News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

LOL at the people (mainly men, I presume) wanting to force women through unwanted bodily trauma. These people claim they are in it for the "benefit of the child" and usually think that it somehow benefits the mother in the long term too. This faux Trisha Goddard/Jeremy Kyle impersonation of "Won't SOMEBODY think of likkle baby" needs to stop.

When the pregnancy is completed most unwanted babies will go through their lives in the hell-holes otherwise known as Polish orphanages where this child receives minimal contact,and minimal socialisation, and no love - because its simply not affordable to the state.

If the child doesn't end up in the orphanage it will end up with a mother who neither wants it or loves it (and in fact will probably look on it with some kind of resentment), and a mother complete with brand new mental health issues due to this forced trauma. Statistics also show the child will probably end up living a life of poverty with very little hope, and will also acquire their own psychological issues.

My question to the anti abortion advocates for Poland is (and I truly want this answered) If you give so much of a hoot about the unwanted children's lives in Poland how regularly do you give to charities that provide care for children in Polish orphanages? How often do you physically help struggling mothers with mental health issues?

If, as I suspect, the answer is "never" you can stop being so evangelical about the situation. You have brought suffering to two lives in the world, where there would have been none. You prove by actions how much you care, not by words and your actions prove you are causing more pain in the world than you would like to believe. It also proves that this issue is purely about control!

Shame on the Sejm, really. Have they upped the budget for women dealing with trauma? Have they upped the budget for orphanages? No? Then it's about control and nothing more. Stupid control based on a fairy tale, and forced down our throats by a religion we neither believe or care for.

If I were to ever become preganat whilst I'm living here, I'd be on the 1st flight back to the UK to expel the unwanted parasite feeding off my body. If that's shocking then tough - not unless you'd be willing to maintain my child for life, pay for the birth, and provide me with the years of psychological treatment I'd no doubt need after being forced to go through such a thing - and probably my child's too. "Won't somebody think of the likkle baby"? - indeed!

And for those nutters that still bandy about murder as if it has some kind of meaning in this situation, the word "murder" has a clear definition and is not just subject to what you reckon it means. Just to clear up a common error:

Abortion is not murder.
Manslaughter is not murder.
Death by dangerous driving is not murder.
A sausage roll is not murder.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


Ahh, I see for you it's about punishing women. You've sidestepped paying for these children very well. So now it's "You shouldn't have done it, now suffer the consequences"! You are truly a delight, aren't you?

You do realise that it takes two to start an unwanted pregnancy? What do you suppose the "punishment" be for men who also take part in "behaving like animals"? Shall we cut off their willies? If you're of the "punish the irresponsible" mindset I'm sure you'll approve of this new measure. Should I propose it to the Sejm?


I think the ability to survive independently is a pretty good starting point. Either way most abortions happen in the first eight weeks when the foetus is about as big as a raspberry and looks like a tadpole. I doubt it could survive independently or is capable of any kind of thought process.


If she did, I'd have never existed so it would have been no loss to me. According to some theories there are millions of parallel universes where I didn't exist, so you can at least be a little pleased that there's a world somewhere that I don't exist or may have even been aborted! Lucky you Grzegorz!


It's easy to talk like that because it's true.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

Sorry, I realised that and deleted the offending aggression but you saw it. Damn!

Anyway, the "think of the baby" or "hang 'em high" lot are ones for using emotive language. If they can bandy about such emotive terms as "baby" and "murder", why not add "parasite" into the mix? If anything it just livens up the debate ;)

Either way, I've never wanted children, much to the disappointment of my Mother-in-law. People have been telling me my whole life (since the age of 5 - I knew then) that I'd change my mind. I found that rather offensive. I haven't changed my mind yet.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


Tell that to the homeless people (real living people) I give up my Christmases for. What have you done for anyone lately? Oh that's right. I forgot, you want to emotionally and physically traumatise women (but not men) for making a mistake, or behaving in a way that you judge unfit. You're right. It's me who has no humanity. None, whatsoever.

Re: parasites

A foetus is as much a parasite as it is a baby. Both terms are technically incorrect but equally emotive. Is emotivity only allowed on one side of the divide? Should I stop talking to anybody who calls a foetus a "baby" or a "child"? Are you going to reprimand any of the anti-abortionists for use of such emotive terms?

