Abortion still under control in Poland

says anyone who has no answers.

You're supporting killing of newborns to be and I'm trying to defend their right to live and you call it groundless.

Geez girl, you're getting better and better.

It seems to me that while there are a handful of anti-abortion women, most who oppose women's right to choose are male. And all too often what lies beneath the surface is a desire to punish women for what are described as 'their' lascivious behaviour (forgetting that it also takes a man...).

Whether or not you support abortion, I hope you'd accept that unwanted pregnancy is an emotionally heart-wrenching time for any woman. Consider that there are many ways a man can please a woman, or a woman can please herself, with zero risk of pregnancy. There's only one sexual activity that can get a woman pregnant, and for most women it isn't the one that brings her the most pleasure. So if a woman gets pregnant without wanting to be, on some level she took a risk to please a man, she didn't do it in pursuit of her own selfish pleasure.

of course and they're both responsible for it but making abortion to some kinda sport activity and use it anytime it pleases someone is wrong. People seem to forget that it's not all about a woman (or man), it's about a living newborn to be inside of her.

That's why, I'm very much for everyone making decisions for himself but I'm against giving the right to anyone to make a decision, whether a child will live or die (unless, rape, incest etc.). If we allow that, it will surely lead to misusing it instead to do it in a real emergency situation.

These seem to be the physical aspects:

Biological markers

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhood#Biological_markers

I can't help but think that it's around the time of development of a central nervous system but I don't know.

Your emotive language is groundless, yes, because as I said, for the 3rd time, over 70% of fertilised embryos are naturally rejected by the womb, so not everything is going to a "newborn to be". How can you kill something that you cannot prove was alive in the first place?

First off, could you please at least separate your sentences with a space if you won't use paragraphs?
Secondly, okay, if we couple that with your earlier point about the father having a legal obligation to the welfare of the child then I see what you're saying and am inclined to agree with you.


It's not up to you.
Ask yourself these questions:
Are you gonna be there when that baby needs someone to change its diaper? When it needs someone to hold it? When it needs to cry for what seems like an eternity? If it gets sick, are you gonna be there in the hospital as much as you can?

If the answer is no, then maybe that's why it isn't your decision.

Liking.


Not liking.

I certainly haven't been trotting out any platitudes. It sounds to me like I'm about the only one on here with any real experience of abortion, and I can tell you, it is unnatural, and that is not an empty label.

It is impossible to come up with a correlative experience for a man, to that of a woman's experience of having her pregnancy medically terminated ... so not sure why I am wasting my breath.

Foreigner 4, this is not about orphanages. It is about responsibility, and the sanctity of life, and respect for women, actually. Where do you think abortion came from? For so many centuries, having a child out of wedlock was a social death sentence, and possibly a literal death sentence in some circumstances. So women in desperation turned to abortion. For damn sure there have also been a hell of a lot of guys who have got such women pregnant and who relied on the existence of abortion to save their skins ... regardless of the terrible process a woman would have to go through to abort.

But: and this is a very very important but: we do not now live in 1540. Or 16, 17 or 1840. We live in 2012. Woman in the societies we are talking about - particularly, in this instance, Poland - are not facing anything that could possibly be construed as even a similar hardship to women in the past. It just isn't on the same page. If a young woman in Poland today gets pregnant by mistake and is distressed about what will happen if she has the baby, then Poland should be looking to upping its support network for such girls, and getting rid of prejudice in society - not offering her an abortion.

It has all become too easy, Foreigner 4 - I think that is what some of us are trying to say. And the idea that a woman has some kind of right to abort, because it is her body, is, to my mind, flawed.

Two people have sex. Either they use contraception, or they wing it, or they use the patented Catholic method guaranteed to ensure pregnancy (withdrawal ; ). If the women gets pregnant, the unborn child belongs to both parents. So both should have a say. In particular, if he doesn't want an abortion, I personally think it would be too cruel to allow the woman to proceed with one. And I bet that in reality, when the baby was born, she would accept and love the baby. Women who haven't been pregnant and had a child really aren't qualified to speak definitively, because they haven't been in that situation. Let them live it, and then say.

