Should A Man Have A Say In What A Woman Does With An Accidental Pregnancy?

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 02:25 pm: [report]

I think men absolutely have a say in this. It took 2 people’s decisions (or poor decisions) to create a baby. Then I think it also takes two people’s decisions to decide whether or not to keep it.

I don’t like the women who say “it’s my body, my choice”. Because ultimately it affects the man too. Some women will be chasing down those men for child support money if they keep the baby.

No doubt it is a hard decision to make, no matter where you stand on the abortion issue.

jimnist10
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 02:27 pm: [report]

Talking about that sort of decision with the babydaddy is extremely important.  And if I got pregnant by a one-night stand, he would only know about it IF I decided to continue the pregnancy either to sign away his parental rights OR to pay for child support. Now, don’t everyone get all upset over that. It’s the accidental result of sex, just like getting an STD.  Ok, so getting an STD doens’t make the guy financially responsible for 18 years, but so what? There are sometimes unpleasant or complicated consequences to having sex. Why should the guy get off (no pun intended) easily just because HE DOESN’T WANT TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY and claim it’s not his choice to continue with the pregnancy and raise a child? At least a guy can away with merely making monthly payments if that’s what it comes down to. If guys are going to get upset over having to AT THE VERY LEAST be finacially responsible for the results of sex, then they shouldn’t be having sex. In fact, that goes for most PEOPLE. If people can’t handle the consequenses of sex or at least be responsible enough to go out and buy some condoms and get regulary checked for STD’s, they shouldn’t be having sex. So many problems would be solved if people just thought a teeny bit before taking their pants off.

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 02:33 pm: [report]

@jimist: I agree with you on about being able to handle the consequences of sex. I mean this is the 21st century. Condoms are very accessible-anyone can buy them, there is no age restriction. And I think people who do have abortions who didn’t necessarily think about the consequences should be taking a class on preventative measures—like a sex ed class that encourages condom usage, etc.

bellarose
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 02:35 pm: [report]

“All I know is, if I were to get pregnant by a man who didn’t want to be my child’s parent, I would have him sign away his parental rights and wouldn’t ask him for a dime.”

Great point. I had a friend who did this. He was unable financially to support the child, it was a one night stand, and he made this decision. The mother did not necisarily want this outcome, and she still calls him but can’t ask for anything and she shouldn’t expect anything. This decision still changes the life of the man and not always in a good way. My friend has a lot of problems being in relationships and it’s affected the way he sees fathers, families, and himself. It’s very sad sometimes. I don’t think enough women get this viewpoint especially the women who say things like “It’s my body, my choice” because whatever the outcome it affects both parties dramatically.

joyy
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 02:35 pm: [report]

@Coral - you do realize that birth control, even when used correctly, does fail sometimes, right?

_jsw_
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 02:36 pm: [report]

I agree that it’s clearly the woman’s choice to keep the baby or have an abortion. The man can weigh in with his opinion, but it’s her choice.

If the two of them agree on a course of action, then in the case of an abortion, I think the man should pay for it; it’s the least he can do, given what she must endure. In the case of a decision to have the child, I agree - the man should be held responsible after the birth, even if he changes his mind.

If the two of them disagree, and if she wants an abortion but he doesn’t, I don’t feel he should pay for it, but I don’t think he has any right to stop her.

If the two of them disagree, and if she wants to keep the baby and he doesn’t, then I think his financial obligations should be more limited than if he wants to keep the child, at least in cases where an abortion is an option.

bellarose
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 02:40 pm: [report]

@Coral/jimnist10 : Have either of you experienced a pregnancy or abortion either yourselves or with someone close to you? If you haven’t maybe you need to have that experience; people can get accidently pregnant by being stupid and not taking precautions, but people can also get pregnant by making a mistake while being cautious. It’s a lot harder when it happens to you directly. Everyone can talk about abortion and pregnancy but it’s a lot different when it actually happens.

Alexa
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 02:51 pm: [report]

I agree with _jsw_ all the way around.  She should certainly discuss it with him, but that decision is hers and hers alone, period.  She’s the one who has to carry the pregnancy, not him.  She’s the one whose life is at risk, not him (women do die from pregnancies).  Even if he wants the baby and offers to adopt it, she still is the one who’s life is at risk and has to give birth.

LayD
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 02:55 pm: [report]

I think men deserve the right to know if they got a woman pregnant.  I like what Jessica Wakeman said. It is very true, why should men be allowed to live in ignorant bliss on these matters?  At the very least, if men are more aware of how many women actually get preganant compared to those they are told about, maybe they will use protection more or have a backup plan.  Even though pregnancy happens to the woman and she ultimately is the one that either terminates the preganancy or carries it out, the man should know what he did.  My friend recently told her boyfriend that she doesn’t want children and of she were to get preganat, she would abort it and probably won’t evne mention it to him.  (She is on the pill) He was very bothered by this.  He doesn’t want children either, but he still wanted to be apart of that discussion if it were to happen.

A friend of mine recently got pregnant and had an abortion and after helping her go through this I realized that women really are alone in these situations.  The mere fact that women get pregnant and men don’t creates unequal opportunities for men and women and really does put women in a position of inequality.  I think this position makes women more vulnerable, if they get pregnant they sacrifice more than a man, but it also makes them a superior being because of the decisions we have to make, what we do for others, and the strength we have to have in order to carryout a pregnancy, give birth and raise a child, or the strength to terminate a preganancy.  The man who impregnated my friend was someone who she was in a relationship but it had ended and he now lived 6 hours away.  He knew she was pregnant, discussed things with her and would check in with her, but was not physically there.  For the brief time she was pregnant, her social life came to a halt (no late night bar drinking, she was always ill, always sleeping, gained 10 pounds just because eating was the only thing that kept her from feeling nauseous, she paid for the abortion, dealt with the guilt, the sponatneous bleeding for 2 weeks, and of course will never forget this experience.  The guy didn’t have to deal with any of this, perhaps he does have some guilt and perhaps he does think of what might have been, but he very easily continued with his life normally while my friend had to readjust hers.  She also once made a comment to me, being the Catholic that she is, does she go to hell for this and the guy doesn’t since he didn’t commit the act? I know that idea gets into other issues but, in society it seems that it is the woman who makes the choice as well as deal with the judgments and how often is a guy judged for this?  My friend does feel that she made the right decision, but naturally a lot of emotions come into play.