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


I know. I hate these kinds of threads.

The reason I think it's my duty to post on these type of threads is that many people come to this site looking for information about Poland. Living here, I don't want these potential visitors to think that all Poles are superstitious hardline nutters, bound by whatever falls out of the church's mouth. We need some kind of balance here. We aren't all afraid of the big woo-woo.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


Don't give them ideas.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

There are an infinite number of outcomes to one's life so I don't like this option a) or b) nonsense.

If a girl wants a child, and feels that she has no choice BUT to abort, then it's a terrible shame, and society should have safeguards there to ensure that abortion is not made through a "no other choice" option. However.... neither should we be forcing women to go through pregnancy if she feels that she cant handle it, will suffer mentally, or simply desperately wants not to have a child (there are some women who don't want to have children, take all the precautions, and still end up pregnant).

Forcing a person to do anything is always unsavoury be that forced abortion OR forced pregnancy.


This is a line regularly trotted out by the anti-abortion lobby. However there is NO evidence to suggest that abortion is a primary contraceptive in any country where it is legalised. What woman in her right mind would have abortion after abortion just because she can? It's a nonsense, and if these women do exist I'm sure that they don't even reach the 1% mark.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

What has this got to do with men in suits in the Sejm forcing some women through bodily trauma, yet doing nothing to help with the aftermath?

Wouldn't it be nice if we didn't punish people for making mistakes? Wouldn't it be nice if compassion and freedom was legislated? Wouldn't it be nice if people with control issues didn't want to dictate to everyone their own black and white version of morality, and just, you know, got on with taking the bits of log out of their own eyes?

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


I'll answer your question when you answer mine. I fully expect no response. But seeing as I asked mine first, it's only fair isn't it?.

If you think a woman should be forced to go through bodily trauma because she "behaved like an animal", what traumatic equivalent should the man be forced to go through? Possibly paying 50zl a week for a child you didn't want doesn't come near the same scale as having the equivalent of hormone treatment for 9 months, then having to push out a watermelon through a hole the size of a saucer.

Surely a man should suffer an equal punishment for his reckless behaviour, seeing as you are quite happy to force this onto a woman? Or do the man's actions somehow not count?

You told me I was a "quasi-human", so tell me, what have you done to make the world a better place recently? Given up months of your free time working at the Red Cross washing wheelchairs? Perhaps you've given up a few Christmases for the homeless? Visited any orphanages recently and given these unwanted babies the emotional attention and love they so desperately crave, I mean, you wanted them born in the first place, perhaps you've helped these poor children? Given your time to any mental health charities? I mean, you're quite happy for women (but not men) to acquire a whole set of mental health issues.

At the moment it seems that you're all for dishing the dirt to the vulnerable in society but seem to give back very little. I wait with baited breath.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


My presumptions are sound. The majority of the "force em though it" lot here are men. You can tell by the icons next to the username. Furthermore it's the Sejm - a bunch of men - dictating and pontificating to women about their actions, consequences and responsibilities whilst ignoring their own. I don't see many of the sejm asking women of child bearing age their opinions on the matter.


Ok! So if it's about facing the consequences I take it you'd be quite happy not to give any medical treatment to a child who has fallen down a cliff, by your logic s/he should have been more careful in playing around cliffs the first place, right? If his/her bones happen to fuse badly, or suffers some kind of mental trauma due to the incident, then he/she should just get on with it. I've got you. Actions -> Consequences. Deal with it.

Furthermore, if I happen to eat something bad and develop tapeworm, I should just let them live in me cos I shouldn't have eaten that tasty bit of pork in the first place... right?


YOU UTTER GENIUS! I've never thought of that before! WHAT A F***ING REVELATION! If *only* I'd thought of that sooner! A round of applause for that man!

Aside from the repugnancy of you actually telling me what to do with my body, and aside from the fact that this thread isn't about my personal circumstances, I've got a bit of news for you... I've asked for the 'snipsnip', In fact I asked two doctors. None of the doctors agreed to it. They said "I might change my mind" and also, it's standard practice not to give any unnecessary medical treatment to women of child bearing age. What's your next bright idea... genius?


.......... aaaaaaaaaaaaaand we're back to the emotive language again.