We have to strike a balance between respecting the wishes of both parents, the obligation to protect the unborn child, and to support and encourage the mother in her role as just that - mother. For sure, one thing is true: once conception has occurred, nobody's life will be the same again.

Have you had an abortion? or what experience are you talking about?

(sorry if I missed it in a previous post)


The point really is, we (as in you and I) don't seem to really know when life begins, the same problem existed back then and in years to come.... who knows?


Oh no, the brutal death of a language.

Gabi, it seems to me you are talking mainly, in your discussion, about a minority of women who:

- Use belt and braces contraception, but for whom for some reason this doesn't work, and despite their best efforts, they get pregnant anyhow
and
- Who have a pathological fear of pregnancy and childbirth.

That is minority, when you combine the two factors. It sounds like you are talking about yourself. And maybe we are all talking about ourselves, but my point is that I have experienced termination of a pregnancy, and I have experienced pregnancy, childbirth and being a mother, and I know what it is to be a woman, what my job is, what I am made for, and where I fit - a role which I accept and embrace. And yes, I do feel that my opinion is an informed one, because of my experiences.

But the point you really, really miss is that nobody is telling anybody what do to here, but this ISN'T just about the woman who doesn't want to go through the natural process of having a child. This is about THE CHILD.

And this is about our responsibilities as fertile adults who choose to have sex, which however much we might try to divorce from its natural purpose, WILL result in pregnancy if it possibly can. Which will result in the existence of a child.

I think that women who feel as you do should consider sterilisation - surely that is the sensible option? But I am not saying what you should do - I am just expressing my opinion about people in that situation in general.

And as far as abortion is concerned, without doubt it involves terminating a tiny life, and I think some of our points here are just that the life should be respected, and if people have got pregnant by taking a risk, then they should not escape the consequences of their actions just because it's 'easy' to get out of, by hiding behind some nonsense about a woman being able to do what she wants with her body.


With respect, the evolution of one.

But not abortion.

I agree that we all talk about ourselves, at least to a certain extent.

Just because you have given birth and you are content with what you find your role, it does not speak for everyone, none of us do.

I have a question, would you be ready to accept abortion, as an option, if it got a "Yes" vote in a referendum from the democratic society?


I forgot to put a smiley face at the end of that post, soz :)

Sorry - did you miss the bit where I said I have experience termination of a pregnancy? I won't even say the word 'abortion' ... such is my abhorrence for it.

I didn't really want to spell it out, but if you want the story, can give you a summary. And I am the perfect example of a normal, happy, balanced young girl who underwent a termination as it was presented as the only sensible option by boyfriend, parents and the BPAS. The whole process was a catalogue of scandalous behaviour on the part of the BPAS in particular, and the result was devastating for myself, and for my unborn child, who was 'terminated'. As I say, can elaborate on the story, but had not really wanted to bring my own experience into it quite so explicitly.

But trust me, I know what I am talking about. My experience is in a different world to the safe and distant bleatings of Gabi. Unfortunately. I envy her innocence of the reality of this issue. Gabi: you are so, so lucky. Keep it that way.


No, I wouldn't accept it - I would consider it an ill-informed decision, and if I had the option, I would move to a different country. We can only live out our lives under the wing of one or other country and set of beliefs, but to be honest, I would feel happier in a country that saw termination of pregnancy as an extreme and undesirable option ... which, to be fair to the 1967 Abortion Act, is how it was intended to be in this country. And if I had an power in this country, I would insist upon only the proper application of the Act. I would come down like a tonne of bricks on organisations such as the BPAS. Interestingly, its Chairwoman is also a woman who has always known she wouldn't want children ... how great that she gets to spend her life making money out of taking this joy away from other women as well.

It is legal which doesn't mean that we all agree with it. Note that although abortion is legal in every state, it is not necessarily available in every state. As I said earlier, I don't mind abortion in certain, drastic cases but I do have a problem with it when people perform abortion just because they feel like it. I expect adults to be responsible for their actions.


