Abortion still under control in Poland

Not really, they have football for that.

I stand corrected.


"freely acknowledged by most in this discussion"
Why I took issue with that statement was not because it's meaning was unclear to me in the least.
The reason I took issue with such form of "proof" is that it isn't proof of anything except of how you interpreted the collective opinions of a group of people discussing an issue on a message board. This wouldn't be the first time many people were wrong about something. So, while you may find solace in a crowd, I am here to let you know that it counts for nothing in terms of actually supporting an opinion.


And I must return the favour: please define what exactly "reasonable doubt" means to you.


First of all WE aren't killing anyone. If someone kills another person we don't all accept responsibility for that so please keep me out of other people's decisions. Secondly, it is NOT up to you or me to decide for another woman how she views her pregnancy (this is where you will run into the most trouble with your argument).

As I mentioned previously, the closer your time line moves towards conception, the more divided opinions become on what is living and what is human.

Do I think the little zygote is human? Well it's not a bear, is it?
Is it a person?
Define what a person is.
Is a brain dead corpse on life support a person?
I think the little zygote is alive, I am convinced it's human but I don't know if it's a person but then again, it's not up to me to make that distinction for others.


What if you're wrong about that too?
The fact of the matter is there are millions of parents throughout the world who simply don't give a damn about their children. You presume too much with your scenario and it betrays your attempts at presenting a reasoned argument. Your lack of experience with people outside your social milieu is evident through such presumptions. You simply haven't met some of the worst society has to offer and don't know what you're talking about when you assume every parent-to-be will love and cherish their children- the world around you shows that to be categorically false. Case closed.

Now, could every parent love their children?
I hope so, but again, making that happen isn't going to be through litigation. That's the lazy way of trying to get that done. This is also a fact.

If you want to force all pregnant women into parenthood then I'm assuming you want to force all the fathers-to-be into assuming their role as well. Do you also want to force society to pay for their children when they can't afford to raise them properly? Do you want to force standards as to what proper raising of a child is? How much do you want to force society to contribute towards poorer parents achieving those standards? Who is to decide these standards? Do you want to force society to take care of these children if the parents prove to be inept?


So if I understand you correctly, the institution allowing an abortion and the doctor performing an abortion are guilty of murder but the woman who decides to have the procedure done to her body and to the human life in her body (YES I AGREE IT'S HUMAN AND HAVE BEEN ADAMANT ABOUT THAT) is not guilty of murder nor is an accomplice to murder in your opinion? What is your reasoning behind that one?


So you made a decision to allow what you think of as murder but don't see that as being an accomplice to murder?
I'm not trying to make you feel bad here, I just really don't see any logical consistency in you.
I am not saying this with an empty hand either. You I have also lost a child and wasn't too far away from losing my wife as well. Ours was killed by incompetent medical staff here in Poland.

We named him, we visited him every day, we played the music for him that he could hear while my wife was still carrying him. We tried to relieve his suffering every day. We saw his eyes light up when we came to visit him (although I must admit despite my constant doting he always gave his mother a bigger reaction). We tried to stimulate him through little touching games and saw the little guy figure out my primitive little tasks and we were completely in love with him. And when he died it absolutely devastated us. There cannot be anything worse to endure than watching your child fighting to live, suffering throughout their life, enduring nothing but pain and irritation in between controlled visits and then watching the life drain from their body.

This says nothing about the nightmare that an ACTUAL MOTHER had to go through in not being able to take care of her child as her body demanded, this says nothing about what that innocent little person had to endure in their tortured life. I got off easy compared to them!

And despite all that, deep down, I know I am responsible for his death as my decisions led us to that hospital at that time. I could have decided on a different hospital, I could have become more involved in my wife's pregnancy, I could have educated myself MUCH MORE- I didn't. He's dead because of my failings.

I've accepted responsibility for this. I am still here, I have to continue....
...now then are you done with your little pity-party, because I for one am sick of it and like other people on this site have had my own trials to endure.