Baby (from the Oxford English dictionary.....

noun (plural babies)

1a very young child: his wife's just had a baby [as modifier]: a baby girl
a very younganimal: bats only have one baby a year [as modifier]: baby rabbits
the youngest member of a family or group: Clara was the baby of the family
a timid or childish person: 'Don't be such a baby!' she said witheringly

So I'm sorry, technically a foetus is not a child but who cares about one small technicality!!!!

I think I'll just go back to calling foeti parasites. It's just as technically flawed.... but really, who cares about one small technicality.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

I dare you to go and tell that to a rape victim. You know they Sejm haven't ruled out the possibility of banning abortion in cases or rape?

While were talking about actions, consequence and responsibility, would you be happy for your child to forego emergency treatment if he or she falls off a cliff? Yes? I'm sure you know he or she shouldn't have been playing there in the first place. S/he knew the consequences. It shouldn't be society's tax bill picking up the pieces.

If you get tapeworm, I hope you take your own advice, and just let them live out the natural process of their lives. Really, you should think of that before eating pork.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


So you'd be happy for them to forgo the emergency medical treatment then?


Ah ha, so now we're back to dictating one black and white version of morality onto another human. I bet you complain about "barbaric Muslims", without noticing that you are doing the exact same thing which you complain about. I think it's time for a reminder of the old logs and specks quote from the holy bearded one.


Isn't it? Tell me why it isn't. Is it because you said so? Cos your book says so? Are you yet again forcing (just like Muslims do ;) ) one version of morality over another.


I think you're mixing up "new life" with "potential life". I hope you don't masturbate.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


I didn't say that at all. I said that if people think it's "all about responsibility" try telling that to a rape victim. No one in their right mind would be pro-rape. Don't put words into my mouth.


Sick in what way? I've not been the one that's been saying that people need to suffer in order to "take responsibility" for their actions.


So using correct terminology, in a philosophical debate closely linked to the biological process is now classed as non-thinking? Great.


Pregnancy is personal to a woman. It is whatever she makes it. If she wants to give personhood to the potential independent life inside her then that's her prerogative. If she doesn't then that is also her prerogative. If she wants to eat organic mung beans for the duration of her pregnancy, then that is up to her too, as it is to neck a bottle of vodka week in and out.... it's not illegal, although I would doubt her capabilities as a mother.

Just because one is able to do something it doesn't mean that one HAS to do it. Ability and obligation are not mutual and do not go hand in hand, and whilst no body is forcing anybody to get pregnant there people are forcing pregnancy. See the difference?


You told me, in your complete ignorance, that if I didn't want to get pregnant I could get the snip. Which clearly I can't, genius. I and many other women take the necessary precautions already.


As I said, pregnancy is whatever a mother perceives it to be. If she wants to see it as the most wonderful thing ever, then that's up to her. If she doesn't, well I'm sorry but that up to her too, not up to you.


Erm, as Harry pointed out:
1) You can't get the snip in Poland
2) Doctors will not perform unnecessary, expensive, and painful medical operations on women of child bearing age unless there is a real necessity. It's in their code of ethics. I'm not the only person who's been turned away in the "liberal" UK. I suggest if you don't like it, you should take it up with the doctors and stop trying to find flaws in my personality in an attempt to make things personal. Is there no depths to the lows which you will not go? Also, before suggesting people in Poland "get the snip", a vague idea of the actual law might be a good idea.


Quite.

So far we've had a whole host of ill thought out and straw man arguments as well as personal attacks from the usual suspects:

1) We've had personal insults, and dehumanisation - "quasi-human", "hysterical women", and "immature" being a few.

2) The ascertation that in order for society to stay moral people need to "face the consequences" of their actions, and then U-turning when tapeworm and childhood accidents come up. It seems this "moral rule" is therefore only applicable for pregnancy, and more to the point, only for women, cos men don't get pregnant. It's do as I say, not as I do hypocrisy.

3) We've had emotive and incorrect language; "baby" and "murder" from one side, but when other incorrect and emotive terms are used such as "parasite" suddenly the tactic is no longer acceptable! Moreover, using correct terminology is now called as "non thinking". So whic is it to be? Incorrect emotive language? OR correct non-thinking language? Goalposts are constantly being shifted, but only as long as it suits the anti-abortionists.

