Abortion Providers

[LADoc00]

First, you said "call girl types" which are a well-paid, highly autonomous minority of prostitutes....

I dont want to start a prostitute thread but I will handily debate any of the info Ive gathered/help gather. Actually call girl type prostitution is NOT a minority, it is the majority. Increased police patrolling and enforcement has reduced street walker drug addict type hookers to record low levels. The key break through has been the internet. Things like craigslist, eros guide etc. offer call girls webpages to post their info and meet clients. The entire industry has undergone a metamorphosis, Im not sure how up on this you are. Pimps and such are definitely on decline. I had statistics of how much of the sex worker business was using the internet as a conduit, but I think it was over 50% in CA (in CA, urban areas mind you, dont reply with hookers in rural Miss. stories). The police arent even really going after it as by and large it doesnt produce the same crime issues as street walker hookers. As more and more Asian massage palor type operations are shutdown, I think eventually almost 100% of the biz will be via the internet.

The POINT is Leukocyte's story could very well be true, I have evidence of both parts of that equation. If so, how do feel about serial aborters? Did you know the average (!!) number of abortions in some countries like the Ukraine is 6? That's the mean...imagine the outliers on that bell curve.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[trustwomen]

Check this out:http://www.drhern.com/fulltext/preg/paper.htm


Basically in half-assed bombastic page long essay, Dr. Hern put forth the idea that pregnancy is a pathologic state and he is in fact the "cure". Seriously this is guy a lunatic.

Seriously FRINGE crap. People wonder why religious radicals sit around in Bible study cleaning guns and foaming at the mouth...

Been searching for my reference on serial aborters, but half my personal library is in storage. I had a whole abortion bookset at one point.

Warren Hern is a good doctor and a brave man (he deals with daily death threats and all the rest) but he is... eccentric. I suspect the foamy-mouthed shotgun-toters actually contributed to him becoming so radical - he was on the infamous internet hit list, they put up "wanted" posters with his name, picture, home address, and work address, and one guy (Ken Scott) has publicly claimed that he will make sure he kills Warren Hern someday.

You'd have to be a little kooky to keep working at all, wouldn't you?

He does not, EVER, do an abortion on someone who has not sought it out and fully consented to it. His personal philosophies aside, he was a pioneer in abortion technique and continues to have an unbeatable safety record. I'd let him perform an abortion on me, no question - no matter what he writes in his essays.

 

[trustwomen]

The POINT is Leukocyte's story could very well be true, I have evidence of both parts of that equation. If so, how do feel about serial aborters? Did you know the average (!!) number of abortions in some countries like the Ukraine is 6? That's the mean...imagine the outliers on that bell curve.

I absolutely believe that a patient came in for her tenth abortion and cried when shamed by the doctor. No question. However, I contest the notion that she has repeated unplanned pregnancies for "the rush". Maybe it is possible, I suppose anything is "possible"... But when you ask the people on the ground, they unanimously say that it's highly unlikely (I checked my listserv this morning).

I have counseled many women who were so-called "serial aborters" (wow, no implications in that choice of phrase, eh?). Most were from Russia, China, the Ukraine, etc... where effective birth control is hard to come by (communist delivery systems are not great at ensuring consistent access to the pill, for example). Back home, they had to use abortion as birth control because of lack of options (by the way, they disprove that whole "abortion causes infertility" myth - they would have double-digit numbers of abortions interspersed between their three deliveries, for example). Once they moved to the States, the abortions diminished greatly because they went on the pill - although some did have "cultural carryover" that included considering abortion "no big deal" and the pill as "dangerous".

Some others, not from those countries, displayed symptoms of mental illness and personality disorders (I'm not a shrink so I can't diagnose, but the symptoms were pretty clear in the counseling room). Some also had severe learned helplessness - they did not believe that they could, in any way, prevent this from happening.

I don't have any moral issues with women who have many abortions, although I think it is better to prevent unplanned pregnancy, for the woman's sake. I don't consider abortion to be intrinisically evil, remember? It is a necessary, preventable, common, safe surgery. Of course, if you can engage in preventive medicine instead, that is better... for any surgery.

I do know that shaming women won't help them contracept better.

 

[LADoc00]

I have never thought about much about whether abortion should be legal or not, maybe because Im a guy, dunno. BUT last night I thought about it and decided that the "burden of choice" was the heaviest obligation carried by individual members of society. I would reference "Sophie's choice" flick for the life long implications of having to make such a choice. In such situation I believe having the option of abortion is actually unfair for women...that is my thought for the day.

Call it the "Tyranny of Will" but the absence of choice would lead to more happy, fulfilled lives. Would be interesting to do an experiment on this. You would need 2 equivlaent SES groups and follow them over the long term. Of course make adoption available as an alternative.

Another interesting fall out of legalized abortion is the Roe Effect, or the idea that the political mainstream is shifting toward evangelical type radicalism because they are the becoming the dominant reproductive paradigm. The classic example: Seattle has more dogs than children within city limits, but Salt Lake has 3 times as many children as dogs. Over time countries with legalized abortion must be moving the political center strongly to the right wing, of course this takes generation of breeding/abortion, no idea how many cycles this would take but I think already this is the case in the US. Looking at Europe, the rise of ultranationalist parties (although immigration plays into it, so does abortion because immigrant populations often have higher fecundity than native pops) is also an interesting sign.

You have to admit, powerbase will follow those that reproduce. I had never heard much of midwest evangelical christianity in the news as a kid, now it seems to be common place, Mormon temples everywhere, Latino populations exploding. I see the Democrat base seriously dwindling here. Eventually we will be a country of 2 parties: Republican and Really Really Republican.

 

[trustwomen]

I have never thought about much about whether abortion should be legal or not, maybe because Im a guy, dunno. BUT last night I thought about it and decided that the "burden of choice" was the heaviest obligation carried by individual members of society. I would reference "Sophie's choice" flick for the life long implications of having to make such a choice. In such situation I believe having the option of abortion is actually unfair for women...that is my thought for the day.

Call it the "Tyranny of Will" but the absence of choice would lead to more happy, fulfilled lives. Would be interesting to do an experiment on this.

Most groups and populations that have had an absence of choice/absence of power have fought to change this, no? That kind of answers the question for me.

There is a (misnamed) group called "Feminists for Life" that claims that having a choice is unfair for women. I'd say that "Sophie's Choice" is not the best example, because her free choice would have been to keep both her children. I believe in free choice, meaning I also support the kind of social programs that make it possible for women to have children whenever they want to.

Overall, do women live more happy and fulfilled lives when they had a choice to have an abortion (whether they actually chose it or not), or when they must have children, without any other possibility? It probably depends on the person; some women (as I mentioned before) have told me they would prefer it if abortion were illegal, because then they wouldn't have this "burden of choice" - but far more have thanked the stars that they did have this particular "burden". If somebody wants to live unconsciously and not "choose", i.e. let life happen to them, I won't stop them. I might feel sorry for them, but that's just me. But I don't think that we can safely assume that everyone would be happier without freedom, which means I don't think we can justifiably take it away.

 

[LADoc00]

Choice debate circa 2005: Abortion or Adoption

fast forward 10 cycles of Roe Effect....


Choice debate circa 2100: Muslim or Mormon

Thanks.