So my point is, I do believe that men should know when they get someone pregnant, they have the right to be part of the discussion, but in the end, the woman is always the stronger one.

G-Had
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:02 pm: [report]

In some cases it might just be easier to have a conversation about the possibility before it even becomes a reality. I asked my boyfriend point blank, “I’m not ready to have a baby yet, and if I were to get pregnant, I would have an abortion whether you liked it or not. Would you want me to tell you if this happened?” He said it wasn’t something he “necessarily had to know about.” Whereas my best friend said a similar thing to her guy, and he told her he absolutely wanted to know so that he could hold her hand through whatever she decided to do. Obviously you can’t have this conversation if it’s just a one night stand or something, but maybe it works for some couples.

GreenAura
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:05 pm: [report]

It completely depends on the relationship with the baby daddy.  Is it a committed, loving relationship?  Damn right you better discuss with him! He has every right to voice his opinion on the life of the child he helped create during a committed relationship. One night stand? Then only inform him if you want to keep it.

writergirl
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:10 pm: [report]

Exactly what Green Aura said.  BUT.  If the one night stand says he doesn’t want any responsibility, he should have the right to sign away his parental rights.  A woman has an option of an abortion…a man should have the option of not supporting a child he didn’t want in the first place.

(Deadbeat dads who don’t pay child support after a divorce are a different category)

Nutmeg
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:11 pm: [report]

Great comments so far.

I do agree that everyone should be responsible for their actions, but things do happen.

If both have sex with no protection, then it’s hard to claim “I didn’t want it.” As a male, my committal to use a condom is my implied decision that I do not want children (or disease). If something breaks or fails, I would hope there would still be respect for that decisions. The female may decide to keep the baby, but that’s not my decision as a male(even if my opinion is considered), but that does not absolve me of legal responsibility without further permission from the female. That’s a shame and a failing in the system.

I do think the associated risk, Alexa, is a little overstated. In the US, it is about 1 in 10,000. You have a 1 in 100 chance of dying in a car accident (lifetime).

Alexa
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:13 pm: [report]

@Nutmeg, “If both have sex with no protection, then it’s hard to claim “I didn’t want it.”

That’s like claiming that, because you didn’t use a safety harness, you wanted to fall off that ladder.  Please, dude.

And, regardless, there IS a risk of dying from a pregnancy.  How great that risk is is wholly irrelevant if the woman does not want the baby.  Why should she be forced to endure that risk?

firefly
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:27 pm: [report]

What sbout this situation? A friend of mine started dating a guy, they settled on an exclusive relationship on the 2nd date, and had sex on the 3rd…without a condom (she was on the pill).  Then the next week, he broke up with her via email, and a few weeks later she found out she was late, test confirmed pregnancy.
She does not want to keep it, but should she tell the guy who humped and dumped her about this situation, even if she doesn’t want money for the abortion?

LayD
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:35 pm: [report]

@firefly:  The guy is a total jerk, but I still think she should tell him.  I do feel for your friend and I am sure she doesn’t want any contact with him, but I think despite his a-hole status, he should know.  Hopefully he will learn from this and be more respectful in the future.  I do think that it is ok for her to tell him via e-mail since that is how he so considerately dumped her.

Netty
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:41 pm: [report]

I’m getting an abortion tomorrow actually. And I am really scared about the whole procedure. I live with my boyfriend and we made a decision together to terminate the pregnancy. I am not sure if i ever want to be a mother. And I am starting college in the fall and neither of us have a stable job. I have no religious conflicts and to me it is as of now just a fetus.

I asked him what he thought we should do. He said he supported me and loved me. Although he wanted me to get an abortion he said it is my decision and my body and if I want to keep it he will support me regardless of the struggle.

Obviously, I am getting the abortion. It is my body, and I would have gotten an abortion if my boyfriend wanted me to keep it. But his voice and feelings meant a lot and were considered. What the past weeks have taught me is that being pro-choice and actually being able to prepare yourself for an abortion are two very separate things. And I am just fortunate that I live in country where I can have a choice and have a man who supports me either way.

GreenAura
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:50 pm: [report]

Good luck Netty.  Just because it is legal and you are of sound mind and body, doesn’t make it any easier! And props to your bf for being so supportive!!

likeOMGkbye
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:51 pm: [report]

I would like to say that if I had every gotten pregnant by accident during my wild years that I would have told the guy, but if I was actually in the situation I don’t know if I would have the guts to do it, because that is a hard conversation to have. Especially with a casual sex fling/one night stand. During college I always knew that if my BC failed somehow, I would definitely get an abortion. Would I have been able to tell whomever it was? I’m not too sure.

Now that I’m out of college and in a stable, long-term relationship, damn right I’m discussing it with my boyfriend if anything were to happen. Neither of us are ready, but that doesn’t mean I should just assume that I should abort it and get it done without consulting him.

Now a real conflict would be if a woman got pregnant through a date-rape scenario (she knows her attacker), does she tell him?

LayD
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 04:05 pm: [report]

Netty-  I hope everything goes well tomorrow.  I know it isn’t easy, but it seems like you and your boyfriend are doing what you feel is right.  I am glad your boyfriend is supportive. I think his response to the situation is the best a guy can have- stating what he prefers, but letting you choose and being supportive either way.

adenosine
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 04:11 pm: [report]

You know, I don’t think I’d want to be in a relationship with someone who would not be there for me every step of the way, regardless of the outcome of an unplanned pregnancy.  On top of that, how strong is a relationship if you can’t be honest with one another about important issues (aka, being PREGNANT), or if one party insists on turning a blind eye to said important issues?

Netty
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 04:19 pm: [report]

Thank you so much everyone. It means a lot. I haven’t been able to tell anyone about it. I am not ashamed of my decision. It just is so personal and intimate I don’t think I’d be able to bring it up to my friends.