4) We've had some people trying to say that it's all about the welfare of the child, but yet these same people actually deliver no help, physical or monetary, to unwanted children in Polish orphanages, or any struggling mothers, and actually do nothing to make the situation that they wish to implement on these vulnerable people any better for them. More do as I say, not as I do.

5) We've had people projecting their personal views of a morality, on to others, and then demanding that only their version of morality is acceptable and should be legislated. So.. totalitarianism then.

6) We've had people wanting to force dogmatic views taken from their own religion on to others. I think that called religious fanaticism.

The ONLY and I mean ONLY reasonable response we've witnessed so far is actually this one:


Which is fine and dandy. Should really be having a discussion about where life begins. Or more importantly where you consider individual human life to begin and therefore at which point do you consider life to become huiman life to become "sacred".

There can be five possibilities for this:

1) Metabolism. - Cellular activity. Such as respiration and metabolism. This includes skin cells, and sperm cells.

2) Genetics - A complete genome, in other words a fertilised egg. It is an independent "being" from its parent, but is still not viable. We must also think of some paradox's when talking about this. A a single ferilized egg can give rise to twins, triplets or quadruplets, in fact theoretically with infinite space, a singe fertilised egg could give rise to a million monozygotic twins. So is this fertilized egg a life, a million lives, or still just the potential to become whatever it pleases?

Here's a scientific view on some common inaccuracies and untruths:

- The Embryo is Safe Within the Womb. Modern research shows that 30% or fewer fertilised eggs will go on to become foetuses. Many of these early miscarriages are because of abnormal numbers of chromosomes. The view that every fertilised egg is a potential human being is wrong in around 70% of cases.

- There is a Moment of Fertilisation when the passive egg receives the active sperm. Again recent research has shown that the previous commonly held view that the fastest sperm races towards the egg and, bingo, we're up and running is wrong on many levels. Fertilisation is a process taking up to four days. As such there is no magic moment, rather there is a process.

- There is consensus amongst scientists that life begins at conception. There isn't even consensus amongst scientists as to whether there's consensus. However, Scott Gilbert's paper lists embryologists who support each of the major view points belying the common and oft repeated assertion that there is consensus amongst embryologists, let alone scientists.

3) Embryology - This places the start of life at gastrulation, where the uncertainties of the genome become fixed. Twins will now be twins, viability becomes much more likely (but not certain), at this point however all embryos are female, and we still don't know for certain what it will develop into. The stem cell argument hangs in this stage.

4) Neurology - Or brain activity. Death is usually determined by brain activity, so most people consider this to be the start of life. It's the point at which we decide to switch off the life machine. It's much a much more reliable indicator of life than a heartbeat, which is actually just involuntary muscular activity, and is not really that much different to the metabolic process described in 1).

5) Ecology/ Technology - The point where a fetus can sustain itself outside the womb and becomes viable. As technology progresses, this moment is pushed to an earlier time.

6) Self awareness - Which actually comes after birth for us humans.

Scott Gilbert (a developmental biologist) says:


So if we're going to talk about where life begins, it's always going to be a matter of opinion, and opinion alone. It is not something anyone can say for definite. What we do know for definite is that a woman IS a living being, and an embryo "might possibly be one", so I'm of the opinion that we should be giving far more rights to "definite life" than "possible life".

Because where life begins is a matter of opinion, can we really, in a moral sense, legislate an unprovable philosophical opinion over the real feelings, emotions, and experiences of a definite provable living being? Do your unprovable opinions on this subject, trump an actual human? If a woman, or a living being, is that an unwanted pregnancy seen to completion would be the same as torture, and wishes to do something at say, stage 3 of the process where there are still many uncertainties about what this embryo will become, would you force her through that torture, on nothing more than your opinion?

I guess the answer to those questions would be yes. We've already witnessed dehumanisation, projection and name calling, so I don't see forcing someone through torture that for from the dehumanisation process. It's very easy to ignore the feelings and wishes of someone who we no longer seem as human. It's how we get soldiers to kill the enemy, and it's how the governments win us over with propaganda. I wish to be no part of it, which is why you will never see me dehumanise anyone, no matter how much I disagree with them.

