Multiple abortions

[Fingy]

People don't seem to remember that adoption is another viable option. There so many people who can't have children of their own who would be over the moon to adopt a baby.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

You have no idea what you're talking about Zing, as usual, instead you're making assumptions about a situation you've never been in, and for your sake I hope you never are.

oh look so there is some emotional response to the circumstances you are human afterall

---------- Post added at 09:07 ---------- Previous post was at 09:05 ----------

Originally Posted by Fingy

People don't seem to remember that adoption is another viable option. There so many people who can't have children of their own who would be over the moon to adopt a baby.

exactly and women rush into the desision when if they went full term held the child they may have found the bond and felt the love you can only understand if you have children

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Fingy

People don't seem to remember that adoption is another viable option. There so many people who can't have children of their own who would be over the moon to adopt a baby.

People don't seem to remember that adoption is one of the hardest things to do.
It is not easy carrying a baby to term, then breaking the mother/child bond.
People don't seem to remember that abortion isn't easy either, it's not a case of "Oh shucks, I'm preggers, oh well, out with the dyson"

---------- Post added at 09:08 ---------- Previous post was at 09:08 ----------

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

oh look so there is some emotional response to the circumstances you are human afterall

Now if only you were.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

People don't seem to remember that adoption is one of the hardest things to do.
1 It is not easy carrying a baby to term, then breaking the mother/child bond.
People don't seem to remember that abortion isn't easy either, it's not a case of "Oh shucks, I'm preggers, oh well, out with the dyson"

---------- Post added at 09:08 ---------- Previous post was at 09:08 ----------



2 Now if only you were.

1 if that happened there would no longer be a need to adopt

2 Im a bigot im judgemental and I voice my view how different are we?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

1 if that happened there would no longer be a need to adopt

If the mother/child bond was broken there'd be no need to adopt? You what?

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

2 Im a bigot im judgemental and I voice my view how different are we?

You're an ignorant poster on a forum who thankfully has never been in a position of needing an abortion.
We are very different, I'd never come out with the crap you do.

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

People don't seem to remember that adoption is one of the hardest things to do.
It is not easy carrying a baby to term, then breaking the mother/child bond.
People don't seem to remember that abortion isn't easy either, it's not a case of "Oh shucks, I'm preggers, oh well, out with the dyson"

---------- Post added at 09:08 ---------- Previous post was at 09:08 ----------



Now if only you were.

That bond is the hardest to break, we have a very close family friend who was more or less raped at the age of 15, this was over 20 years ago. Infortunately due to the situation she concealed the pregnancy until it was too late to abort. (Even as a teenager I was first to spot there was`something up with her)

Her family sat down and discussed it sensibly with her and let her make the decision, and she decided that the child should be put up for adoption. She went to hospital to give birth and it was agreed the child would be taken straight away from her.

All went well until a do-gooder nurse decided to take the baby to the mother, the bond could then not be broken and she kept the child. All turned out well, but she had a difficult time and had to be supported by her family.

I still think the bottom line is that children are optional, and no one should conceive a child if they are not able to support it.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

If the mother/child bond was broken there'd be no need to adopt? You what?



You're an ignorant poster on a forum who thankfully has never been in a position of needing an abortion.
We are very different, I'd never come out with the crap you do.

if the bond was there there would be no need to break it.

You call me ignorant but I know enough to know a lot of pregnacies are terminated by pure choice with no other reason other than "im not ready" what happened to you could be different I am ignorant to them facts I just grouped you with the odds if im wrong I apoligise if im not then I dont

Just because im pro life does not make my view crap btw it just makes it different to yours

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

if the bond was there there would be no need to break it.

You're talking out your backside Zing!
My aunt fell pregnant in the 60's and it turned out her partner was married.
There was no way she could have brought up her son on her own, so gave him up for adoption.
Are you saying that she had no mother/son bond?
Of course she did, but she knew he'd more chance of a better life if he was adopted.
Thankfully he did, unfortunately many babies given up for adoption grow up in childrens homes and many of them never recover psycholigically.
So please, think before you next post.

[Fingy]

I am adopted and frequently thank my lucky stars that my "birth mother" did not just decide to have an abortion.

I understand it wouldn't be easy to carry to full term and then give the child away but if the person is not ready to raise a child themselves it should at least be considered, in this day and age I don't think that it is.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Lets just add some context shall we?

I've made my personal position on abortion clear and posted the whole page for people to read in it's entirety - if I'd wanted to obscure the context I'd hardly have done that.

Most of us accept why abortion is sometimes sadly necessary even in a first world country with universal access to free contraception however it's still important to ask just why so many abortions are required when it's clear that only a proportion are due to genuine contraceptive failure.