LayD
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 04:30 pm: [report]

Netty-  I totally understand how you feel (well for the most part).  When my friend had her abortion she only told me because she is my best friend and new that I would be supportive and her exboyfriend.  She said she couldn’t tell anyone else, she wasn’t comfortable with it for many reasons and I can understand that (that is one reason why the whole “abortion party” baffles me, most people cannot bring themselves to tell others, much less have a party for them to pay for it).  Anyway, Netty, you have my support and luckily your boyfriend’s too!

Nutmeg
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 04:30 pm: [report]

@Alexa

That’s not a logical comparison. The biological purpose of sex is to make a baby. The purpose to climb a ladder or ride a motorcycle is not to fall off. Even if you rebut with a proper comparison, the point isn’t that you want it, it’s that you accept that the likelihood has increased to being significant, not just statistically possible. You are taking risk without any form of precaution and with the options of prevention available implies acceptance of a probable outcome.

Regarding your other point, I’m not saying the woman shouldn’t have a choice, I believe everyone should have a way out. The risk of dying in childbirth is not significant compared to the other risks involved, but if you didn’t want to get into a car, I wouldn’t make you either.

theoldman
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 04:39 pm: [report]

I have an old fashioned view on this.  First the baby if the woman chooses to carry to term is an innocent victim of this mistake.  That is where the where the primary focus should be in that case.  Focus should be on what is best for the child because the child is not a pawn. He plays, he pays. He doesn’t have to do 3AM feedings ,he doesn’t have to get the child off to school every morning.  Child support is lousy pay for what the mother has to do.

Netty bless you, you are the best reason I could make for the father not forcing the issue.  The woman pays the real price here.  Support her 100%.

Alexa
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 04:57 pm: [report]

@Nutmeg, perhaps you should find a dictionary and look up what word “want.”  You seem to be rather clueless as to its definition.

Netty
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 05:00 pm: [report]

@LayD

Yes, the abortion party is beyond appalling. I would say borderline disgusting. I am not happy I have to get an abortion. I am not ashamed but still the idea of sort of parading it around and using it as a reason to get trashed is very disturbing to me. That is not decision to poke fun at. It is a serious life choice. Even women who don’t feel regret after an abortion still have to deal with the emotional/physical side effects of such a procedure. And it seems her friends are not helping prepare her for those aspects.

And if the woman needed money to get an abortion, there are plenty of organizations that can help and I bet her friends would have helped without an “abortion party”.

@ theoldman. Thank you for the blessings. I think it takes a real man to be able to support his lady 100%. I am glad I have one.

firefly
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 05:22 pm: [report]

@LayD…thanks for your opinion. I was just curious to see what others would say, it was a tough decision for her. 

This happened last month, and she decided not to put anything in writing, but left him a voice mail telling him what happened, and told him to be careful with the next person he dated.  He called back and asked how much money she needed to take care of it, she said that wasn’t why she told him, and he countered with, “Well, why did you even bother to tell me then?” He did offer to help, drive her to the clinic or whatever, and asked her to let him know her final decision once she made it, of course she was going to do no such thing.

Two days later, he sent her another email, saying he wanted to see the preg results from her doctor. Once he saw those, then he’ll “help.”
This guy is a network analyst, not your typical player. Telling the guy in this scenerio made things worse, because now she feels bad because she’s pregnant, but she’s also been accused of being a liar, and using this for money. What a guy, eh?

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 05:35 pm: [report]

@joyy: Of course I know that, but people who choose abortions because it was an accident (rather than health reasons, mental/health problems with the fetus) should be forced to have more education on birth control—both condoms and other forms of contraception and they should know that people should be using 2 forms.

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 05:40 pm: [report]

@bellarose: Two of my close friends got pregnant in high school (one of them got pregnant twice within a few years). My aunt had an abortion years ago..my mom had an abortion before my older brother and I was born. If one is truly cautious, then they actually wouldn’t be pregnant. I believe that all people who choose to have sex should be using at least 2 forms of birth control-always. It is actually quite simple. But the point of the article is if the man has any say..and he absolutely does. It’s both a man and a woman’s responsibility to prevent unwanted pregnancies and they both have the right to decide upon what to do. That fetus if half the man’s and half the woman’s.

Alexa
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 05:44 pm: [report]

@Coral, when the man starts carrying the pregnancy “half” the time, then he can have a say in the matter.  It may be half his DNA, but the woman is the one who has to endure the pregnancy, not the man.  That’s just a simple fact of biology.  The fact that both of them might have the “responsibility” of preventing an unwanted pregnancy in no way gives him a stake in her decision to carry it.  That defies common sense.

eden
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 05:47 pm: [report]

Good luck, Netty. I hope it goes smoothly.

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 05:54 pm: [report]

@likeomgkbye: In any sort of rape scenario, I think the woman should not tell the rapist (if they know them). In fact, I feel that most women who have been raped and later found out they were pregnant have an abortion about 95% of the time. And it is better off not telling the rapist because it just brings up more emotions and turmoil for the woman. Plus, it could bring some gratification to the rapist knowing that the woman endured further trouble.

wonder_bread
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 05:59 pm: [report]

i agree with jimnist10, coral and nutmeg… granted you have the exception of rape or health/mental problems… all parties should have a say and should be responsible for whatever the female chooses. i don’t think its okay for a guy to just skip out on his responsibility just because he doesn’t “feel” ready… if you are ready for sex you have to keep that possibility open that you may get pregnate and have to make a hard, life altering decision. one night stands included.. if your crazy/dumb/brave enough to have an unprotected one night stan(male or female) in this age of disease and who knows what else then you have to be brave/crazy/dumb enough to be able to handle or make yourself handle whatever the consequences are..

it sucks to have to keep someone around who doens’ want to help raise what he help make and if it becomes more of a waste then a help to the child let him give up his rights and do the best you can. If the guy wants the kid and you want to give it up for adoption or terminate then ultimately its still your choice. it’ll be your body,health,mental wellness put on hold for the next 9-10 months.

writergirl
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:01 pm: [report]

Netty—best of luck to you.