Personally, when it comes to morality I prefer to go on definite truths and leave the rest up to personal choice of a provably living human. Anything else on my part would be arrogant and cruel. Why should I be forcing my opinions on to others? Where does legislating opinion stop? Do we make heresy illegal? Do throw people in jail for eating meat, I mean, animals are sentient aren't they?? If my morals dictate I don't do something, then I don't do it. What other people do with their lives is none of my business, and neither is it yours.

You don't agree with abortion, then don't get one.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


Oh please mate! You have got be on a wind up! I've repeatedly asked you to stop guessing about my personal circumstances and here you are CONTINUING to do so? Why is that? Every time you and your genius have made any kind of ill-informed guesswork you've been wrong - as you are now. I belong to no activist or political groups, feminist, pro-choice, or otherwise. Once again, this thread is not about ME. Stop trying to drag ME through the dirt and instead why don't you talk about your opinions and try to back them up with some kind of factual information? Seriously you are embarrassing yourself. You think you are being much smarter than you are.

All you've been doing on this thread is making stuff up, and then debating this made up stuff as if it were reality.

You continually misunderstand and misread (deliberately or not, I don't know) anything I, or anyone else whose life view you disagree with, says. You continually have shown your ignorance of anything to do with women's reproductive health , and are still somehow trying to blame me for your ignorance. Any experiences that differ to yours you just dismiss as a "moot point" without actually looking at the context. You constantly back-pedal, then change the goal posts. And when presented with cold hard facts you use dirty tactics by either selectively quoting, or you just reply flippantly with more of your "opinion" without backing it up with any form of evidence.

Have you even referenced anyone or academic or philosophical standing yet?

You say you're against propaganda, but then you selectively quote me, use emotive terms, more personal attacks, and more guesswork; "pro killing life" "looking for insults" "victim" "member of an organisation"

Now, finally, when all this hasn't worked you're invoking Godwin's law and banging on about the Nazis!!!!! Really?!? It must be a wind up!


Quite.

Just in case anyone missed my earlier post, I'm sure it was ignored rather than taken into account:

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


As said above. A fused embryo could technically become quadruplets, or an infinite amount of people if given an infinite amount of space. In fact, under 30% of fertilised eggs become viable. Now, if you wish to assign every single embryo, viable, or non viable a personhood, that is entirely up to you but I don't see how forcing "personhood" onto something that may or may not become one, two or ten million people is helping anything. Especially when this possible person will never have anything to do with you, and especially, when you can't possibly for see the effects of the abortion on the mother.

Yes, some women are coerced into abortion, and of course this is horrendous, and the psychological damage is awful. I also know women who have been coerced into proceeding with the pregnancy and the psychological damage has been equally as atrocious and the morality of it just as horrendous. I also know women who have had abortions and say it's the best decision they ever made.

So abortion is as subjective a thing as anything can be. Why is your subjectivity more "correct" than another's? Why can't it just be left down to the individual?

I agree with you that it's the women who need to be protected in all this, but for me they should be protected in whichever choice they want to make, regardless of whether I think it's right or wrong.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

AFAIK contraception's a nightmare in Poland. Getting the birth control pill is such a palava, and so expensive one has to rely on condoms, which gives women far less control of their own fertility. I haven't tried yet because I was thoroughly put off by the process. Getting the contraceptive pill in Poland (from what I've heard and understood - from a doctor friend of mine, but please correct me if I'm mistaken) consists of a visit to the GP followed by a referral to and an interrogation by the gynaecologist. Rinse and repeat every month. And pay through the nose for it.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


Erm, I'm pretty sure they do. No one is saying that precautions shouldn't come first, but accidents do happen. Condoms do split you know? A fair few people I've know have got abortions, the majority those pregnancies were due to contraception failure. I'm sure you know plenty of women that also got abortions, they just haven't told you.

RESULTS: Forty-six percent of women had not used a contraceptive method in the month they conceived, mainly because of perceived low risk of pregnancy and concerns about contraception (cited by 33% and 32% of nonusers, respectively).

So the facts are that 54% of women who go for abortions HAVE take precautions and out of the 33% of the people who did no use didn't do so because of misinformation and lack of education.

Again though, don't let the facts stop your "take responsibility" standpoint. 54% of women [guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3429402.html ]in this study took responsibility. The vast majority of the remainder were ignorant or badly informed.