 

[trustwomen]

Choice debate circa 2005: Abortion or Adoption

fast forward 10 cycles of Roe Effect....


Choice debate circa 2100: Muslim or Mormon

Thanks.

Ah, but you're forgetting the power of attrition. My dad is a conservative minister, for example.

A great way to prevent this sad future from happening, by the way, is improving public education and making it mandatory (none of this religious home-schooling crap).

You may be right, in 100 years freedom and secularism and universal human rights might just be a historical blip on the radar; but we can't contradict our own values in order to ensure their survival - that is intrinsically impossible.

BTW, the choice debate is abortion vs. childbirth. Once you choose childbirth, then it becomes keeping vs. adoption. Most women who "choose" adoption when they are pregnant change their minds after the birth.

 

[LADoc00]

Ah, but you're forgetting the power of attrition. My dad is a conservative minister, for example.

A great way to prevent this sad future from happening, by the way, is improving public education and making it mandatory (none of this religious home-schooling crap).

You may be right, in 100 years freedom and secularism and universal human rights might just be a historical blip on the radar; but we can't contradict our own values in order to ensure their survival - that is intrinsically impossible.

BTW, the choice debate is abortion vs. childbirth. When you choose childbirth, then it becomes keeping vs. adoption.

Damn you trustwoman and your kind forcing me into the arms of polygamy! Damn you. The HORROR...

You are too full of contradictions, you cant be about choice then claim everyone has no choice but to go to your propagandist (by your admission) education system. At least Islam is consistent, go to the religious school or you get chopped...Stop waffling. Be about liberty and choice or give it up I say!

 

[trustwomen]

Damn you trustwoman and your kind forcing me into the arms of polygamy! Damn you. The HORROR...

You are too full of contradictions, you cant be about choice then claim everyone has no choice but to go to your propagandist (by your admission) education system. At least Islam is consistent, go to the religious school or you get chopped...Stop waffling. Be about liberty and choice or give it up I say!

What can I say, my feminist ideals seem to be self-defeating in the long term... I studied evolution in school too.... Enjoy your women, LADoc.

As for me, I'll work on the "attrition" part (which is the only reason I post so doggedly on SDN, really).

Are reason, and the scientific method, propagandist? The truth will set you free, my boy, and it will do the same for schoolchildren. Children do not have the same liberty as adults; they never have. Remember, the liberty I have advocated here is that of deciding whether your uterus may be used to support a fetus. I'm not a complete libertarian or anything. I'm sort of middle ground (well, for Quebec, anyway - in the States I'm a raving radical left-wing loony).

 

[LADoc00]

What can I say, my feminist ideals seem to be self-defeating in the long term... I studied evolution in school too.... Enjoy your women, LADoc.

As for me, I'll work on the "attrition" part (which is the only reason I post so doggedly on SDN, really).

Are reason, and the scientific method, propagandist? The truth will set you free, my boy, and it will do the same for schoolchildren. Children do not have the same liberty as adults; they never have. Remember, the liberty I have advocated here is that of deciding whether your uterus may be used to support a fetus. I'm not a complete libertarian or anything. I'm sort of middle ground (well, for Quebec, anyway - in the States I'm a raving radical left-wing loony).

Hahahah truth? No one has dominion over the house of truth, save for the guy with the biggest gun and will to use it. Truth is a few millimeters of lead moving at 800 feet per second.

Yes most definitely your ideas are propagandist. Not bad or good, but they are by definition.

 

[Poety]

You sound like you're pro-choice and anti-abortion. You don't personally like it or agree with it, but you don't believe in restricting others' rights to it. Meaning you're cool by me.

yes, it has to be available. But I am adamantly against women having 7+ abortions, thats where the whole iron fist attitude comes in and say give em depos and make em take it Stick em on the psych ward, I'll have our guys pin em down

 

[trustwomen]

yes, it has to be available. But I am adamantly against women having 7+ abortions, thats where the whole iron fist attitude comes in and say give em depos and make em take it Stick em on the psych ward, I'll have our guys pin em down

I realize you were saying this in jest, but hormonal methods are not for all and can be dangerous for some. Besides, what would you do to all the men who just keep getting people pregnant? Gotta keep it fair, no?

See, I figure if she wants an abortion, it's never better to make her have a baby instead. First, third, fifteenth, whatever - it's not better to make her have a baby. But yes, counselors do spend more time on contraception counseling when it's clear that the patient needs "extra help" with it. Sometimes, that counseling seems closer to psychotherapy (we're kind of past the "information session" approach 'cause she's definitely heard that before).

 

[lama]

Just wondering why you guys are entertaining this premed and her bull$hit arguments? Her logic is so fundamentally flawed that it isn't worth responding to. You wont win arguing with a lunatic like this.

Interesting that it is illegal to perform euthanasia because an individual does NOT have the right to choose the termination of his own life. Yet we allow irresponsible adults terminate unwanted pregnancies. What's further inflammatory is that it's not their own life their ending, its the life of another.

Kudos to LADoc for a very well argued and logical theorem. Very entertained with trustwomen's naive responses; it was laughable.

 

[Poety]

I realize you were saying this in jest, but hormonal methods are not for all and can be dangerous for some. Besides, what would you do to all the men who just keep getting people pregnant? Gotta keep it fair, no?

See, I figure if she wants an abortion, it's never better to make her have a baby instead. First, third, fifteenth, whatever - it's not better to make her have a baby. But yes, counselors do spend more time on contraception counseling when it's clear that the patient needs "extra help" with it. Sometimes, that counseling seems closer to psychotherapy (we're kind of past the "information session" approach 'cause she's definitely heard that before).

You do know that after a woman has this many abortions, she will probably never be able to sustain a pregnancy right? I mean, so hormones may not be for everyone, but perhaps should be for these women, it'd be one way of preserving her fertility.

Also, the real problem here stems from abuse. When laws are instituted allowing rights to anyone, women/men/children, etc - they will inevitably be abused by some. You will always have the 20 year old that faithfully took her bcp's, is in college, in a LTR, but not ready for a child and happened to get pregnant, vs. the 14 y.o. from a dysfunctional home having sex with everyone to replace her father and getting pregnant (over, and over and over). Its the point that abortions are allowed to be done so many times that bothers me - I mean seriously, these girls/women start to think, (whether they admit it to themselves or not) "if I get pregnant, I can just go get an abortion" - that is a definite flaw in the law to protect women's rights and its being abused at an astronomical rate. The solution lies in the LAW, since clearly, patient education isn't working.

I happen to agree with your sentiments LAMA, especially on the euthanasia thing.

 

[pruritis_ani]

Just wondering why you guys are entertaining this premed and her bull$hit arguments? Her logic is so fundamentally flawed that it isn't worth responding to. You wont win arguing with a lunatic like this.

Interesting that it is illegal to perform euthanasia because an individual does NOT have the right to choose the termination of his own life. Yet we allow irresponsible adults terminate unwanted pregnancies. What's further inflammatory is that it's not their own life their ending, its the life of another.

Kudos to LADoc for a very well argued and logical theorem. Very entertained with trustwomen's naive responses; it was laughable.

This is actually a funny post.....claiming that LAdoc is right simply because his is the view you agree with is pretty funny. In fact, I was thinking that trustwomen was making pretty quick work of him, and his arguments.