Gingee
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:01 pm: [report]

The man has NO say about any pregnancy but his own.

It is that simple.

Never mind the snotting about contraception.  A conception is a dance that takes two people.

If the male has not had a vasectomy with the zero sperm count follow up tests, and there is a conception anyway, too bad, so sad.

Any guy who tried to tell me that I am the safeguarder of what happens to his sperm once he has given it away is laughed at.

“The biological purpose of sex is to make a baby.”

WRONG.  About 2/3 of all conceptions are aborted naturally. They are called miscarriages instead of induced abortion.

For those of you who want to share your stories about abortion, you can visit imnotsorry dot net for Positive Abortion Stories.

Gingee

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:02 pm: [report]

@Alexa: It really cannot be a woman’s choice entirely—it doesn’t matter who carries the baby. If a woman’s boyfriend says for her to do whatever she wants, then that is a different story. Now this is a little different, but one of my friends got pregnant when she was 16. She absolutely didn’t want to have an abortion but her mother did and tried to make the doctor force her to get one. Because she was a minor at the time, who has the authoritative and legal choice on the fetus? Parents force their minor daughters who are pregnant into abortion all the time.

But if a woman wants to keep the baby and her boyfriend does not want to, she will most likely end up demanding child support at some point in the child’s life (which she has every right to) but the man didn’t want to keep the child in the first place. So basically, the man gets screwed over in the end. It’s simply not fair.

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:05 pm: [report]

@wonder-bread: Exactly. People need to step up to the plate and be more responsible about their decisions and these discussions wouldn’t have to happen.

wonder_bread
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:09 pm: [report]

@Gingee- i didn’t get the memo. when did sex’s main biological function stop being to reproduced? its taught that procreation is indeed the function of the organs. the fact that it feels good is just a plus. and i don’t know where your getting your facts from but even if “About 2/3 of all conceptions are aborted naturally. They are called miscarriages instead of induced abortion.” we true that doesn’t mute the fact that the sex organs were and are orginially made to produce babies….

@Coral why do you consider a male screwed when he’s forced to take care of his responsibilities. If he didn’t want the risk of being a dad he shouldn’t have gone in unprotected or had sex at all. There is always that risk and i think both males adn females will do best to never get too comfortable and forget that.

Alexa
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:10 pm: [report]

@Coral “Because she was a minor at the time, who has the
authoritative and legal choice on the fetus?”

Only she (the minor) does under every state’s law in the U.S.  Parents cannot force a minor to abort.  Are some coerced?  I suspect they are, but even that is illegal and if the justice system finds out, they’re supposed to do something about it.  The same is not true in reverse, sadly.  Parents can force their kids to carry a pregnancy to term in 38 states.

“But if a woman wants to keep the baby and her boyfriend does not want to, she will most likely end up demanding child support at some point in the child’s life (which she has every right to) but the man didn’t want to keep the child in the first place. So basically, the man gets screwed over in the end. It’s simply not fair.”

You’re comparing apples to oranges here.  Once the baby is born, it is a living human being that has to be supported.  At that point, the mother can’t become any less responsible for it than the father of it is, so it’s hardly “unfair” by any reasonable definition of the word.  Before that, however, the mother carrying the pregnancy is the sole individual responsible for it.  Period.  No amount of argument you can come up with can defeat that simple biological fact.

*sam*
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:13 pm: [report]

@Coral: I had an abortion when I was 18, and FYI: there was a starter pack of birth control in the ‘goodie’ bag they sent home with me. AND before they let me or anyone else who had one that day go home, they had a small lecture on contraception and the like. *NOT TO MENTION* before they did the procedure, they discussed all kinds of options with me—to A) better inform me of not only the alternative options I had and to ensure that I knew what i was doing and wasn’t being forced, but also to B) better educate me on my options on how to prevent that from happening in the future. While I was of course *aware* of condoms and BC, at the time, I was 18 and too scared to make my (ex)BF wear one b/c I thought he would leave me if I demanded such a request.

all in all, I think it was great that they did that, b/c after wards, I was better equipped to tell him that we *obviously* needed to be more responsible.

Curvygal
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:18 pm: [report]

I love all of the “what-if” scenarios going on here…I’m actually in the middle of a real situation and believe me it’s not as easy when it really happens. I got accidently pregnant to a casual lover when after one night of passion we didn’t use a condom. Ahem. Yes, totally stupid and first and only time I’d not used a condom in my life. Why didn’t I take Plan B? I dunno, denial? Regardless I’m now six months pregnant. And despite being all for abortion all through my 20s when it came to the real deal I couldn’t do it.

I had plenty of people tell me in that case I should never tell him. But it’s not fair to deprive the child of the chance at least to know his father. So I did tell him, he pushed for abortion, I said that I wouldn’t but that understanding the situation I wasn’t expecting money. All I asked is for a medical history, perhaps some family photos or history from his side and maybe agreement that one day he would at least meet the kid once. He wouldn’t even provide that which I thought was pretty low. I was as fair I could be understanding both sides. There isn’t really just two side though - there is now THREE - the child.

Real life is complicated. In my case - don’t regret it, and have got a great supportive circle of friends and family around me - and I’m very excited about the birth.

Gingee
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:20 pm: [report]

TO:  Wonder_Bread

Amative sexual intercourse is about sharing intimacy.

I do not accept the claim that biological/function/baby making.  Nonsense on stilts. 

To Coral:  My guy and I had two abortions.  He was with me for both procedures, as was only right.  One thing we learned:  Birth control pills and other forms of contraception do fail to prevent conceptions. 

My tubal ligation still works.

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:20 pm: [report]

@sam: I think that’s great that the clinic/hospital did that. I think it should be required. When I signed up for student loans recently, they forced me to do entrance loan counseling and understand exactly how loans and paying them back entails. So I think similar things should be done for people who choose to have abortions-because it’s kinda like ‘well you made a mistake once, but here’s how to not make it again’. Because I know many women do not enjoy having abortions. But they are also not ready for a baby.

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:23 pm: [report]

@gingee: If people are using at least 2 forms of contraception (as long as the woman isn’t taking a medication that negates birth control) then it prevents pregnancy…with a very very small exception rate.