When human life begins, is actually the main crux of the abortion debate. That's why it's so divisive.. because no one knows the answer yet everyone seems to have an opinion on it. If you knew an embryo was not a person you wouldn't give two monkeys about what happened. Or, for you is it honestly only about women not having sex?


Yeah. Why facts and published sources get in the way of a good argument?

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

Beautifully put. :)

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

@natasia
I completely respect your viewpoint and thank you for replying so politely, however, these are still your opinions and I still ascertain you have no right whatsoever to legislate your moral beliefs onto others, unless you can prove to me otherwise. Why do you think that your beliefs and moral standards should automatically trump the beliefs of others? I certainly don't believe that mine trump yours, and you are free to hold on to your beliefs and live by them, however and I would expect you give other women the same kind of respect, and allow them to make their own personal choices in life.

If you don't believe what you quoted is a justifiable reason for abortion, then don't get one for those reasons. What right would you say you had to tell individual women how to feel about their pregnancy, and what right would you say you had to legislate against their very personal experiences and decisions?


This is the exact kind of misinformation that leads to more abortions. Please be careful because it's an astoundingly bad piece of advice. The fact of the matter is no woman knows automatically when they are fertile, and the fertility period can be anything up to a week, not just one day. If women don't want to get pregnant the first port of call should always be birth control. ALWAYS. If any women are reading this, who think they can magically "tune in" to their body, they'd be wrong. Always use contraception if you do not want to get pregnant.


Exactly. If a women were to become pregnant, and fall into depression knowing that she had to have the child upon discovery of her pregnancy, and if coming to terms with being pregnant and having a child could cause mental health issues, for whatever reasons, then abortion should be allowed. How do we know if a woman is likely to suffer mental health issues being put through pregnancy and childbirth? We ask HER... that's how mental health practice operates, we ask the patient. Individuals thoughts and feelings need to be respected and woman knows her own mind, and her own capabilities better than any outside parties wishing to dictate morality to her.


Whilst I sympathise with your sentiment, I don't know how this would be workable. I also wonder what kind of man would force a woman he loves through a pregnancy and labour against her will? The consequences could be quite, quite grim.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


I would admit this is a bit off... I don't think there should be suggestions being made at all. Although I guess it could be difficult subject to broach as a doctor has to care for the physical and mental well-being of his patient. If the doctor suspects some kind of issue he has to tactically broach the subject, but at the same time I can see how such a suggestion could plant seeds. Tricky.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


Wikipedia states - with references - that the first measurable signs of EEG movement occur in the 12th week.


Interesting. I had no idea. Have you any idea why the check-list is there in the first place? I have an inkling it may because the doctor is under obligation not to assume anything, and as such acting "chirpy" when the woman has doubts could be seen as coercion on the part of the doctor. It's tricky and I really don't have an answer for it.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


To be fair, only 30% of all "traditionally ;-) " fertilised eggs actually become viable attached embryos and 70% are rejected by the "mother" as they have too many chromosomes. As far as I remember the viably of IVF embryos are lower than 30%, but I have to check that.

Just checked. Of IVF embryos only 7.5% become viable.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

Rape is violence and torture being forced on another unwilling human. However, we know for certain that both "participants" (for lack of a better word) are definitely measurably independent humans. For every woman with a negative experience of abortion there are two with a positive one. The thing is we shouldn't be working on anecdotes, we should be looking at studies.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10920466
Here's a scientific research paper from the university of California which states that most women do not experience psychological problems or regret their abortion 2 years postabortion, but some do. Those who do tend to be women with a prior history of depression.


I am a woman, and I've never been able to tell when I'm ovulating. Sometimes I can't even tell when I'm going to start my period. We are all different, I'm pleased that you know, it makes it easy for you.. but honestly I really don't.


I use the words "put through" because it would be the correct term if a woman is forced to continue with pregnancy she wishes not to have. As we are only discussing women who wish to have abortions but are denied them I can't see how this is loaded. I would use the exact same terms if a woman was forced into an abortion.... in that case she would be "put through" that also.

As the study above shows there are definite markers to those that will suffer psychologically after an abortion, and a history of depression is one of them. The thing is, as the study says, we don't know if the depression is caused by abortion, or if the underlying depressional tendencies (low self esteem, poor outlook on life etc) cause the regret. Either way the figures show that after two years, the vast majority are not depressed, and the majority do not regret the decision.