It is important to remember that the right argument is not always the one you happen to agree with....

A second note...your argument about euthanasia shows how little you actually paid attention to trust women's argument...the core of her argument about the choice is that you cannot force somebody to play host to a fetus , in the same vien that you cannot force somebody to donate a kidney. Now, that is a long way from euthanasia.....nothing in common, totally different arguments (outside of the control of your own body issue, that is).

My proposal would be to get rid of the name abortion. Just change it to delivery. That way the pro-lifers can take the responsibility for trying to save all of the 12 week old fetuses without requiring somebody else to risk their life brining an unwanted baby into the world. We maintain mom's rights by allowing her to deliver whenever she wants, and we can satsify the pro-lifers by letting them try to save all these "babies".

 

[trustwomen]

You do know that after a woman has this many abortions, she will probably never be able to sustain a pregnancy right? I mean, so hormones may not be for everyone, but perhaps should be for these women, it'd be one way of preserving her fertility.

Also, the real problem here stems from abuse. When laws are instituted allowing rights to anyone, women/men/children, etc - they will inevitably be abused by some. You will always have the 20 year old that faithfully took her bcp's, is in college, in a LTR, but not ready for a child and happened to get pregnant, vs. the 14 y.o. from a dysfunctional home having sex with everyone to replace her father and getting pregnant (over, and over and over). Its the point that abortions are allowed to be done so many times that bothers me - I mean seriously, these girls/women start to think, (whether they admit it to themselves or not) "if I get pregnant, I can just go get an abortion" - that is a definite flaw in the law to protect women's rights and its being abused at an astronomical rate. The solution lies in the LAW, since clearly, patient education isn't working.

Funny, if the abortions are properly done there doesn't seem to be much of a upper limit. When they did the old D&Cs in the 70s, sure, because those sharp metal curettes scraped too much off the endometrium - but suction abortion (standard since the early 90s) is much, much gentler. I already mentioned the Eastern European women I've seen who had a dozen abortions interspersed with their deliveries. The only real risk could be cervical incompetence (if your doc's too quick with the dilators, every time), but cerclage does exist, no? And besides, it would seem that 12 abortions would probably not cause as much physical risk as 12 babies. Preventing unplanned pregnancies is the real key, of course, but when she comes to you already pregnant, you can't go back in time and feed her Ortho-tricyclen. So if it's her tenth pregnancy, you do what? Make her have a baby instead, because you feel she's way too irresponsible to deserve another abortion (but she'll clearly handle a baby just fine)?

Most women who get abortions do not get 7+, which seems to be your sticking point according to a previous post. Of the 2000-3000 women I've counseled, I estimate only about 80 had had five (or more) previous abortions. That doesn't seem to indicate "astronomical" abuse. Furthermore, those dysfunctional 14-year-olds usually want to keep their babies. One of them (in 7th grade, was held back twice) told me "I want to try to be a mom". I really felt like quoting Yoda at her ("Do or not do. There is no try.") but I bit my tongue and sent her home (her mom was trying to force her to abort). Abortion patients, overall, are the ones who are MORE responsible - they are wise enough to know that they can't handle a baby.

The law is NOT the solution. Abortion access actually has a negative correlation with unplanned pregnancy rates. Meaning that in those countries where access to abortion is easier, with fewer restrictions (Western Europe, Canada), unplanned pregnancy rates (and therefore abortion rates) are lower than in countries with worse access (U.S., Brazil, Peru). Yes, you'll start telling me universal healthcare has something to do with that - and you're right. But even within the U.S., southern states with high restrictions on abortion have higher unplanned pregnancy rates than do the more liberal northern states. Seem counterintuitive? Only because you are misattributing the cause of unplanned pregnancy. Women do not (consciously or otherwise) think "I can just get an abortion, so I'll take risks). It is more complex than that and is linked to a half-dozen other factors - but abortion access is not one of them.

By "patient education" I assume you mean the contraception spiel I can give in my sleep; and you're right, it doesn't always work. However, a different kind of "patient education", namely great public schools and financially accessible universities, would help reduce teen pregnancy a great deal. Girls are much more careful when they have big dreams and plans (which a pregnancy would screw up).

Then again, what do I know. As someone pointed out, I'm just a lowly McGill med student with 5 years of clinical experience in women's health.

 

[trustwomen]

My proposal would be to get rid of the name abortion. Just change it to delivery. That way the pro-lifers can take the responsibility for trying to save all of the 12 week old fetuses without requiring somebody else to risk their life brining an unwanted baby into the world. We maintain mom's rights by allowing her to deliver whenever she wants, and we can satsify the pro-lifers by letting them try to save all these "babies".

I love it!!! We even have the meds to make this happen - misoprostol, mainly. I see a boom in NICU funding on the horizon... (And remember, half of all abortions are under 9 weeks, and 89% are under 14 weeks - better get crackin' on that technology!)

 

[LADoc00]

Once someone provides a coherent defense of abortion practice, Ill listen. I have yet to hear one not rife with contradiction, inconsistency and political motives. Put aside the morality for a bit, even the premed here admits past viability, abortion "rights" are moot.

We have a very serious legal contradiction by allowing women choice, yet criminalize men who dont pay child support and negating their choice in the matter.

I for long too have beared the incessant whining of a female political establishment unwilling to carry their simple natural reproductive burden without demanding concessions from a pitiful, impotent and broken so-called democratic system. I would argue that if men played a similar game and sat around protesting rather than fighting and dying in places like Bataan, Normandy and Pearl Harbor, we would all speaking a combination of German and Japanese and this whole argument would be moot.

End the welfare state at least so I dont have to pay for it.

If some OBs want to perform abortions to make some cash, so be it. That is all on them and their conscience. But dont act self-righteous about it, that makes me sick.

I would query what blacks and other minorities must think about TABs given that the Roe v. Wade attorney so blatanly admitted it was the "Endlösung der Judenfrage" for the problem of inner city crime and overpopulation by blacks. Even popular culture has now accepted the decrease in black crime rates is due to legalized easy access to abortion (see NYT best seller Freakanomics). Ironically the very political party that professes to represent blacks, is intent on crippling their fecundity (but not that Repubs are much better).

End rant..thanks

 

[trustwomen]

Once someone provides a coherent defense of abortion practice, Ill listen. I have yet to hear one not rife with contradiction, inconsistency and political motives. Put aside the morality for a bit, even the premed here admits past viability, abortion "rights" are moot.

We have a very serious legal contradiction by allowing women choice, yet criminalize men who dont pay child support and negating their choice in the matter.

I for long too have beared the incessant whining of a female political establishment unwilling to carry their simple natural reproductive burden without demanding concessions from a pitiful, impotent and broken so-called democratic system. I would argue that if men played a similar game and sat around protesting rather than fighting and dying in places like Bataan, Normandy and Pearl Harbor, we would all speaking a combination of German and Japanese and this whole argument would be moot.

End the welfare state at least so I dont have to pay for it.

If some OBs want to perform abortions to make some cash, so be it. That is all on them and their conscience. But dont act self-righteous about it, that makes me sick.