*sam*
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:24 pm: [report]

@curvygal: wow! good luck with everything! it totally blows that the guy was such a… douche a/b everything. But at least you have a very supportive group of ppl around you!! I wish you the very best!! :D

@coral: I think that’s great a/b the financial counseling! I wish all schools did that b/c the school loans world can be very confusing!! and it was Planned Parenthood that provided that service for me—I’ve never been more grateful.

lb333
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:26 pm: [report]

Netty:
I will be praying for you tomorrow.  Please know that you are strong and have made a difficult decision that was right for you.  I also admire you for sharing your story while living it!  I had an abortion about two years ago and while I still mourn the loss every once in a while, I know it was what I needed to do for me.  Thank you for being so open and know that you will not be alone tomorrow!  Bravo to your boyfriend for being the supportive partner he should be, but you will also not be alone because we have gone through this with you. One third of women in the US will have an abortion in their lifetime. You are a brave woman and will get through this!

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:26 pm: [report]

@sam: Yeah I have heard Planned Parenthood is very helpful. And well all my friends that are going to college this year too had to do entrance loan counseling quizzes for the federal Stafford loans..so I do think that all schools are doing it.

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:30 pm: [report]

@wonder_bread: It’s not just the man who is being screwed..it’s the woman too. She has to endure 9 months of pregnancy, not to mention a lifetime of financial and emotional burdens due to the child.

“If he didn’t want the risk of being a dad he shouldn’t have gone in unprotected or had sex at all.”
The woman has the exact same responsibility to ensure that there is not an unwanted pregnancy.

*sam*
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:35 pm: [report]

@coral: really? I wasn’t aware that all schools were doing that (now). I think that’s great considering how much of a burden they can become. Lucky for me, I got through undergrad on a scholarship while my parents were able to afford that last 25%... Grad school though, is going to be a *completely* different story!!

wonder_bread
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:38 pm: [report]

@ Gingee- well from what i know about Amative sexual intercourse it’s just a fancy way of saying arousal or sex based on attraction and stimuli…. and as i’ve stated even if sex is also used just to be intimate, you still can’t dispute the fact that the reproductive organs are indeed created/ used to reproduce.

whatever you tell yourself at night about the sex organs is your own business but to plainly state that the very facts they teach us and have proven are no longer true because you say so is just off.

retro chic
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:40 pm: [report]

Netty, everything will go fine. In addition to your great BF’s support, I hope you consider confiding in your bestie when you’re up to it. Journaling about it is good too, just to exorcise any unexpected feelings that pop up and need venting to someone/thing not involved. All the best…

wonder_bread
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:43 pm: [report]

@ Corla oh blieve me i totally agree with you i was just wondering why you thought males got the shorter end of the stick in having to learn to deal an unexpected child if the contraceptions don’t work.

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:43 pm: [report]

@Sam: it’s probably because of the economy and people not being able to afford their payments.

Coral
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 06:45 pm: [report]

@wonder_bread: Yeah, I understand.

joyy
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 07:21 pm: [report]

@*sam*/Coral/etc - I started college in 2003, long before the economy tanked, and federal loans required entrance/exit ‘interviews’ i.e. online mini-financial counseling.

marv3mania
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 07:30 pm: [report]

If I had a girlfriend who got pregnant, I would very much want her to talk to me about what she wants to do. I would also expect her to listen to what course of action I would like her to take. If we agree, great! If we don’t, I will certainly respect whichever decision she makes. However, I also think a disagreement over something so big would spell the end of the relationship.

Netty
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 08:27 pm: [report]

Thank you everyone! Kind words mean a lot.

fifi
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 09:22 pm: [report]

Women who think they should exclude men in these decisions, probably have never known any guy who rose to the occasion. I just feel sad for them, because they never had the chance to meet “quality guys”, who really do exist.

I think guys should know. Precisely because of what Jessica Wakeman said.

retro chic
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 09:48 pm: [report]

@marv3mania – re: “However, I also think a disagreement over something so big would spell the end of the relationship.”

Then, I believe that’s for the best. What better way than a crisis of sorts as the best litmus or editor to cut thru the bs or illusions of someone or the relationship? It’s better to know now, not later, if the two in question are fundamentally incompatible due to issues of character, religion, personality, etc, ie, what a relationship should have been based on in the first place.

I think, tho, your allusion to “disagreement” and “spell the end” makes me think it is more of a matter of loyalty to you or the value you place on joint decisions, even tho, really, it’s about including the man to have a say in the process, not to ultimately have a final vote. I would hope that statement is never used as a veiled threat to a GF in this position.

Gingee
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 09:58 pm: [report]

Marv3mania:  What you said, that you would expect this Girlfriend to listen to what course of action to take.

That if there was a disagreement over something so big, like the woman’s having the final veto over what happens to HER body, would be the end of the relationship:  Gee, how 1950s.

moonblossom
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 10:13 pm: [report]

I do not think that men have any say whatsoever in the decision to have an abortion. If the woman chooses to include him, that’s her choice. If not, also her choice. It is her body, her choice. Men can have a choice as soon as they get a uterus.

Men also SHOULD be financially responsible for pregnancy and children…whether they want the kid or not. If they are so concerned about their money then they shoudn’t be having sex. Women are told all the time to keep our legs together….well men can keep it in their pants!

I heard a quote once - not sure who said it. Most women are 1 man away from poverty. Its true. Men still earn more money and take WAY WAY WAY less responsibility for household chores and child care. Women overwhelmingly bear the cost of children - physically, mentally, financially, emotionally, socially. I have zero sympathy for the man who has to fork over a few hundred dollars in child support. Boo Hoo! Cry me a freakin’ river. And don’t forget to keep it in your pants next time!

fallonthecity
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 12:18 am: [report]

@moonblossom: That is so true.  Even though it’s easy for me to see the POV of someone who thinks a man should have the same opt-out choice as a woman…. Men should *fully* understand what they are getting into when they get down with a woman.  They should understand that they are taking risks, and that they cannot just walk away if they feel like it—and that the ultimate choice to carry/abort lies with the woman.  As much as I hate the abstinence line, it really is the only way you can be sure you’re not procreating.  Point: My best friend was born to a mother who was using *three* different kinds of BC.  It can happen.  No excuses.