The following is not a personal attack,; it is a call for logical and moral consistency:
I am not prepared to decide how others are to see their pregnancy or in their decision to terminate their pregnancy. However if you are prepared to do that then you better be prepared to accept responsibility for engaging in what you call it.


But you didn't...nice.


Tell me what I've misrepresented.
Show me what you wrote.
Show me my response.
Explain how you feel I misrepresented your reference to "proof" and I will explain why I wrote what I did.
You keep making vague references while using neither the quote function nor anything resembling paragraphs and accepted spacing-what gives man?
This is one of the reasons I suspect you of being intellectually dishonest.
By using the quote function I've been able to illustrate the logical failings in your arguments- it's documented.
You can make all the snide comments you want but aside from that you've offered me precious little to respond to and have yet to effectively deal with any of the 3 points I laid out to you. You have attempted explanations but each time I've shown you where and how your thinking on the matter doesn't hold up and then I get these vague replies with no substance like the one I quoted. I'm not going to start guessing at what you mean. This is a lengthy discussion so as a moderator you of all people should be adhering to the practices that add clarity to it.

I like the approach you used in regards to the "Double Homicide" angle but I feel there is a logical explanation for this that doesn't rely on religion or subjective views of what person-hood is. When one kills a mother-to-be (we don't call either the father-to-be or pregnant woman a parent until after the child is born), we can clearly delineate between the murderer and victim(s) (the "s" is to acknowledge both perspectives). We cannot know the intentions of the victim but we are forced to accept she wanted to see her pregnancy through to motherhood. It's an interesting angle but proves nothing as to what is or isn't a person regarding the development of the unborn.


You're easily one of the most well reasoned posters on this entire message board.
I was a bit annoyed with you and p3undone hypothesizing about deciding whether to let a baby or mother die during delivery but that's because it touched a nerve with me. It's a horrible position to find oneself in and although I think the subject deserves greater discretion, I shouldn't have been so quick to lash out at you for it.

My apologies, I over-reacted.

I didn't feel like that before I had the operation, because the whole system here is set up to present a 'termination' as an ok thing to do - it isn't really a life - it is just a tiny blob - you will quickly recover and everything will be fine.

The reality of the procedure, and of my reaction to it, and of my increasing experience and wisdom over the years of how precious each life actually is, and how precious each of my children - all of this is something I only had access to after having 'made' the decision.

And my one and only point about abortion is that women should be made as fully aware as possible of what they are doing, and what they are THROWING AWAY, to ensure they are in absolutely the best position to make as informed a choice as is possible, despite in the case of first-time mothers, their total lack of experience of pregnancy and having a child.

And I don't think this is done. Because people fighting for 'choice' won't allow women to hear the full facts, because they think that will ... what? Put them off? Make them feel bad about their 'choice'? Maybe it will make some women think so hard that they don't have an abortion, yes. And then later, they won't have to regret it. They will in years to come think (at least some of them) 'Phew - thank God I didn't have a abortion - what was I even thinking??'.

And to my mind, if only one single woman is spared the emotional torment I have to live with as a result of that 'decision', then it is worth it.

So all I want is full information, no air-brushing, no talk of lifeless blobs - because that is not how it works afterwards. Afterwards one starts to think things like ' hang on - I will now not ever see the face of my child'. Or 'I will never know if I had a girl or a boy' (although I am certain I had a girl, and have been right with the other two so probably right). Or 'What ... did they do with the body of my unborn child?'. And a whole host of other awful questions. And the thing is, I have my whole life to think about that. And you can bet your bottom dollar that those who did it, and took the money, don't have a second thought about it.

I am just so sorry that I trusted a flawed system, and yes, I am angry that a law designed to protect exactly people like me was just blatantly flouted. The law says that abortion can only be given to a mother if she will suffer much more physically or emotionally if she goes through with the pregnancy. I ran out of the hospital once. Surely that should have raised doubts in their mind about my suitability for this procedure? I was 21. I knew nothing. I was very naive. And they failed me. And my parents also failed me.