I would query what blacks and other minorities must think about TABs given that the Roe v. Wade attorney so blatanly admitted it was the "Endlösung der Judenfrage" for the problem of inner city crime and overpopulation by blacks. Even popular culture has now accepted the decrease in black crime rates is due to legalized easy access to abortion (see NYT best seller Freakanomics). Ironically the very political party that professes to represent blacks, is intent on crippling their fecundity (but not that Repubs are much better).

End rant..thanks

Abortion rights are "moot" past viability because abortion just doesn't happen past viability (except for a few hundred cases a year, due to severe maternal and fetal health problems). Roe v. Wade only protects abortion rights pre-viability. I suspect you'll never hear the argument you're seeking, LADoc, because you just aren't listening. I consider myself to be quite consistent in my positions.

There is a whole thread in Topics in Healthcare called "Roe v. Wade for Men" - I started it specifically to address this child support issue you mention. It was inspired by a recent lawsuit filed by the Center for Men, which argued basically the same point you bring up here.

"Simple natural reproductive burden"? Ouch. (The ladies must looove you.) I could counter-argue that if men stopped starting wars in the first place, and started "playing the game" in the way you say women do, we'd all be better off... just a thought.

The welfare state, as you call it, is essential to free reproductive choice. You want "eugenics"? Revert to complete social Darwinism and see what happens. I don't like eugenic theory, or social darwinism, and I believe in solidarity (you probably will too, once you're old and helpless - me, I "caught on" while young).

So you're OK with doctors doing abortions for purely lucrative reasons, but you're not OK with them doing it because they want to help their patients? (Wow, been reading Ayn Rand lately?) This is, as far as criticism of abortion providers go, certainly unique. That's something, I guess.

Some black groups do indeed oppose abortion rights and cry "eugenics" as an excuse. However, the modern birth control/abortion rights movement is not motivated by eugenic thought; eugenics involves the abolition of free choice and the imposition of reproductive decisions on others, which is anathema to us. It's the same mentality as abortion opponents, except in reverse: except instead of saying "everybody must have babies", eugenicists say "certain people must not have babies". This is why I claim that being pro-choice is NOT the "opposite view" of the "pro-lifers" - believing in forced abortion is the opposite view. I am in the middle, leaving it up to each pregnant woman to decide (I suppose you could say I'm on one end of a liberty/coercion spectrum). I will admit that the history of the movement was checkered with eugenic thought - but liberal feminism really did sweep it away and take over within the last 40 years. (The history of most religious groups is also very questionable, yet many religious people are doing good in the world today.) Besides, the birth rate for minorities is doing just fine - it's still higher than for whites, despite the higher abortion rate. But gee, why do white people still have all the power and money despite their shrinking numbers, why in fact has the concentration of wealth gotten more acute? Maybe a woman who is able to control her fertility can get farther in life?

The pro-choice community, as a whole, actually doesn't like the Freakonomics abortion theory. Some of its individual members might (including Henry Morgentaler, sadly); but overall we don't believe in choice because "the world will be better off without these children". We believe in choice because the world will be better off when women are free.

 

[Poety]

Funny, if the abortions are properly done there doesn't seem to be much of a upper limit. When they did the old D&Cs in the 70s, sure, because those sharp metal curettes scraped too much off the endometrium - but suction abortion (standard since the early 90s) is much, much gentler. I already mentioned the Eastern European women I've seen who had a dozen abortions interspersed with their deliveries. The only real risk could be cervical incompetence (if your doc's too quick with the dilators, every time), but cerclage does exist, no? And besides, it would seem that 12 abortions would probably not cause as much physical risk as 12 babies. Preventing unplanned pregnancies is the real key, of course, but when she comes to you already pregnant, you can't go back in time and feed her Ortho-tricyclen. So if it's her tenth pregnancy, you do what? Make her have a baby instead, because you feel she's way too irresponsible to deserve another abortion (but she'll clearly handle a baby just fine)?

Most women who get abortions do not get 7+, which seems to be your sticking point according to a previous post. Of the 2000-3000 women I've counseled, I estimate only about 80 had had five (or more) previous abortions. That doesn't seem to indicate "astronomical" abuse. Furthermore, those dysfunctional 14-year-olds usually want to keep their babies. One of them (in 7th grade, was held back twice) told me "I want to try to be a mom". I really felt like quoting Yoda at her ("Do or not do. There is no try.") but I bit my tongue and sent her home (her mom was trying to force her to abort). Abortion patients, overall, are the ones who are MORE responsible - they are wise enough to know that they can't handle a baby.

The law is NOT the solution. Abortion access actually has a negative correlation with unplanned pregnancy rates. Meaning that in those countries where access to abortion is easier, with fewer restrictions (Western Europe, Canada), unplanned pregnancy rates (and therefore abortion rates) are lower than in countries with worse access (U.S., Brazil, Peru). Yes, you'll start telling me universal healthcare has something to do with that - and you're right. But even within the U.S., southern states with high restrictions on abortion have higher unplanned pregnancy rates than do the more liberal northern states. Seem counterintuitive? Only because you are misattributing the cause of unplanned pregnancy. Women do not (consciously or otherwise) think "I can just get an abortion, so I'll take risks). It is more complex than that and is linked to a half-dozen other factors - but abortion access is not one of them.

By "patient education" I assume you mean the contraception spiel I can give in my sleep; and you're right, it doesn't always work. However, a different kind of "patient education", namely great public schools and financially accessible universities, would help reduce teen pregnancy a great deal. Girls are much more careful when they have big dreams and plans (which a pregnancy would screw up).

Then again, what do I know. As someone pointed out, I'm just a lowly McGill med student with 5 years of clinical experience in women's health.

First, as for abortion patients being more responsible? I don't think so.... I go BACK to my example (which my n=1, but my n=1, saw about 20+ patients with multiple abortions on her obgyn rotation, ie 4+, its NOT UNCOMMON, perhaps in Canada, but NOT IN urban Jersey)

Second, I'd like to see your data on whats in bold up there - I have a hard time buying it. Perhaps the data is skewed in many of those "unwanted" pregnancies end up in adoption or being adopted in by a family member. So in essence - you'd have to look at birth rate/adoption rate and the like to make that statement valid.

ETA: if you think incompetent cervix isn't a big deal for sustaining a pregnancy, you really need to go back to obgyn - or just watch a woman come in after her fetus spontaneously aborted at 24 weeks and then tell me, oh its not a big deal to have the "gentle suction abortion" that even sounds disgusting.

You lost me when you became militant about a woman's rights to abortion, you will NEVER convince me that it was my right to have CHOSEN to abort my daughter if thats what I wanted to do... YUCK, how selfish is that?

One last question - do you have kids?

 

[LADoc00]

I could counter-argue that if men stopped starting wars in the first place, and started "playing the game" in the way you say women do, we'd all be better off... just a thought.

Ignorance this like this is why I left the military. I came to the conclusion such sacrifice in the face of a decaying decadent population was pointless. I seriously cant wait for the day when the freedoms of the West are trampled into the dirt and yoke of tyrannical lords leave us gasping for the breath and the will to even live, let alone have free discussions like this one. People might only then look back on an all too brief chapter in the history of the human experience and remember how it came into being.

Ahhh, Spengler's The Decline of the West, 80 years late but "Behold the rider of the pale horse with a white crown." And who gave the crown to the rider?

Im done, have fun.