I quoted the last paragraph simply because it related directly to the point of this thread and, contrary to what some people still claim, confirms the view of certain groups/people out there view abortion as just another acceptable form of contraception.

So far nobody has been able to explain why despite the availability of highly effective methods of contraception so many young women seem to get pregnant more than once and then have abortions risking their own long term health, wellbeing and even fertility by so doing.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Osem

I've made my personal position on abortion clear and posted the whole page for people to read in it's entirety - if I'd wanted to obscure the context I'd hardly have done that.

Most of us accept why abortion is sometimes sadly necessary even in a first world country with universal access to free contraception however it's still important to ask just why so many abortions are required when it's clear that only a proportion are due to genuine contraceptive failure.

I quoted the last paragraph simply because it related directly to the point of this thread and contrary to what some people still claim, confirms the view of some groups/people out there view abortion as just another acceptable form of contraception.

So far nobody has been able to explain why despite the availability of highly effective methods of contraception so many young women seem to get pregnant more than once and then have abortions.

I added my quote to put yours into context, otherwise people might get the idea that they were suggesting abortion as primary contraception (as you appear to be suggesting), when they're actually saying that it's being used as a backup when primary has failed.

"Highly effective" is not 100%, condoms break, or slip off. The pill isn't always effective, the morning after pills don't always work, even vasectomies can result in pregnancies.

As for their health, did you actually read the page you linked to?

The recent Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guideline, The Care of Women Requesting Induced Abortion (1), provides evidence based on systematic literature reviews that abortion cannot be considered a serious risk to women's physical or mental health.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

I added my quote to put yours into context, otherwise people might get the idea that they were suggesting abortion as primary contraception (as you appear to be suggesting), when they're actually saying that it's being used as a backup when primary has failed.

"Highly effective" is not 100%, condoms break, or slip off. The pill isn't always effective, the morning after pills don't always work, even vasectomies can result in pregnancies.

As for their health, did you actually read the page you linked to?

Yes - did you read what I wrote? I wrote that they're putting their health at risk - I did not suggest that risk was serious, moderate or negligible since I don't think anyone can yet categorically say which is true.

I've already alluded to the fact that contraception isn't foolproof more than once but but how many time is a teenage girl going to be the victim of a split condom, failed pill etc. as compared to the number who are simply just careless, don't fully appreciate the repercussions of what they're doing and then opt for an abortion possibly even not really understanding at the outset what's involved in that?

The issue is why are so many young women particualry having repeat abortions. It can't all be down to genuine contraceptive failure so in those cases where it isn't, surely the abortion process can be said to be being used as just another form of contraception.

Frankly I'd rather live in a society in which abortion is only used as a method of last resort NOT an alternative for those who've been careless or even negligent. That having been said, I don't expect it's ever going to be possible.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Osem

The issue is why are so many young women particualry having repeat abortions. It can't all be down to genuine contraceptive failure so in those cases where it isn't, surely the abortion process can be said to be being used as just another form of contraception.

Fewer under 30's are having repeat abortions than over 30's though.
Given how traumatic the abortion process can be (many women find just going to a gynocologist traumatic), do you really think women would prefer to go through that more than once rather than take a pill each day or use a condom?

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Fewer under 30's are having repeat abortions than over 30's though.
Given how traumatic the abortion process can be (many women find just going to a gynocologist traumatic), do you really think women would prefer to go through that more than once rather than take a pill each day or use a condom?

That's part of the point I'm making about the use/misuse of abortion amongst some women. Those who've thought it all through no I am certain they don't do it lightly. But I do think there's a fair proportion of women (mainly younger) who indulge in unprotected sex without thinking much about anything - including HIV/STD's, the risk of pregnancy or indeed to proper use of the contraceptive pill. For these women possibly the thought (misconception even, pardon the pun) that there's always an abortion if the worst happens ("but of course it won't happen to me will it") is a factor in their rather reckless behaviour.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

You're talking out your backside Zing!
My aunt fell pregnant in the 60's and it turned out her partner was married.
There was no way she could have brought up her son on her own, so gave him up for adoption.
Are you saying that she had no mother/son bond?
Of course she did, but she knew he'd more chance of a better life if he was adopted.
Thankfully he did, unfortunately many babies given up for adoption grow up in childrens homes and many of them never recover psycholigically.
So please, think before you next post.

At least your Aunts child had a chance as she didnt kill him

Also at least the children you mentioned had a chance of life instead of having that chance taken away.

Who has the right to choose life or death? you me? the law I dont think so

Why do you not line up these children and shoot them it amounts to the same thing