So no, I am not keen on 'choice' when it isn't a real choice. There is so much talk about those women who 'desperately' want an abortion, and so desperately need to be allowed their 'choice' and their 'rights' over 'their body'. But what about a woman who doesn't even yet grasp the implications of her actions, and is channelled into the preferred 'sensible' behaviour by those around her, and denied - yes, denied - access to the full facts? I can tell you that if I had had to have a scan, and see pictures of the developing child at the time when I had the abortion, and to see pictures post-abortion, then I would not have done it. And if someone had also talked to me about the long-term, lifetime implications of regret - I would not have.

But nobody did. And I think that is a failing in the system, and, frankly, in the law.

So I am not against choice. I am pro a real choice.

And yes ... I do wish I had been brought up in a country that considered abortion a terrible thing to do, and something that should only be done as an absolute last resort in the case of medical emergency. I really do.

Ok. I will shut up now. Not sure what else there is for me to say.

can you summarise the first post, it's tl;dr
Like in 140 characters, call it the Twitter-challenge

Before abortion I didn't feel like I was about to permit murder - if I had, wouldn't have done it.
Afterwards, it felt as if I had permitted murder.
If I had been properly informed beforehand, I wouldn't have done it.
Choice is all very well so long as it is a fully informed choice, and that would involve, e.g., scans and pictures and literature about the development stages of the unborn child.

Choice at the moment in the UK is boll*cks, as far as I am concerned.
I wish I'd been in Poland, where my child would have been respected and protected.

May not be 140 characters, but hope digestible.

it's not the system's fault that you had abortion.

natasia

I agree with you completely.
I am not going to tell you how you should feel regarding your life choices, I was curious as to your reasoning for it. I am not going to comment on your life history and through which lens you choose to reflect on it. I was only interested in how you apportioned blame for said events.

I think we can have this discussion without being so self-referential, I think we can have this discussion without continually vying for suffering points.

The reason that topic came up was because I wanted to know where anti-choice proponents stand on the issue of incarcerating doctors, nurses and women who have had or performed abortions. The reason I asked that was because:

If I chose to view abortion as murder then I would be forced to reason that those people engaging in abortion must be regarded as murderers or accomplices to it.

I only wanted to see if that was the mindset of people who are pro-life/anti-choice (choose which moniker you see fit). I wanted to know their take on that question.

A subsequent question I have is whether or not it is a question of medical staff believing they're killing a person and not caring or, do some of these people see things differently?

I am interested in to what extent anti-choice proponents would seek legislation to ensure that life is being taken care of after birth or, do they not care after that point?

I am interested to what degree anti-choice proponents will choose to hold themselves responsible for another person's child if they would like to force that person to carry the unborn child through to delivery.

Based on the avoidance I've received from these questions I'm left to assume the collective answer is "not very."

Until I receive some specific answers to those and other questions the portrait I am forced to draw of most anti-choice advocates is one of a hypocrite who really doesn't want much to do with the sh*tty families or the poor families or broken families or the kind of people whose mothers were considering an abortion but didn't for whatever reason.

I do not support abortion but I see eliminating the social circumstances that turn abortion into a sought after option as being the most effective path to that goal. A purely legal recourse is not going to work. I cannot say I'm anti-abortion because if I did then I would have to do something to prevent it. Since I am not, I cannot make that claim. I am curious how others can make said claim but sit on their butts and pretend to be objective in their views.

p3undone, whatever dude, in this conversation you're dead to me. You're like that crappy kid in dodge ball that pretended he wasn't hit multiple times while the rest of the class just rolled our eyes at him and just accepted he wasn't worth our time.

it was partly, by making her decision too easy (is what she's saying).

when abortion is illegal, there is underground. it still helps to make a decision.

She said that she wouldn't have abortion if:
"If I had been properly informed beforehand, I wouldn't have done it.
Choice is all very well so long as it is a fully informed choice, and that would involve, e.g., scans and pictures and literature about the development stages of the unborn child."

She's talking about the consequences, not about the possibilities.