 

[trustwomen]

First, as for abortion patients being more responsible? I don't think so.... I go BACK to my example (which my n=1, but my n=1, saw about 20+ patients with multiple abortions on her obgyn rotation, ie 4+, its NOT UNCOMMON, perhaps in Canada, but NOT IN urban Jersey)

Second, I'd like to see your data on whats in bold up there - I have a hard time buying it. Perhaps the data is skewed in many of those "unwanted" pregnancies end up in adoption or being adopted in by a family member. So in essence - you'd have to look at birth rate/adoption rate and the like to make that statement valid.

ETA: if you think incompetent cervix isn't a big deal for sustaining a pregnancy, you really need to go back to obgyn - or just watch a woman come in after her fetus spontaneously aborted at 24 weeks and then tell me, oh its not a big deal to have the "gentle suction abortion" that even sounds disgusting.

You lost me when you became militant about a woman's rights to abortion, you will NEVER convince me that it was my right to have CHOSEN to abort my daughter if thats what I wanted to do... YUCK, how selfish is that?

One last question - do you have kids?

My clinical experience was in NYC. About half the patients were on Medicaid and a majority were minorities (wait, does that make sense?) Four is a lower standard than 7, which you said earlier. If we look at 4 total (meaning at least three prior, then one more the day of the appointment), my number goes up from about 80 to about... 200 I think. So about 1 in 10; still not "astronomical", IMO. (I was looking at min. 5 priors +1 = 6 total, in my earlier estimation, because you had said 7+ before).

Did you not see irresponsible OB patients? That surprises me, urban Jersey and all. And if you don't want or can't care for a child (and can't face placing it for adoption which, let's admit, none of US could do either) - is it not responsible to have an abortion rather than permanently sabotage your life and the child's?

And sure, a 24 week abortion is a much bigger deal medically than an early abortion (the latter are the suction curette procedures, BTW) - although it's still less of a deal than childbirth. You've seen people have 4+ abortions at 24 weeks every time? Not me - all my major repeaters were 1st-tris. There were a few women who came in for their second or third 2nd-tri (ex: drug users who never got their **** together enough to show up earlier, or the occasional teen with a denial problem) but not many and they never became major repeaters (they would often tell me "next time I'll just have the baby", which somehow failed to be a reassuring statement for me). The major repeaters seemed to have "early and often" as a mantra, b/c that's how it was done in Russia or China etc... Occasionally you'd have an American woman with a severely external locus of control, as I already mentioned ("why does this keep happening to me"? they'd cry - but wouldn't listen to my answer). The "major repeaters" generally had early abortions in which the cervix is dilated to about the width of a pencil, for less than 3 minutes. Followed by methergine tabs PO. Not likely to cause that much cervical incompetence, no matter how many you have, unless your doc is way too aggressive with his dilators, every time.

I would fight for your right to have your daughter as passionately as I would fight for someone else's right to have an abortion. I'm thrilled that you're happy to have had her, I'm sure she's loved and safe and healthy. That's what I'd like to see for all children - and that starts with them being wanted.

I don't have kids yet. I want to, someday. I'll be sad if it doesn't happen, but I'm sure I'd be able to find another outlet for my energy and love. If you're trying to imply that I'll feel differently once I have kids, I respectfully disagree. I remember when one of my colleagues was pregnant, it actually increased her empathy towards abortion patients: she said that her baby was planned, wanted, and prepared for - yet she STILL felt overwhelmed, scared, and vulnerable. She said she could imagine even clearer how terrible it would be if the pregnancy was unwanted - and how desperate a woman could feel.

 

[trustwomen]

Second, I'd like to see your data on whats in bold up there - I have a hard time buying it. Perhaps the data is skewed in many of those "unwanted" pregnancies end up in adoption or being adopted in by a family member. So in essence - you'd have to look at birth rate/adoption rate and the like to make that statement valid.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/25s3099.html

Please note that this compares abortion rates per capita, i.e. of every 1000 women there are X abortions per year. Some data compares abortions to births (sometimes this is called "ratio" instead of "rate"), which of course makes the developing world look "better" because they may have more abortions but they also have FAR more babies. Please note that I am not arguing that enacting laws against abortion, in and of themselves, directly CAUSE more abortions to happen; just that there is a correlation. The causation lies with the fact that the same value structure (often religious conservatism) that leads to stricter abortion laws, also leads to women not being empowered to take control of their fertility. Therefore, it does not lead to fewer abortions, but more.

Abortion rate:

Netherlands 6.5 (no significant 1st tri. abortion restrictions, no sexual stigma, good gender equality)
Belgium 6.8 (ditto)
Germany 7.6 (ditto)
Canada 15.5 (no abortion restrictions, some sexual stigma/double standard)
England 15.6 (kinda like Canada)
U.S. 22.9 (somewhat restricted, medium sexual stigma/double standard, more problems with gender equality)
Brazil 40.8 (It's illegal, strong sexual stigma/double standard, poor gender equality)
Peru 56.1 (see Brazil)

I'll look up adoptions next. But if unplanned pregnancy rates (period) are lower in countries where abortion is more accessible, adoption doesn't really factor in, no?

http://www.prcdc.org/summaries/teenpreg04/teenpreg04.html for info about the causes of unplanned teen pregnancy.

http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/factsheet/fsest.htm And here are some interesting ideas too...

 

[trustwomen]

Ignorance this like this is why I left the military. I came to the conclusion such sacrifice in the face of a decaying decadent population was pointless. I seriously cant wait for the day when the freedoms of the West are trampled into the dirt and yoke of tyrannical lords leave us gasping for the breath and the will to even live, let alone have free discussions like this one. People might only then look back on an all too brief chapter in the history of the human experience and remember how it came into being.

By "men", I obviously was including the tyrannical lords in question. And I don't think this will actually be possible, or anything - any more than it will be possible to make women "take up their rightful reproductive burden" again. That particular genie is out of the lamp for good. (I hope.)

I love our freedoms and our values. I am absolutely willing to defend them. What's with the attack? I suspect it's not really "about" me...

 

[trustwomen]

'

 

[trustwomen]

Just wondering why you guys are entertaining this premed and her bull$hit arguments? Her logic is so fundamentally flawed that it isn't worth responding to. You wont win arguing with a lunatic like this.

Kudos to LADoc for a very well argued and logical theorem. Very entertained with trustwomen's naive responses; it was laughable.

I'd love to hear all about the fundamental flaws in my logic; fire away! (I'm surprised you haven't posted yet, considering how blatant they obviously are and how much you disagree with me...) I guess I'm not only a lunatic but a masochist - I'm always reevaluating my stances, and new information is useful. So let's hear it!

And laughter is good for your health, so I guess I can say I'm a healer, too... Thanks!

 

[LADoc00]

I love our freedoms and our values. I am absolutely willing to defend them....

Hahahaha A Canadian premed right? Im guessing you couldnt defend a bowl of kibbles from the yapping jaws of a hungry chihuahau if your life dependant on.

The face of fear:

 

[trustwomen]

Hahahaha A Canadian premed right? Im guessing you couldnt defend a bowl of kibbles from the yapping jaws of a hungry chihuahau if your life dependant on.

Hey. You don't know me and you don't know what I've been through. I don't think you get to comment on my capacity to defend myself and others.

(And why do you still insist on saying "premed"?).