As long as your heart is beating you're alive, right?


excuse me? If not for people like me, there will be countless, defenseless, little creatures killed, just because no one gives a damn about it. Of course I will take care of it and btw. I already did and I expect the same from everyone who's responsible for making babies. Adults should be making adult decisions and stick to it for Christ's sake. If one can't live with the consequences of having sex, he shouldn't have sex to begin with or at least use contraception (both, man and woman).

if I'm on a life support machine and the EEG of my brain is negative I'm not. My heart would still be beating, but I'd be dead.


I'm sorry, but once again, the thing growing inside a woman is personal to a woman. Some women give the foetus personhood from the moment of conception, and others don't. It's not up to you who gets to decide what a pregnancy is for an individual woman, and if it is a child or not.

I'm not bleating. I'm not a sheep in some far away field. I talk and think like a rational person, so stop dehumanising me - I don't think you even realise that you do it.

I'm really sorry about what you went though. How horrible for you. There are definite issues, as I have already said surrounding the mental health of women and abortion, and personally I think more research needs to be done on this issue, some kind of psychological analysis by professionals, not just a check list/tick box from a GP. Clearly, you had given your foetus personhood from the start of your pregnancy, and it's terrible for you that this wasn't picked up on, or taken more seriously by the so-called professionals whose care you were in. Its also terrible that you had been coerced into your termination. This should be illegal, and there needs to be rigorous checking by unbiased medical professionals to ensure that a woman makes a decision independently of others. If a woman becomes pregnant, the support network needs to be there for the abortion procedure to really be the final safety net.

However, as tragic as your experience is, your experience does not equate to the experience of other women. I've already given you the links to the university research papers, which do show, contrary to your experience, that the majority do not regret their decision - these are papers which discuss the experience of thousands of women, not just yours. Whether you choose to acknowledge them or not is up to you, but by denying them, you are denying the very real experiences of other women.

You seem to be projecting your very personal, and very tragic circumstances onto other women, and equating the foetuses inside of them into the child which you lost, but they are not your child - and it is not your duty to protect them. In your circumstances your viewpoint is admirable, but other women are not you. Their feelings are not your feelings - you really should acknowledge that.

Big love to you natasia. I'm really sorry about your experience.

C-H-I-L-L O-U-T
I didn't accuse you of doing so. Relax
I am not saying everything is pleasant, I know life can tear pieces from you that don't grow back but don't confuse that or repulsive medical procedures with being anything but a part the nature we have created around us. Nature is everything. Full stop.


Don't think you can come at from that angle because I'm a man. This has nothing to do with my willingness or ability to undergo such an experience. This has only to do with whether I think it should be someone's right to choose to undergo such an experience if they decide it's in their best interest. This does not even have to do with whether I, as a man, think they are wrong or right in that decision. It is simply about what I feel is their right to choose. As p3 illustrated, there are good reasons in some instances to deny one person that right but in what he wrote there was something of these things called reason and logic.


Whoa, what was that about platitudes?
Not about orphanages, eh? So I take it you answered no you're not willing to take on the responsibility of helping to raise a child you'd force a woman to have?

Now suddenly you're the cross bearer for women's respect? Why not respect other women disagreeing with you on the issue?


How is that relevant to today? I'm not being a jerk here, I honestly don't see the connection you think you see.


I don't see what this has to do with what I've written.


So what I'm saying is that because we as men don't have to, by nature, take on any extra anything once our boys are swimming, we have to accept a woman's decision to make such a choice unless it's our child and we want the little gaffer safe and sound in our arms. It it's not my child and it's not my body then I've no business interfering in someone's choice no matter how much of a mistake I think it is.


I completely agree with you but UNTIL people are actually willing/demanding that AND MORE then it's her right to make that choice. No matter how awful I find it, if I'm not willing to care for that child then I have to stay out of her decision. How often do you go out of your way to help care for children whose mother's couldn't or wouldn't care for them?


Are you writing empty platitudes now as a joke?


Then we are going to be eternally at odds. How can you speak for so many other women who refute exactly what they are saying about their very own bodies? How can you pretend to think you know what's best for all other women when so many millions of them say you're wrong? How do you know their rights better than they do? Who do you think you are?