Quite, which is why I've provided an unbiased scientific study for you to read
archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=481643

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


Again, the majority of women (taken from US studies) became pregnant through contraception failure, the majority of the rest of them did not use protection so because they were misinformed and/or ill educated (ie.... "you can feel when you're ovulating"). So in the vast majority of cases it's not about "not being careful". It's about contraception failure and dis/mis-information.

^^^
The study and figures are linked up there somewhere. Go find em!

I feel like I'm constantly repeating myself :(


Exactly.


Just seen this. What do you make of the beating heart they grew in a lab without a body?
youtube.com/watch?v=j9hEFUpTVPA

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

I know, but there's this misconception that abortions are done because people weren't careful, but actually, this is only the case in a minority of incidents. Most of the women who abort have just been plain unlucky.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


You listen, yeah. But not everyone can, or has the ability to and this isn't about swimming every morning or measuring energy - this is about cold, hard facts. As you said we're all different, and saying that any woman can do as you do is not correct - it's also dangerous. If a woman reading this thinks that she can do as you, and gets preggers it's not going to be happy ending. If a woman's going to have sex the provably safest option is contraception. As the NHS states, your rhythm method has a realistic reliability of 75%, and that's after measuring body temperature etc.. for months on end, where as condoms and the pill are 98-99% effective, immediately. The advice you are giving may (not will) result in more abortions - something which nobody wants, so please be careful about what you say on a public forum. I'm not trying to take away from your personal experience, but seeing as we were talking about not getting pregnant and using contraception, I think the safest method should be advocated. I'm sorry if you felt that I wasn't being respectful to you, but your method is just more risky, and not everyone can realistically do it.


No, unlucky is you have PROTECTED sex and get pregnant. Not any sex, protected sex.

I'd say, that if you have a 1% chance of something happening to you, having taken precautions against it, that's pretty unlucky no matter what "it" might be.

If you go for an enjoyable drive, and plan to do so at the quietest point at night, don't speed, take all the precautions, indicate, check your mirros etc, and you still crash does this mean that you should "never have been driving in the first place" and "you were bound to crash" It just means you were unlucky, wrong place, wrong time, wrong box of condoms. Manufacturing fault.


Hungarian :)

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


No,thankfully. But if I do become pregnant I wouldn't mind having the option I'm very very careful, and have known all my life I don't want kids. Does not being pregnant make my opinion somehow less valid? And if that's the case, going back to the OP, can we just tell the men in the Sejm to shut the hell up?


I'd say yes, because how can we ever prove who had protected sex, and who had unprotected sex?

And even then there's the whole "where does the life begin anyway?", and "when do we assign personhood?" stuff, and the rather morally dubious "my morals trump yours" stuff too....

My stance is: Personal choice is personal.


I think that's something the whole of the world will agree on. See, abortion issues CAN unite us. ;)

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


Are you now telling me why I should or shouldn't have sex? Really? Sex isn't just about getting pregnant, it's not just about mechanics, it's about a bond between you and the person you love.

It's perfectly easy to separate pregnancy from sex... that why we invented contraception in the first place. I don't see where you get off on telling people not to have sex, and how they should see it! That's just not on. If fertilization is the most important part or consequence of sex to you, then so be it. It isn't mine, and I'm not going to be bullied into seeing it as such, and I'm not going to feel bad for having sex out of love, but not wanting kids at the same time. Many women feel the same.


I'm sorry. You've lost me.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


Ah I see... well that's my point... how do you go about proving who was sensible and unlucky, and who was uneducated, or misinformed, or just reckless? We can't.

If you're going to start handing out abortions on whether or not you think someone took precautions or not there are only two things we can do:

1)Believe all of them, in which case they get an abortion anyway,
or
2)Believe no one, in which case some of the sensible women that took precautions may just be forced through pregnancy.

I think I prefer option 1. But that's because I don't want kids, and I don't want to be forced though pregnancy. I can't think of anything worse. It actually gives me the creeps just thinking about being up the duff.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

Actions and consequences again... we've discussed this already. Don't make me talk about all the actions you could take and all the consequences I might dictate you live with.

The bit in bold is particularly charming. Where do you guys get off on dictating the private lives of others? Really! I'm kind of flabbergast! Mind your own business!