Cute dog though.

 

[Poety]

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/25s3099.html

Please note that this compares abortion rates per capita, i.e. of every 1000 women there are X abortions per year. Some data compares abortions to births (sometimes this is called "ratio" instead of "rate"), which of course makes the developing world look "better" because they may have more abortions but they also have FAR more babies. Please note that I am not arguing that enacting laws against abortion, in and of themselves, directly CAUSE more abortions to happen; just that there is a correlation. The causation lies with the fact that the same value structure (often religious conservatism) that leads to stricter abortion laws, also leads to women not being empowered to take control of their fertility. Therefore, it does not lead to fewer abortions, but more.

Abortion rate:

Netherlands 6.5 (no significant 1st tri. abortion restrictions, no sexual stigma, good gender equality)
Belgium 6.8 (ditto)
Germany 7.6 (ditto)
Canada 15.5 (no abortion restrictions, some sexual stigma/double standard)
England 15.6 (kinda like Canada)
U.S. 22.9 (somewhat restricted, medium sexual stigma/double standard, more problems with gender equality)
Brazil 40.8 (It's illegal, strong sexual stigma/double standard, poor gender equality)
Peru 56.1 (see Brazil)

I'll look up adoptions next. But if unplanned pregnancy rates (period) are lower in countries where abortion is more accessible, adoption doesn't really factor in, no?

http://www.prcdc.org/summaries/teenpreg04/teenpreg04.html for info about the causes of unplanned teen pregnancy.

http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/factsheet/fsest.htm And here are some interesting ideas too...

I admit, I didn't click the links yet, but I will I promise! Your argument about adoption rates being lower in other countries, that would be the determining factor I suppose. In the US its unfortunate that our adoption rate isn't higher - is this because of abortion? I don't know. I can tell you my cousin is an obgyn (why, God bless him, I'll never know) and he ended up adopting a baby that was going to be aborted. His name is Sam, he's now 3 years old, and has a 1 year old biological sister. These are the reasons I'm adamant about other options being PUSHED toward pregnant women. My cousin and his wife couldn't get pregnant for years, and I mean YEARS. They tried every avenue of adoption but ultimately, were STILL ON THE WAITING LIST when he approached his patient about adopting her unwanted child.

I believe your views will change once you have a child for one reason - and no one can tell you this, or convince you of this until he/she is here - its hte way they look at you, how they laugh, how they smile, and how they are beyond themselves just to be alive and discovering the world. Theres no one in the world that can tell me she "wasn't aware" when I carried her either. She was imprinted by every move I made, every breath I took and every emotion I felt. Think I'm full of it? You'll see one day

I appreciate that we can disagree respectfully - thats a rarity in the forums. However, I would love for you to contact me when you're pregnant with your first, I'm going to smile quietly when I know you know what I mean

When life is created, from the moment of conception on.... wanted or not.... it IS a life, it has a heart beat, it has cells - to dehumanize our bodies by saying they only count after a certain gestational age takes away the true miracle and beauty of what life really is, magical - and a gift. Every day... its a gift.

 

[tiredmom]

Two quick points:
- You also run the risk of Asherman's Syndrome with any number of D&Cs. Also, I've seen plenty of women who were either too late to get their cerclage or it didn't hold and they still lost their baby. If my memory serves me correctly, the research doesn't show a statistical improvement in viability with cerclage. It's not like it's the easy answer to incompetent cervix, it's just the only thing we've got right now.
- Most women who are are in a situation where they are not "in control" of their fertility, are also not in a situation where they can get a few hundred dollars together for an outpatient surgery without spouse/s.o. knowing anyways. And if he isn't going to let her have a choice with when to have sex or get pregnant, he's likely not going to let her have a choice about aborting.

 

[dnw826]

Flea girl -
I did not intend to offend anyone by asking if providers offered information about abortion. I was trying to find out if it actually occurs, because I've not seen any of the residents/attendings in our program ask about it (even in the family planning clinic), nor the private physicians I worked with prior to medical school. So, there wasn't a bubble to pop. Most providers don't keep up with changes in adoption practice. There was a booth at the ACOG chapter scientific meeting I attended recently by an agency that provides educational programs for physicians and office staff on adoption practices and how to bring it up in a positive manner. The delays you mentioned in getting a foster parent might be related to whatever route the SW took to getting placement, as if it's a drug + baby, must go through CPS, at least in TX.

3dtp - I'm sorry to hear y'all experienced some of the stupidity that can be found in the adoption beaurocracy. It is so provider dependent. We had a few interracial placements - and every white couple that expressed interest in accepting a non-white infant was fully encouraged to explore it. For some reason unknown to me, its really difficult to recruit African american and hispanic adoptive parents. So, it makes sense to allow cross-racial adoptions - to me anyways, but I also don't see a problem with homosexual couples adopting either. We eventually would like to adopt, possibly a sibling group. I'm not sure we would pass the home study required, as our son with autism is pretty difficult at times, especially with strangers. A side note, if you are still interested, I would try a different agency - PM me if you want a name.

When I went with my friend for hers, they were extremely informative. Left out gory books with the process lined out with pictures, discussed it, talked with her (a psychiatrist) about her reasoning and offered her about a million other options and opt outs. They certainly don't force you to have one.

 

[dnw826]

Definitely the big ones are RARE as hell, Ive seen 2 (both dunno I guessed at around 22 weeks I think). Now Ive seen lots of the big 'uns but those were fetal autopsies in the University setting, not TABs.

As I said I dont sit in judgment of any man or woman, merely posed a question whether all sits well in your mind, which it seems it does. Fine. No need for a flame suit!

I take some (yet minimal) issue with your concept of the "greater good", similar to the "lesser of 2 evils" B.S., its a simple way of rationalizing something that morally might be objectionable. Dunno, I love my work, it seems (??) as if OBs do abortions but hate it..how can you make a career out of doing stuff you hate?

I have another hypothesis...crazy...could it be that some abortion providers might indeed love what they do. I want to throw out that provocative thought for everyone. There is such a wide range of human psychological paradigms why not an abortion provider paradigm?? It doesnt neccessarily have to be someone who pulled the legs off insects as a kid, but could, I dont know.

Maybe, stay with me this is crazy theoretical stuff...performing an abortion produces a similar rush in some providers like the thrill of burning ants with magnifying glasses. I remember doing it when I was kid (not abortions but killing ants), knowing it wasnt nice to kill things but kinda of tripping in the fact I got to select which ants got zapped. Something about that experience sounds like it could transfer to abortions.

Or, hmmm, could it be that some women resent the societal demands of having to bear kids and be responsible and doing abortions is way to rebel against this. Maybe you dont feel control over your life, but in some small way each abortion is where you can exercise ultimate power.

The thing I trip on is that abortion is such a Nietzsche-like struggle for the meaning of it all, religion vs. anti-religion.

Abortion IS one of the truest forms of Nietzsche's Der Wille zur Macht or "Will to Power", which states life drives not only for self-fulfillment but to exercise power. While anti-abortion camps are the classic example of Schopenhauer's "Will to Live" principle, in which life is motivated by its own development without exercising control or will.


What you all think??