I agree with you but you're arguing exceptional circumstances and not what has proven to be the norm. The norm is that men usually don't care enough about their own children but pretend to be all offended by what other women do with their bodies. The norm is that good families pretend to be unified against this horrible practice but keep their distance from the riffraff of society? The norm is that the state isn't there to lend a helping hand on behalf of the taxpayers. The taxpayers aren't demanding more money goes from their wallets to the government so that should clue you in to the fact that people don't care as much as they say they do.


I'm not willing to tell another person what to do in such an important event in so many people's lives base on a bet I'm willing to make.

personal or not, you don't have the right to decide who's to live and who's to die.
After 6 weeks, the hearts starts beating.
Your heart is beating too, do you consider yourself alive or not? If yes, then the little creation inside of you is alive too.

Again, if I'm on a life support machine and my EEG is negative I'm not, even if my heart is beating. At the moment I'm alive, but that's not because my heart is beating - it's because you can measure my brain activity and my conciousness.

A heartbeat is a metabolic reaction by a particular muscle group, you can grow a beating heart in a lab nowadays. What makes a person a person has much more to do with neurology, the formation of the brain, and the capacity for independent desires.

is the baby inside of you on a "life support machine" too?

Girl, you're so vulnerable.

The life support machine is supposed to be the mother. And as far as I'm concerned, it is ****** up to think otherwise. Similarly, to call an unborn child a thing and to suggest that it is not 'alive'. This discussion isn't entertaining any more ...

yep, a living creature is supporting another living creature.

ORLY?


Well I don't have a "baby" inside of me.

But metaphorically speaking... to a certain point, yes it is. A foetus cannot survive without the mother up to a certain point, and before a certain point there is no EEG in a foetus.

When someone is on life support in a hospital, and the higher mental functions are inactive (wheel's turning, hamster's dead) we normally ask the relatives of the person if they wish to switch the support off. It's a personal choice for them and very dependant on whether they (the relatives) consider them alive or not. Some say yes, and some say no.

It certainly isn't up to strangers.

That was pretty scientific observation:)
I on the other hand ain't so sure they do.


I know but those are exceptions, majority of unwanted pregnancies are irresponsibility and stupidity.


So they say, don't you that is possible that those women asked about using precaution just lied and never used precautions.


But it is pretty obvious isn't it?
My point here is - women who don't want children do not have to have them. They should educate themselves, and use precaution, that should gibe them certainty no conceive even if they decide to engage in sexual activity in about 95% - 99%,if they will go about that a right way.

Controversy over abortion gone, simple and elegant solution!


It is still life. Human life nipped in the bud.


Harry???

and yet, it's a living creature

Alive in what sense?

agree 100 %


usually alive means, not dead.

Yes, and if they knew that there was no such option as abortion, I bet they'd be a damn sight more careful ...

@4 eigner
hmm... you state that men should also be involved in decision making, although you say above that women should educate themselves, should not spread easily, use precaution etc. so what is a men's role in it? because you should mention men also

Could you quantify not dead please?


There is no such option in Poland. And yet, women living in Poland have some of the highest abortion rates per-capita in the whole of Europe. Do you think people are being more careful or less careful?

An estimated 150,000 polish women got an abortion in 2010, in a nation of 30million ish.
An estimated 189,000 abortions took place in Britain in 2009 in a nation of 60million is.

Per capita the abortion rate in Polish women is nearly twice that of the UK. So much for being more careful.

scroll up or even better, read all of my posts in this thread and you'll know that I was always saying that both parents are responsible for their actions.

General statement: Don't you guys really understand that abortion without any emergency, leads to a moral freefall of our, already sick, society? People are screwing around and don't give a damn about the consequences of it because they know, they won't get punished for it. Why not just use (every possible) contraception before aborting a baby?

Using abortion as an anticonceptional method is both barbaric and idiotic. This should be a non-issue. You don't need to try to bring in your sick moral relativism in order to justify the murder of an infant. With the the infinity of contraceptive methods arounds("natural" or otherwise), why do you even need abortion?