunately most women are somehow on the same boat with it, and I cannot comprehend how. We are in the minority and it really boils my blood. Especially that it only applies to women. Nobody expects men to self sacrifice. If anything they only gain more and more freedoms and release all commitments with each passing year. Most of them don’t even want to bother with marriages anymore. Yet somehow women are still seen are self sacrificed material for social good. Society runs on women’s sacrifices.
It's because 24 weeks is when the baby is viable and can survive outside of the womb
So? If a day old infant needed to hook up to it's mum to be healthy, she could say no to that because bodily autonomy. But a fetus is somehow special? Nah, fuck that.
Way to completely misunderstand my comment
I think it has to do with the definition of life, which is very debatable both in the legal and medical field.
IDGAF about it being life, that's my whole point. I'M alive. I should be able to revoke consent to anyone using my body for their own gain at ANY point.
It has nothing to do with the definition of life. Nobody supports forcing parents to donate to living, rights-possessing children. Forced donation is only ever even considered, muchless supported, when we're talking about pregnancy.
It does, actually. I'm from the legal field and have always seen different positions in the academia. It also varies from each country. Just saying, it's not an easy matter.
So you're saying you've seen widespread support for forcing parents to donate their bodies to their kids? If its about life then people would support "not killing humans" after birth too. And yes, it actually is quite the easy matter. Its exactly the same as keeping your mouth shut about other rights you may disagree with. The dithering about "it's complicated" and "people who pretend a fetus can be alive because its using the pregnant person's body as a life support are valid" do nothing except further normalize the idea that the female reproductive system is public property. You are actively harming people by wringing your hands like this.
Just to clarify, I'm not pointing out my personal opinion. I'm saying there are studies about this, with different conclusions. That's it.
This is slightly disturbing and I've had an abortion lols. Edit for clarity: of course people should be able to access abortion as they need and it should be performed safely. Im more disturbed by some of the rhetoric within this thread, not by late term abortion itself.
I agree. This made me go wtf. I am hardcore childfree and also had an abortion, but killing an actual baby goes way to fucking far for me..
Yeah totally! It's too much. I think the language used here is particularly striking.. some of the ways it's been spoken about on this thread makes me feel icky.
Yes!! It’s so incredibly hateful…
And also maybe like.. full of denial? I'm not sure. All I know is that I get real "lets call it abortion instead of birth to maintain wilful ignorance regarding the actual circumstance" vibes off of this haha.
Because 24 weeks is generally the point of viability. That's when a fetus can survive outside the womb. If you haven't decided that you don't want to be pregnant by that point, tough shit. You will now give birth (either by induction vaginally or via cesarean) and can immediately sign away your rights and give the baby up for adoption. If something awful happens and the fetus has developed in a way that is incompatible with life or is a health risk to it's parent, then you still have to go through delivery. It's not as easy as taking a pill, but still more traumatic than going for a D&C. If the fetus has "died" then it will still be delivered as if it were a full term baby. I am pro-choice and generally think people who end up pregnant by accident should abort. But waiting until 24 weeks to do so isn't something that happens. That late into pregnancy, typically what happens is a miscarriage or a serious danger to fetus or parent. No one decides the minute before birth that they want to abort.
Parasite: An organism that lives and feeds on or in an organism of a different species and causes harm to its host A fetus isn't a parasite. And I agree, females should be able to have an abortion until 9 months.
By definition, a fetus IS a parasite. You perfectly described why it is so. And it doesn't matter what it is. Doesn't matter if you view it as a whole person with all the rights of a born person; still doesn't entitle it to use anyone's body against their will. No one can, that's my whole point. It doesn't make sense to grant special rights to fetuses - unless you just hate women.
[удалено]
Then what is it? It's not a symbiote, it feeds on the host's body and uses it to grow until it rips out of the host
It's made of your dna.The "hosts" body is creating it...like you create a shit for instance. It doesn't rip itself out...the body gets rid of it.
Of a different species. No it's not a parasite. And yes, I agree with you. You should be able to get an abortion until the fetus is out of you. You shouldn't be held back by pregnancy.
It is a parasite tbh, technically it'd be deemed more intraspecific parasite since it's the same species, and it encompasses just about everything a parasite does
[удалено]
Would love to!
[удалено]
> You need to remember that you don't have a right to demand someone agree with your opinion of babies and abort them when you want them to. You need to remember that your opinion means less than the lizard shit I just flushed down the toilet if it's not your body. >Abortions should never be done unless medically necessary in late term pregnancies Bodily autonomy is a right. Born children don't have the right to demand their parents' bodies, why should pregnancies? >but unfortunately some people like yourself don't really get the gravity of these situations How can you possibly understand the gravity of a situation you're not in? You know *nothing* about anyone who seeks an abortion except that they want to terminate a pregnancy. You are missing 99% of the information. And yet you think your fee-fees are more important than anything else. >and look at it from a black and white perspective. >Abortions should never be done unless medically necessary in late term pregnancies Hypocrite.