I disagree completely. Now I do not know any abortion providers, but I do know that I am interested in the field and that I could honestly do the work. Not that it wouldn't be emotionally draining, but I wouldn't do only abortions ( I do know docs who do it as part of their practice). I just know that it is something that needs to be done and something that I can do. What did Dr.Larch say, to "be of use"? And no, I'm not some odd psychopath. I never ever have hurt an animal (I cried the one time I ran over a possum). I am a huge animal rights person. I cry over road kill. But I am also a realist. I can weigh the options and let the woman choose what is best for her, because quite frankly, it's not my decision to make for her.

I thought that this would be a frank discussion of being an abortion provider, and the practice. Instead this seems to have ventured into the realm of pro-life/pro-choice. WTF??? Can we stick to the topic and keep out the unwanted attacks on our beliefs?

 

[dnw826]

Cows and dogs?! Do cows and dogs have self-awareness, hell no. Yes they are aware and react to their environment, but self-awareness no. You are venturing into foriegn lands young OB, steer away, steer away.

Cows and dogs dont self-actualize, dont seek fulfillment. Sheesh, anthrax spores have independent viability! That is a non-issue.

CCU patients dont have independent viability and often dont have awareness....you created the cliche paper tiger argument there. I can punch holds in it that crap half drunk...

The power vs. life argument is your best bet for logically debating and defending abortion. You cant use the claim fetuses are not life past the age of extrauterine viability, it holds no water. AND you cant begin redefining what life is to suit your philosophical purpose.

For example, you cant claim abortion is acceptable yet be morally outraged at your neighbor killing their cat. The cat is their "fetus", a charge and responsibility over which they exercise the choice to feed and shelter. The cat is dependant on them and therefore needs to live and die by their will alone. You would have honor their choice, however much you liked seeing that cat play in your yard or hop along your fence. You cant have it both ways, trustwoman..you cant play in the guardian of choice yet create the rules for who enters....

Cats lived for thousands of years without human intervention, they are certainly not only alive because they leech off of us.

 

[dnw826]

I have never thought about much about whether abortion should be legal or not, maybe because Im a guy, dunno. BUT last night I thought about it and decided that the "burden of choice" was the heaviest obligation carried by individual members of society. I would reference "Sophie's choice" flick for the life long implications of having to make such a choice. In such situation I believe having the option of abortion is actually unfair for women...that is my thought for the day.

Call it the "Tyranny of Will" but the absence of choice would lead to more happy, fulfilled lives. Would be interesting to do an experiment on this. You would need 2 equivlaent SES groups and follow them over the long term. Of course make adoption available as an alternative.

Another interesting fall out of legalized abortion is the Roe Effect, or the idea that the political mainstream is shifting toward evangelical type radicalism because they are the becoming the dominant reproductive paradigm. The classic example: Seattle has more dogs than children within city limits, but Salt Lake has 3 times as many children as dogs. Over time countries with legalized abortion must be moving the political center strongly to the right wing, of course this takes generation of breeding/abortion, no idea how many cycles this would take but I think already this is the case in the US. Looking at Europe, the rise of ultranationalist parties (although immigration plays into it, so does abortion because immigrant populations often have higher fecundity than native pops) is also an interesting sign.

You have to admit, powerbase will follow those that reproduce. I had never heard much of midwest evangelical christianity in the news as a kid, now it seems to be common place, Mormon temples everywhere, Latino populations exploding. I see the Democrat base seriously dwindling here. Eventually we will be a country of 2 parties: Republican and Really Really Republican.

That's when I move to....anywhere else. Nice discussion here. Kinda scares me.

 

[dnw826]

Just wondering why you guys are entertaining this premed and her bull$hit arguments? Her logic is so fundamentally flawed that it isn't worth responding to. You wont win arguing with a lunatic like this.

Interesting that it is illegal to perform euthanasia because an individual does NOT have the right to choose the termination of his own life. Yet we allow irresponsible adults terminate unwanted pregnancies. What's further inflammatory is that it's not their own life their ending, its the life of another.

Kudos to LADoc for a very well argued and logical theorem. Very entertained with trustwomen's naive responses; it was laughable.

Irresponsible??? Have you ever met anyone who has had/considered an abortion??????

 

[dnw826]

I admit, I didn't click the links yet, but I will I promise! Your argument about adoption rates being lower in other countries, that would be the determining factor I suppose. In the US its unfortunate that our adoption rate isn't higher - is this because of abortion? I don't know. I can tell you my cousin is an obgyn (why, God bless him, I'll never know) and he ended up adopting a baby that was going to be aborted. His name is Sam, he's now 3 years old, and has a 1 year old biological sister. These are the reasons I'm adamant about other options being PUSHED toward pregnant women. My cousin and his wife couldn't get pregnant for years, and I mean YEARS. They tried every avenue of adoption but ultimately, were STILL ON THE WAITING LIST when he approached his patient about adopting her unwanted child.

I believe your views will change once you have a child for one reason - and no one can tell you this, or convince you of this until he/she is here - its hte way they look at you, how they laugh, how they smile, and how they are beyond themselves just to be alive and discovering the world. Theres no one in the world that can tell me she "wasn't aware" when I carried her either. She was imprinted by every move I made, every breath I took and every emotion I felt. Think I'm full of it? You'll see one day

I appreciate that we can disagree respectfully - thats a rarity in the forums. However, I would love for you to contact me when you're pregnant with your first, I'm going to smile quietly when I know you know what I mean

When life is created, from the moment of conception on.... wanted or not.... it IS a life, it has a heart beat, it has cells - to dehumanize our bodies by saying they only count after a certain gestational age takes away the true miracle and beauty of what life really is, magical - and a gift. Every day... its a gift.

THree kids here. NAK actually. I have become even more pro-choice since becoming a mother. I have way too much experience with people who should NOT have become parents. I was almost an abortion. My mother is a drug addict facing decades in jail (she is awaiting trial) who has never wanted or loved me. But still "stuck it out" to raise me and make my life a living hades. Oh, and my three brothers. Love them to death, glad that I am here to have my beautiful kids and to have all of these experiences. But I have all the respect in the world for someone unlike my mom who would be strong enough to say, "you know what? I would be a horrible parent. I don't want to have to raise a drug addict child with birth defects and create a miserable existence for them.". Abortion or adoption. But adoption around here is ridiculous. I had a friend who was facing the choice, and there was no assistance for adoption around here. Plus she would have to face raising her other three kids (all under 3) very pregnant, take off time for work and face not feeding her kids, and take off time from school and face failing. Either way, she is keeping the kid. But her story is something if you ever want to hear an enlightened view on choice.

 

[Poety]

THree kids here. NAK actually. I have become even more pro-choice since becoming a mother. I have way too much experience with people who should NOT have become parents. I was almost an abortion. My mother is a drug addict facing decades in jail (she is awaiting trial) who has never wanted or loved me. But still "stuck it out" to raise me and make my life a living hades. Oh, and my three brothers. Love them to death, glad that I am here to have my beautiful kids and to have all of these experiences. But I have all the respect in the world for someone unlike my mom who would be strong enough to say, "you know what? I would be a horrible parent. I don't want to have to raise a drug addict child with birth defects and create a miserable existence for them.". Abortion or adoption. But adoption around here is ridiculous. I had a friend who was facing the choice, and there was no assistance for adoption around here. Plus she would have to face raising her other three kids (all under 3) very pregnant, take off time for work and face not feeding her kids, and take off time from school and face failing. Either way, she is keeping the kid. But her story is something if you ever want to hear an enlightened view on choice.