To the point of the article: I think it’s legitimate to discuss the issue with a man… I definitely think I would discuss it with any potential contributors to my own potential pregnancies.  But no way would they get veto power over any decision I were to make.

marv3mania
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 05:18 am: [report]

@Gingee ... I personally think that a disagreement over whether or not to have a kid is too big a dealbreaker to allow a relationship to work. To me, agreement on that issue is necessary to a long-term relationship. If she wants an abortion and I want to keep the kid, I think her decision (which I fully support as HER decision) would really hurt me and therefore hurt us. If the situation was reversed, based on the type of woman I tend to date, I would expect her to NOT want an unwilling father to help raise her child. I would of course support her financially, but it’s really not fair to anyone if one parent is raising a child who he (or she) thought should have been aborted. So like I said, to me, a relationship would be unsustainable if this disagreement came up.

marv3mania
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 05:25 am: [report]

@retro chic ... I would never, ever threaten to end a relationship with someone if she didn’t make the decision I wanted her to make. This is something I would discuss with a girlfriend somewhat early in the relationship to gauge where we fall on the issue. If it did happen, it’s another thing we’d talk about to find out what we think would be best for us and, potentially, for the child. I merely said what I think my reaction would be if a girlfriend did get pregnant.

bogart4017
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 06:15 am: [report]

Accidents can and do occur. Either way a woman cannot and should not be forced to carry a baby to term that she does not want. We as men don’t have that right and for good reason. However it would be nice to let us know one way or the other one night stand or not.

Nefret
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 06:20 am: [report]

I think that discussion between partners about what to do is important but the final say has to be the woman’s and if there’s a disagreement about what to do, her vote wins. I take every possible precaution, but I also know that there’s always the possibility of birth control failure (even simultaneous failure of multiple methods - you’re just decreasing your odds, not eliminating them entirely) and that if that happens, I’ll have a decision to make which in the end I will have to live with regardless of the support I receive. Even if my man has the best intentions of stepping up and supporting my decision either way emotionally, financially, or in any other way, there’s no guarantee that that’s what will happen - to take the most extreme example, he could be run over by a bus before any provisions are finalized. So if I’m ever in the position to have to decide about an unintended pregnancy, I will certainly be taking my partner’s position into consideration but the final question comes down to “If I have to do it 100% on my own, what can I handle?”...it’s nothing agaist my partner or any reflection of trust in him, it’s just simple reality that no matter what anyone else would *want* to do, in the end the buck stops with me and I have to make a decision I can live with.

lawyrgrl
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 07:43 am: [report]

I accidentally became pregnant following a “fling” relationship when I was in my early 20’s.  I had no intention of continuing the pregnancy regardless of anything he could have or would have said on the subject.  Why should I have added stress to an already stressful situation by including him?  Perhaps he would have been supportive but perhaps not.  Not worth the risk, in my humble opinion.  I turned to friends that I knew I could count on and dealt with the abortion on my own terms.

And to Netty - I hope that everything went smoothly for you.  You have a great deal of life ahead of you and many wonderful things to look forward to.  Sadness may come at unexpected times but always remember that you made the right decision for yourself at the time you had to make it.  I admire your strength.  And kudos to your boyfriend - he is truly a man, not a boy.

jld117
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 08:01 am: [report]

Netty, I know you will just be fine today. Don’t be scared. We all know what is right for us. Keep your head straight, and your heart will follow.

jimnist10
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 08:14 am: [report]

@bellarose: Of course I know women who have had to go through deciding what to do with an unwanted pregnancy! Just because I don’t think a man should “get away” with not being AT LEAST financially responsible for the result of a one night stand REGARDLESS of how much contraception is used, does not mean that I don’t understand that contraception occasionally fails. MY POINT was that a the man ultimately has ZERO say in whether a woman gets an abortion and he has little choice in being involved at LEAST FINANCIALLY if the woman decides that what she wants/needs.

So bellarose, you can point the finger at me and Coral and tell us that we need to experience, what exactly? getting accidentally pregnant? getting an abortion?, but I don’t need either experience to KNOW what I would do. Your accusation indicates that you seem to think that just because I have articulated a pretty clear idea of what I would do with an unwanted pregnancy, that I somehow think it’s “easy” to execute my “plan”.  Every sexually active person should contemplate HE OR SHE would do if by chance negative consequences happened from being sexually active, whether in a relationship OR from a one-night stand/casual sex. Understanding responsibility and consequences and your choices is IMO part of having sex. It’s NOT easy, it’s reality.  I’m still going to stick with my assertion that “so many problems would be solved” if people went out and bought condoms and got regulary checked for STD’s. Saying that people should keep it in their pants if they’re not going to be RESPONSIBLE, doesn’t mean I don’t understand that accidents happen.

We can have all the ethical debates we want, but in the end, it really is up to the woman whether to have an abortion and tell the guy, regardless of his relationship to her.  I mean, isn’t that what we all have kind of agreed on here?

bellarose
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 09:18 am: [report]

@jimnist10 : This is not a fire evacuation. Life doesn’t always play out in a way you “plan” in the best or worst circumstances; and you can say you will do this or do that when this or that happens but you never will know until something happens. And if nothing ever happens you will never know how you would react. I’m not saying you are necissarily wrong to think this is what you do, all I was asking is if you’ve ever had this experience. Life is all about having experiences, otherwise *some people* may see your arguments as empty.

“but I don’t need either experience to KNOW what I would do.” We all need experiences to determine what we would do, and plans in life fail or change most of the time, am I right? How many of us can truely say that our life has turned out how we planned.

That was the point of my comment.

I do agree that both parties should know, understand and accept the responsibilities of having sex. So I agree with you there, and if someone is not ready to take on those responsibilities they shouldn’t be having sex.