Foriegner4,I know that I'm dead to you because you couldn't rebut what I was saying and you contradicted yourself more than once on this thread and it was obvious.Ouch,you don't have get so nasty and rude though,I really don't understand that one,don't respond to me and I won't respond to you,fair enough?Because I will each and every time that you do.I have outlined my stance on this thread more than once and you obviously understood me or you wouldn't have continued the debate.We can agree to disagree.why you take it so serious;I can't understand.

that's what biology at schoold is for, and i'm sure they teach about that. beside, before you do such thing, educate yourself on your own, right? we live in the era of information, you know.

obviously, they don't teach enough, otherwise, we would have nothing to discuss about now ;-)


of course, education and contraception before abortion and abortion only out of emergency, not out of convenience.

They do teach about human reproduction, cells, embrios, fetus, development. I'm not talking about teaching morals because everybody should figure it out themselves.

pgtx,then why does the medical profession debate about when a fetus is actually considered a life?If they're not sure then it doesn't matter how much education you have.

They cannot agree because beside medican knowledge they also use their morality. Human nature.

Actually, to some degree it is. (and it's 'an' abortion)

yes, they do but not enough.

Well, i don't agree and thanks for the Lesson of English, natasia.

don't you think that if abortion and its consequences, were made much more visible and understandable, the amount of abortions, would go back significantly? Of course, I don't have any numbers to support my claim but it makes sense to me and I'm personally convinced, it would.

pgtx,it's not so much morality,they just don't know.

Abortions remain a highly contentious issue in many countries. People will argue over this issue for a very long time to come.
So, what should Poland do?
Leave the decision between the mothers and the doctors. It's no business of the state or the church (or anybody else) to tell any women that they can't have an abortion.

It's really that simple.

Is it really that simple? How much does your life mean to you, Tommy? Do you believe that it would be OK for others to decide whether you're supposed to live or die?

(over and out for right now)

natasia

I'm sorry to hear that you have had such an awful experience, I would say please try to show yourself more compassion, you were young and in a difficult position,that may not be of much comfort though. I do agree that education about both sex/birth control and abortion needs to be far more realistic. We teach sex education in schools but we do it without teaching about responsibility and consequences! it's a short sighted policy. While I am totally pro choice, I also believe that we should be making young people aware that they do not have to be pressurised into sexual relationships and it's okay to say NO. The option of adoption should also be far more widely available too. There should also be extensive counselling available post termination. Bottom line, we should be aiming to drastically reduce unplanned pregnancies thereby reducing abotion/adoption and neglected/abused children.

I would never outlaw abortion, working with the children that I do work with I believe that some people should never be allowed to have children but that's another story.


Agreed

At the time, there was no internet.

And they don't teach you about serious emotional consequences in Biology ...


I like you too, 4 F : ) Thank you for getting it : ) (and for trying to make it simple for others ...)


I think I'm the only one who has brought any personal experience into this, apart from those women who have said they would never have kids. Totally not trying to score points - just to share relevant experience.


Which takes time. Years. And experience. Unless you are one of those ladies who is always extremely sure of herself, and has been from a young age ...

I'm sorry about your experience. Thinking about "what ifs" is really useless, though, don't you think? Just because now you wonder what that child might have been like now does not necessarily mean you would have done things differently if you had to do them over again. If you didn't have enough information to truly realize what you were doing then, maybe you were even less prepared to have a child?

I, too, grapple with the "when does life begin" question, but I would not take the right to choose from other women, who might have had a much harder road than you or I.

But, as long as we consider sex as a form of entertainment (nature's cruel joke, huh?), I would not put the milestone of a beginning of life at the point of conception.

Natasia,I don't think there could be life at the point of conception.Bet I can't bet the farm on that.

so when? That is the big question.
The choices span from: when the first cell divides to when the fetus could possible survive outside of the womb.

fstop,I agree that is the big question.Hard to tell.I think that when the fetus is recognized as life then abortion should not be permitted..I think if there's cerebral activity and a heartbeat then the fetus is definitely alive,but I'm not a doctor.

Indeed it is.
Without conception there is no life, I dont think that is wrong.


Why not?