And in the end... you ARE here, to have children yourself... and yet you still doubt. Perhaps psychiatry will benefit you, not necessarily abortion rights.

 

[Soleil9]

I thought that this would be a frank discussion of being an abortion provider, and the practice. Instead this seems to have ventured into the realm of pro-life/pro-choice. WTF??? Can we stick to the topic and keep out the unwanted attacks on our beliefs?

OP here. I have been off the internet for a week or two to concentrate on my finals... Check back here and whoa!! I didn't expect 6 pages. Anyway, A big THANK YOU to TrustWomen--- it sounds like you are doing wonderful work and I can't believe people were attacking you because you are preMS1. Geez. You know more about the topic than probably the average 4th year ob/gyn resident. Thank you for all that you have shared with us. It has been very educational. It was input like yours that I was requesting in my post. Also, Thank you PruritisAni, I think many of our views are similar.

I have decided to become a leader for MS4C at my school. I'll be attending the leadership training conference this fall, and if it does seem at all militaristic, I'll let you all know, because I wouldn't want to have any part of it. The whole point is that I want to have access to a well rounded education so that I can help my patients in any way that I can.

I am still curious about being an abortion provider in the suburbs. I haven't had much contact with the demographic that TrustWomen worked with, so I'm just being honest that I may not find myself working in that environment after graduation. What I'm asking is, who does the abortions for the Trisomy 13s, for example? I just finished genetics and they were always saying on the side that you offer termination as an option. I, at the very least, would like to have the education to help these women, let alone the sticky issue of "contraceptive abortion".....

 

[Poety]

OP here. I have been off the internet for a week or two to concentrate on my finals... Check back here and whoa!! I didn't expect 6 pages. Anyway, A big THANK YOU to TrustWomen--- it sounds like you are doing wonderful work and I can't believe people were attacking you because you are preMS1. Geez. You know more about the topic than probably the average 4th year ob/gyn resident. Thank you for all that you have shared with us. It has been very educational. It was input like yours that I was requesting in my post. Also, Thank you PruritisAni, I think many of our views are similar.

I have decided to become a leader for MS4C at my school. I'll be attending the leadership training conference this fall, and if it does seem at all militaristic, I'll let you all know, because I wouldn't want to have any part of it. The whole point is that I want to have access to a well rounded education so that I can help my patients in any way that I can.

I am still curious about being an abortion provider in the suburbs. I haven't had much contact with the demographic that TrustWomen worked with, so I'm just being honest that I may not find myself working in that environment after graduation. What I'm asking is, who does the abortions for the Trisomy 13s, for example? I just finished genetics and they were always saying on the side that you offer termination as an option. I, at the very least, would like to have the education to help these women, let alone the sticky issue of "contraceptive abortion".....

Hi OP, at my institute, the MFM people handled any genetic issues including termination if thats what the patient chose to pursue.

 

[dnw826]

And in the end... you ARE here, to have children yourself... and yet you still doubt. Perhaps psychiatry will benefit you, not necessarily abortion rights.

Still doubt what? I do not doubt that abortion should be legal and provided. Everyone needs psychiatry.

 

[Poety]

Still doubt what? I do not doubt that abortion should be legal and provided. Everyone needs psychiatry.

touche

 

[LADoc00]

THree kids here. NAK actually. I have become even more pro-choice since becoming a mother. I have way too much experience with people who should NOT have become parents. I was almost an abortion..

Its never too late, you know.

You set yourself up for that one sweetie!

Im curious what magical ability you acquired to be able to so accurately judge one's inherent skill at parentage and child rearing. Was this is a divine gift or a drug induced realization? Can this skill be taught, learned..transmitted to a computer format? Or is this the typical arrogance of a mispent youth?

Judge not or you shall be judged. Good motto.

 

[dnw826]

Its never too late, you know.

You set yourself up for that one sweetie!

Im curious what magical ability you acquired to be able to so accurately judge one's inherent skill at parentage and child rearing. Was this is a divine gift or a drug induced realization? Can this skill be taught, learned..transmitted to a computer format? Or is this the typical arrogance of a mispent youth?

Judge not or you shall be judged. Good motto.

I don't understand what you mean.

All I was saying is that sometimes some people know when they can't be a good parent, and that if they are already pregnant, then why shouldn't they be allowed to have an abortion? I think that it is more courageous to get the abortion than to be a horrible parent. Did you even read my whole post? Because I don't understand what you keep rambling about. Seriously, I am confused. Arrogance of misspent youth? What in g-d's name are you talking about? How about: Quid rides? Mutato nomine de te fabula narratur (horace)?

 

[pruritis_ani]

Its never too late, you know.

You set yourself up for that one sweetie!

Im curious what magical ability you acquired to be able to so accurately judge one's inherent skill at parentage and child rearing. Was this is a divine gift or a drug induced realization? Can this skill be taught, learned..transmitted to a computer format? Or is this the typical arrogance of a mispent youth?

Judge not or you shall be judged. Good motto.

Now, I find this post amusing....nobody is trying to predict who will or will not be a good parent...we are simply advocating the potential parent be able to make that determination by themselves....

But, I think that by making that choice for people (ie taking away the choice of abortion), you are clearly trying to impose you will on others.

 

[Flea girl]

Judge not or you shall be judged. Good motto.

Hey you stole my motto that I am constantly spouting on these threads !

 

[Flea girl]

Two quick points:
- You also run the risk of Asherman's Syndrome with any number of D&Cs. .

More likely with the sharp currettage(SP?) then with suction, from what I was told. But will look up and see if any published data is out there, if not I think I found another research project for next year

 

[Skills]

Whats all this discussion of fetuses being alive or not?

How can someone say that a being that hears, feels, swallows etc etc, that if allowed to be born (assuming viability) would be legally "living", is not alive -
So if I was pregnant and 30 weeks seeking a late abortion but had PPROM and child was born 2 days later and is suddenly "alive", then retrospectively does that mean that the child inside me at 30 weeks is not alive?
Isn't that what CTGs and biophysical profiles etc etc are for? Or is it to assess the viability of dead fetuses? Maybe Im going crazy.

 

[Poety]

Abortions have to be legal, I think most people here agree that in order for women's safety they MUST be legal, however, it doesn't make them RIGHT.

I'll be sure to tell my daughter she wasn't a real being until she was born shyeah - now teaching her THOSE ideals would make me a wonderful parent wouldn't they?

 

[Skills]

Just thought this might illustrate points about pregnancy, motherhood, children and being alive in general - humanity

www.anencephaly.net/ mary.html

 

[Poety]

Just thought this might illustrate points about pregnancy, motherhood, children and being alive in general - humanity

www.anencephaly.net/ mary.html

Personally I wouldn't be able to carry a baby with anencephaly to term. I also don't think the woman with a known genetic defect (like one patient I had) should keep getting pregnant (I konw anencephaly is not genetic) over and over and over again just to spontaneously lose the baby in her 30th week - THAT shouldn't be allowed either, each of her baby's would live for like 22 hours and then pass away.

So, as you can see, I'm a bit more in the gray area with my beliefs.