Also -

“he has little choice in being involved at LEAST FINANCIALLY if the woman decides that what she wants/needs.” He does have a choice. We all can make choices regarding our actions. And in my opinion if a girl does get pregnant from a one night stand/uncommitable guy she needs to be ready to take on the responsibility alone and if she is not, take a different course of action.

We all have to make choices and it’s hard to say what choice you would make before the circumstance is presented in front of you.

Gingee
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 09:37 am: [report]

To MARV3MANIA:

Absolutely, but you get that issue settled immediately.

If you know that one day you might want kids, date only gals who share the same view. 

For us Childfree by Choice sorts, malese who want to one day be a father are TBA. To Be Avoided.

LayD
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 10:04 am: [report]

I think it is natural that an abortion could make or break a relationship, of course you should discuss children early on and be in a long term relationship with one who shares your views on children and an unplanned preganancy, but if an accident does happen, especially early on in a relationship and one person wants the abortion and the other doesn’t and it happens, or vice versa, I could see why things wouldn’t work out. Of course the relationship probably wouldn’t have worked out anyway.  Also, both people may want children, but just not yet for whatever reason.  People do get abortions and then go on to have children later, so just because both people in the couple do want children, if they accidently get preganant and the woman decides she isn’t ready for it yet and aborts it and the man doesn’t like the decision and decides he wants out of the relationship, I think it is fair, it happens.

(I don’t remember who said it and there are too many comments for me to find it right now) It was mentioned above that one woman told the guy she was pregnant and he questioned if she was telling the truth.  Another woman said that all she wanted was for the man to one day meet the child without ever supporting it and he refused.  I strongly belive that men do need to take some responsibility, naturally a pregancy and child raising become the burden of the woman, but they should share some of it.  I know crazy women do lie about being pregnant and try to dupe their man, but I think it is rare and to find out you are pregnant is stressful enough, it is cruel to accuse her of lying.  It may not be fair for a woman to have the child after the man states he doesn’t want it, but I think the least he could do is one day meet the child.  He did just as much to create it as she did.

Women carry a bigger burden than men because we have a uterus.  I don’t think men will ever fully understand what we have to deal with, the stress, the responsibility, not to mention what are bodies go through every month in addition to what happens to our bosies during the preganancy.  I strongly feel that men need to be supportive in any way in this kind of circumstance and I do think it is important for them to be included in the discussion of the ultimate decision.

jimnist10
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 10:21 am: [report]

@bellarose: So you’re arguing that in order to have an informed opinion, you need to experience something first? Really? Think about that one for 5 minutes. I hope you realize that people would have very little to talk about if their opinions and thoughts on a subject or situation were only valuable if they themselves actually “experienced” it first. And experience does not always an informed opinion make.

And my life hasn’t turned out “as planned”. BUT with regards to abortion and telling the guy, I at least have a pretty good notion of what I would do in that situation AND again, my choice would not be an easy one (because it’s NEVER easy in that situation) AND having a plan doens’t mean I can’t change it if the “experience” presented itself.

“We all can make choices regarding our actions. And in my opinion if a girl does get pregnant from a one night stand/uncommitable guy she needs to be ready to take on the responsibility alone and if she is not, take a different course of action. ” So basically, if a woman gets pregnant from a one night stand and she decideds keep the kid, she needs to deal with the emotional and financial burden of raising a child alone? Basically, you’re absolving the guy of all responsibility? Well, he can sign away his parental rights OR if he won’t “man-up”, that’s when the courts get involved and his wages get garnished for child support.

Molly Jean
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 10:21 am: [report]

Fascinating post & comments!  So, not to sound all preachy, but this is precisely why I haven’t had a 1-night-stand in ages.  If I don’t value a man’s opinion on something so huge & life-altering, something that he is a part of (whether we like it or not), then I don’t value him enough to let him go inside me.  Period.  I don’t ever want to have to face such a huge decision without hearing my partner’s opinion.

With that said, I am, & will always be, pro-choice.  I’ve just had too many friends that have had to grapple with this choice.

Good luck Netty, I’ll be thinking about you today!

bellarose
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 11:08 am: [report]

@jimnist10 : I was responding to the fact that you said you had this plan and just stating the fact that it can change if the actual experience presented itself. All I did was ask if you had actually had this experience? I wasn’t saying you cannot have an opinion/plan, of course you and everyone else in the world can and you’re right if we only talked about our experiences there would be limited conversations.

But, yes I do believe that if a girl gets pregnant from a one night stand/uncommitable guy and she talks to him, or doesn’t talk to him, to realize that he is not going to come through to support the child or her, she needs to take responsibility for that. She can choose not to have the child and she better figure it out before it’s too late what she wants to do. You cannot force someone else to take responsibility just because you are.

I’m not absolving the guys responsibility, he is. A woman cannot beg a guy to support her when she ultimatly is the one making the decision about the baby she is carrying. So case being that (in my opinion and from my experience) if she is carrying the child of a man that will not be there for her financially or emotionally either accept that responsibility, be a strong independent, single mother; have the child and put it up for adoption; or abort it.

Life has taught us that not everyone is on the same page, intelligence level, or commitability level as we may be and you cannot change a person to become anything they are not. Why would you rely on a loser guy to support you and your child anyways?

I don’t want to have a child with anyone except for the one man I know is commited to me and I am in love with. I wouldn’t but a financial and emotional burden on myself for a guy I hooked up with once; and I wouldn’t want to put that financial and emotional burden on him either because he is not worth it and I don’t want him in my life for the next 18 years.

BlueVibe
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 11:33 am: [report]

Sorry—sex on the *third* date??

Now I feel really old-fashioned.  I can’t imagine sleeping with somebody that I didn’t know that well, even if we were friends first.  If I didn’t know him well enough to know how he’d react if I did accidentally get pregnant, or I wasn’t comfortable *insisting* that he use a condom, there is no way I’d sleep with him, even with serious birth control.  (Yes, that means I don’t do one-night stands, either.)

Sorry, I don’t see how anyone can make the case that a woman shouldn’t have to tell the man, or give him a say, and then say the man should have to pay up whether he wanted the kid or not.  Obviously, I think people ought not to do absurd things like have un- or under-protected sex if they don’t want kids, but the guy is half the game.  If he can’t force her to be a mother, she shouldn’t be able to force him to be a father.  Yes, women bear a heavier physical burden—more reason for us to stand up for ourselves when it comes to the pill and condom use.

