Designer Babies

[Lurker]

I don't know what sort of comic book view you have of people, Embar, but I don't know of anyone on the pro-choice side that believes in freedom of choice without limits.

Most people don't think it's ok to abort after a certain point in the pregnancy unless the health of the mother is threatened. Most people don't think it's ok to abort based on the sex of the child or as a casual form of birth control.

Everyone has a line they draw somewhere. There's nothing "all of a sudden" about it.

[Ddrak]

It's just the flip-side to people that are anti-government in their business dealings get all pro-government in controlling what other people do in their own homes.

Like I said - there's a difference between moral and legal.

Dd

[Ariannda Kusanagi]

I don't know what sort of comic book view you have of people, Embar, but I don't know of anyone on the pro-choice side that believes in freedom of choice without limits.

Most people don't think it's ok to abort after a certain point in the pregnancy unless the health of the mother is threatened. Most people don't think it's ok to abort based on the sex of the child or as a casual form of birth control.

Everyone has a line they draw somewhere. There's nothing "all of a sudden" about it.

If you have to deliver a child at 27 weeks who is viable without medical intervention and you abort it by killing it "while still in the womb" then i see that as murder. At that point she can keep the baby and give it up for adoption, or hell give it up then, just let it live or die and put the child up for adoption. IMO There's a certain point where if you haven't had an abortion you're not entitled to one. I mean why get an abortion at 9 weeks when you can wait till 22 or 27 or something...

[Lurker]

If you have to deliver a child at 27 weeks who is viable without medical intervention and you abort it by killing it "while still in the womb" then i see that as murder. At that point she can keep the baby and give it up for adoption, or hell give it up then, just let it live or die and put the child up for adoption.

Nobody is getting late term abortions because they decide on a whim they don't want the baby. First of all, abortions that late account for a fraction of 1% of cases and only occur when the woman's health is in danger. Just having the baby and putting it up for adoption isn't an option. The procedure is illegal in most states, and there would be a federal ban on in if the far right wing had included a health exemption. So, I'm not sure where you are coming from.

[Partha]

So, I'm not sure where you are coming from.

My vote is La-La Land.

[Ariannda Kusanagi]

If you have to deliver a child at 27 weeks who is viable without medical intervention and you abort it by killing it "while still in the womb" then i see that as murder. At that point she can keep the baby and give it up for adoption, or hell give it up then, just let it live or die and put the child up for adoption.

Nobody is getting late term abortions because they decide on a whim they don't want the baby. First of all, abortions that late account for a fraction of 1% of cases and only occur when the woman's health is in danger. Just having the baby and putting it up for adoption isn't an option. The procedure is illegal in most states, and there would be a federal ban on in if the far right wing had included a health exemption. So, I'm not sure where you are coming from.

Yeah sorry I know a woman who had an abortion that late. She wanted it sooner so she claimed. Now maybe she was only 22 weeks and she said she was 27 or something, but to the best of my knowledge she was 27 weeks and had a late term abortion. La la land nothing. I'm citing a specific example to which I am aware, it was still considered a late term abortion. I'm not saying they account for any significant amount of the cases, and if her life was in danger then that would be a different story, I'm simply saying in my mind that's murder and this is coming from a pro-choicer.

[Lurker]

What State was that in?

[Ariannda Kusanagi]

Michigan

[Lurker]

An abortion under the circumstances you describe is a felony (for the doctor) in Michigan.

[Ariannda Kusanagi]

What do you want me to tell you ? I don't speak to her anymore, I don't know what ever became of her, I'm simply retelling the events as I was told about them. she was pregnant, certainly so, and then the next day she wasn't. maybe she lied about any of the circumstances, how far along she was, maybe she lost the baby at home and didn't go to the hospital, i don't know anything more then what I was told =/ Again though I'm simply illustrating the difference to me between abortion and murder, as I see it from a pro-choice stand point. Late term abortions aren't the same thing to me as early abortions.

[Harlowe]

I believe he's just simply stating that it wasn't possible. A doctor would not do it under those circumstances in MI as it is a felony. One of you must have gotten the months wrong.

This is why random individual anecdotal stories are always poor substitutes for facts.

I really don't know anyone that is pro-choice that are not absolutely against late-term abortions. It's really not even part of the abortion issue because no one is fighting for that right, other than to save the mother.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I believe he's just simply stating that it wasn't possible. A doctor would not do it under those circumstances in MI as it is a felony. One of you must have gotten the months wrong.

This is why random individual anecdotal stories are always poor substitutes for facts.

I really don't know anyone that is pro-choice that are not absolutely against late-term abortions. It's really not even part of the abortion issue because no one is fighting for that right, other than to save the mother.

I think Select and Freecare support the right to late-term abortions, based on the absolute right to self-determination of a woman's body. I don't think they like it, or would choose it, but they support it as a choice for others.

[Select]

ORLY EMBAR?! THANX FAH READING MAH MINDZ!