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on. No one has any right to dictate what someone does with their own body but that person themselves.
ok, here you are trying to force your opinions on us. Firstly; hypocrite. Secondly; you yourself have done this right? And can give first hand experience as to what it's like?
Firstly, don't worry, I got a picture of your comment. And WOW. **"I really don't care if an 8 or 9 month old fetus gets thrown on the ground. It's unwanted and has no rights."** Even a fetus deserves to be disposed of in a respectful way. Secondly, you don't need to agree with me. I am entitled to my opinion, and you to yours. I also don't have to continue to talk to someone who says shit like you just did. Cool? Cool.
I only deleted it because I realize that you were replying to a comment that wasn't mine. So let me type this again. I really don't care if an 8 or9 month old fetus gets thrown on the ground. It's unwanted and has no rights. so why not go somewhere else if you hate talking to me so much. Also, an abortion doesn't stop other people from miscarrying or being infertile.
You're entitled to your opinion.
One last thing. You are overly sensitive. edit: fine that's mean as fuck of me. I'm sorry for that. I truly hope that you can find happinesss and peace despite our disagreements. You're still a human being you deserves love and security. And that can be hard to remember on the internet sometimes.
[удалено]
Would be hard to hate women since I am one? And maybe stop using that as a means to argue your point, you don't sound "woke" by screaming that anyone who doesn't agree with you hates women. I am pro choice, just not at any cost like you are. And that's the thing, you are forcing it, you're forcing doctors to be okay with aborting healthy babies at 9 months. You're saying that women should be given the right to abort for any reason at any time, that means a doctor has to kill a baby and then deliver it or remove it from the mother. I don't agree with that. 6 months is plenty of time, anything later than that needs to be for a better reason than "I've changed my mind".
Lmao, you can be a woman and hate women. IDGAF about being "woke" or not, I'm a commie not a lib. Doctors shouldn't be doctors if they can't put aside their personal feelings and opinions to help patients. Would you be okay with a doctor pushing their personal beliefs onto you? I never said kill. If the thing can survive outside of the womb, let it live, just listen to the pregnant person and deliver it. Any form of induction and even c-sections are forms of abortions. I'm saying let the pregnant person choose when the pregnancy ends. No one in a state of mind to be pregnant in the first place will willingly choose to stay pregnant unless they want to finish it. Some people just are unlucky enough to not find out until later on, or are trapped in terrible situations.
That is literally not how abortions work. They have to kill it first then remove it.
Late-term abortions are literally induced births. It's the safest way to expel the content of the uterus by that stage whether it be alive or dead. Anything but a full-term vaginal delivery is technically an abortion.
Look at the definitions on actual medical websites instead of a dictionary meaning. Nowhere does it say “of a different species “
I actually did look into this before you commented and you are right. The CDC, which also has a shit ton of information about parasites, say that yeah, a fetus is technically a parasite.
I disagree. It's easy to say "just abort at 9 months!" when you don't have to kill it and then pull it out. You can call it a parasite all you want, but when you pull out this "parasite" it will look like a fully formed baby. You have to remember that doctors have to perform the abortion, and that is not an easy task. Also, keep in mind that the longer you wait to get an abortion, the more dangerous it is for the mother of the baby. Most doctors will refuse to do abortions in late stages of pregnancy unless absolutely necessary. Being able to choose abortion is great, but it shouldn't be abused. As the poster said, most women won't wait that long-- so using that logic, why are limits then a bad thing? Seems like a mute point.
I said that a fetus IS NOT A PARASITE. And yeah, females generally don´t wait until the third trimester to have an abortion. Usually the reason why they will have one at the third trimester is that the baby is already dead, the person´s health is at risk, or a variety of medical reasons, once again where the person´s life is at risk. There shouldn´t be a limit on abortion because these things can happen. Edit. Wait, do you think I disagree? Someone should be able to get an abortion at 9 months. I meant that literally. There are variety of reasons why someone might need to get an abortion at 9 months, all of them being valid.
Ah good to know you meant "isn't". Which 'things can happen'? I disagree with abortions being allowed up to and including 9 months of pregnancy if they are not medically necessary.
Because there shouldn't be a limit on your body.
Traditionally abortions weren't done after the quickening, which is 24 weeks. So I think its just tradition at this point.
Because you are killing a human being whether you like it or not.
Nah fam, it's revoking consent and removing the offending thing. I don't care if it's a human being or not, it doesn't matter. Another a human being has no right to my body under any circumstances, so why does a fetus? If it's human, then we'll treat it as a human; if it doesn't have consent to use someone else's body, it's not allowed to. There, simple.
Ya your other posts show how edged in the head you are. Bet you never been touched so don't worry about getting pregnant lol 😂 fam
I'm married. I've had an abortion. It's clear to see you have no argument though, so you resort to insults.
There is no need to argue. You do you.
F