I don't like late term unless the life is in danger. I do think the woman should have the right after abortion expires to remove it and have it put on machines and leave the survival up to it and science. At the state's expense since they care oh, so much about this potential life.

[Lurker]

I don't like late term unless the life is in danger. I do think the woman should have the right after abortion expires to remove it and have it put on machines and leave the survival up to it and science. At the state's expense since they care oh, so much about this potential life.

Wow. That seems like a more extreme, and frankly really bizzare, position than what Embar accused you of holding.

You think that after a certain point in the pregnancy a woman should be able to force the state to remove the fetus and care for it? And free of charge since they won't allow her to just abort? But somehow you think are against late term abortion.

I don't think you've thought things through.

[Embar Angylwrath]

One of the rare times that Lurker and I are in agreement.

Seriously Select, wtf?

[Select]

I think she should be able to remove it at any time, but most people think it's murder after a certain point. After a certain point, I agree. It's viable, so let her have the option to remove it, but stick it on some machines where it has a chance to survive. These states are outlawing late term abortions since they care about the "life", so let them support this 'life' while letting the woman choose what she wants inside of her and when. As was said, these cases are very rare and I don't think many women would let it get that far. It's an option without outright 'killing'.

I think she should pay for the procedure like she would with an abortion, but as I said, if the state cares so much about this 'life', the state should be responsible for what happens to it after she's paid for it to be removed. Of course the state should only pay for the life support if she's giving it up for adoption. If she wants it, it's her responsibility. Though at that point, it's really just a c-section and isn't what I'm talking about.

[Arkaron]

Define "viable".

My birthday is in November. It was supposed to be in January. This was before babies born as early as I was were saved as often. A nurse told my mother, "You should name her. It will help later." Which I suppose is true. With a name she would have a personality, a construct to mourn.

Viability is at the heart of the issue of engineered children. If it becomes routinely possible for a zygote to survive outside the womb, I imagine we'll have radically different views on abortion as well. For obvious reasons, I am against late term abortions with the exception of the usuals.

And it's not the state that needs to support those children because it isn't strictly the "state" that cares, although that's a larger discussion than I have the capacity to engage in at 4am. If the fanatically anti-abortion faction in this country would provide greater support instead of shaming unmarried pregnant women, I suspect it would be less of an issue. Sadly, that's not the case. For example, I was listening to a Christian fundamentalist talk show where they were discussing the film Juno, which another Christian said was the most positive pro-life message they'd seen out of the film industry in years. One of the commentators remarked that he'd been to a grocery store and checked out in a line where a pregnant girl was working. He noticed she had no wedding ring and didn't feel it was appropriate to congratulate her as other shoppers were doing. He actually asked on air if perhaps fundamentalists had gone too far in their pro-life rhetoric, because the protagonist in Juno isn't married to the father. Without missing a beat, the conversation turned to a discussion about why young people were turned off by fundamentalism.

[Ariannda Kusanagi]

Oddly enough when I became pregnant with my first child I wrestled with the choice of adoption, not abortion. I thought never crossed my mind. I have been to abortion clinics and I have had discussions with women about it (i have been sent to the abortion clinic to get an ultrasound done, there were protesters and everything... it was great I assure you) but at one point n my life it was not an issue, while at later points in time it was an issue for me.

Harlowe I'm sure she was not 27 weeks, based on my experiences, but she insisted she was. She was more then a little bit of an inconsistent person however, and I was originally told 22 weeks, and then it jumped around. 22 weeks sounds more feasible in my mind, but i still can't quite figure out what would make someone decide HALF WAY into their pregnancy that NOW was the best time to abort, when they had plenty of time earlier.

Ark you were viable, they didn't know if they could save you but they tried, Leah is another example, but NOW we certainly can save children 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, weeks premature with generally no side effects or long term problems at all, barely any6 breathing problems.

Also I haven't done the research, really, but what are some examples of the mothers life being in peril if she keeps the baby ? Pre-Eclampsia where the only cure is delivery ? I mean i understand the 9 year old with twins, but are there any other examples ?

[Ddrak]

Also I haven't done the research, really, but what are some examples of the mothers life being in peril if she keeps the baby ?

Usually anything that makes you weak enough that the baby taking nutrition from your system will kill you. As the Ob told my wife - the baby will eat first.

Dd

[Select]

I would say they should attempt it as soon as they could with the highest chances of the baby surviving and developing normally. A doctor would know when it was best to at least try. I haven't researched this enough since I haven't had experiences with premies. When a mother gives a birthed baby up for adoption, the state pays for its care, right? It would be an option: go through with it all the way to the end, birth it and pay for everything or give it up after the birth; pay for abortion; pay for it to be removed while giving up your parental rights where its care becomes the responsibility of the state like a birthed abandoned baby. The numbers would be small, but that's tax money directly supporting a life and not a person who may use the money elsewhere. I'll add that I'm on 3 1/2 hours of sleep, but we can keep discussing this at half brain power, Ark.