Molly Jean
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 11:42 am: [report]

@BlueVibe: I agree with everything you said EXCEPT that a man shouldn’t have to pay up.  Uh, yeah, he should (I’m assuming you mean take financial responsibility should a child be born) - he sort of agreed to that when he had sex.  Sometimes sex results in pregnancy, a risk both man & woman take.  Both should be expected to pay the consequences (regardless of whether 1 is ‘given a say’).

pragmatryst
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 12:46 pm: [report]

@joyy: you do realize that birth control, even when used correctly, does fail sometimes, right?

Unfortunate, but irrelevant. I am 100% pro-choice but there are way too many unplanned/unwanted pregnancies, especially among young adults and teenagers who are the least prepared to deal with the consequences.  The decision of whether to keep the baby or not should exclusively belong to the woman, “her body, her choice” is gospel.  However, the man should definitely be informed.  In fact, he should be given written notice of either:
A) His obligation to pay child support for the next 18 years
OR
B) His obligation to pay for an abortion.
Option B should be court mandated just like Option A along with the ability to garnish wages if necessary.  If the guy has reason to doubt he is the father, he and his former paramour should both have to fork over the full cost for a paternity test which will be put in an escrow account.  If he isn’t the baby daddy he gets his money back otherwise it’s on to Options A or B.

It takes two to tango, but men don’t have to go through pregnancy and you can’t force them to be in a child’s life, so they should bear responsibility in the one way that is certain to grab their attention—money.  Guys need to learn that you don’t f*ck around when it comes to sex (pun intended).  Actions have consequences so plan accordingly.

joyy
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 12:58 pm: [report]

@pragmatryst - my sentiment *is* relevant when someone’s response to an abortion discussion falls immediately back to “but just use a condom!!!likeomg!”

pragmatryst
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 01:37 pm: [report]

@joyy: I’m not trying to be flippant or dismissive.  In a conversation about unwanted pregnancy the fact that birth control failed has no bearing on the man’s role (or lack thereof) in deciding whether to terminate the pregnancy.  Your original response was to Coral and I don’t agree with her first post that a man should have a say in the abortion decision, but I do agree that the man DOES have a say in how to guard against an unwanted pregnancy.  If he and his partner together decided on a particular form of birth control and it didn’t work, it’s now out of his hands.  If he elected not to use birth control even though it so easy to get (Coral’s point about condom availability) then he failed to assert his influence when he had the chance.

Gingee
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 02:14 pm: [report]

About the original post:  The father, sex partner, one night stand, whatever term is used, if there is a pregnancy and the gal decides to gestate to full term, the man ABSOLUTELY must open that wallet.

The the male may not want to become a father is what this gal would file under the Gee, Tough File.

Men who don’t want to be in that situation have alternatives:  Vasectomy, or sexual intercourse with one who is not and never will be fecund.

metricula
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 03:53 pm: [report]

My boyfriend and I already decided that if we have an accidental pregnancy we will make the decision to keep, abort, or adopt together and shoulder the costs together.

tishfish44
wrote on July 18 2009 @ 11:58 am: [report]

I am pro-choice for men and women.  No one should be forced into parenthood, and those that are forced are often terrible parents.  If men do not want to be parents, they should not have to be forced to pay child support but consequently the “child” will never be “born” for them- the father would not know his child’s name, whether the child was born, the gender, the health, nothing, as if the child did not exist.  A man should also be able to voice his opinion if his wife/girlfriend’s life was at risk due to a pregnancy but she did not want to terminate the pregnancy.  I’m not saying he should be the ultimate decider, but he should at least have a say in the matter at that point.  For the sake of the potential child, both parents should have an opinion and should be ready to be loving and very present parents.

Little Lamb
wrote on July 18 2009 @ 04:28 pm: [report]

The thing is, women have to live with it either way.  Although I’ve never had one, I can only imagine that an abortion leaves you with thoughts (and probably a few haunts every now and then) for the rest of your life.  I highly doubt the same happens for a man if his gf, hook-up, or whatever has an abortion.

I believe the way it is now is the best we can do.  I often tell my students “What is fair isn’t always equal” and vice versa.

Jennifer Reding
wrote on July 18 2009 @ 04:40 pm: [report]

Coral—I want to tell you a little story about a good friend of mine.  She got pregnant 3 times on 3 different types of birth control—first, condoms; second, the pill; third, an IUD.  She was married at the time and they decided to keep the three children.  She says she had more sex WHILE pregnant than while not pregnant the first few years of her marriage.  She finally made her husband get a vasectomy and then wouldn’t let him touch her until tests proved he was shooting blanks.

I am currently in a LTR and have cycled through three types of birth control and haven’t been able to tolerate any of them.  We are using condoms at the moment, but hate them and I wish he would just get a vasectomy and get it over with.  Both of us are older and neither of us wants children, so I am having trouble understanding his reluctance.  Maybe we are just lucky, but I haven’t gotten pregnant yet.

I’m just saying that not everything is as simple as your overly simple world view insists it is.  I don’t think it’s at all reasonable to expect anyone to always use two types of birth control, especially since one of them would probably be a condom.  If he would get a vasectomy or I could use something like the pill without getting sick, I would jettison them in a hot second.  I don’t like them any more than he does.  I can’t imagine being forced to use them for the remainder of the relationship.

Gingee
wrote on July 18 2009 @ 07:22 pm: [report]

Been there twice.  This gal knew, way before ever having sex, that even thinking of pregnancy was revolting.  I was determined to never go through that.

My contraception failed. No biggie, use what works. My abortions did what the contracepting failed to do:  They worked.

Never have regretted them, if necessary would have another one in a New York minute.  My legal and safe abortions were a blessing for my husband and me.

Coral
wrote on July 18 2009 @ 08:50 pm: [report]

@Jennifer Reding: Well obviously it’s not hard for a woman to get pregnant when only on one type of birth control..I have seen it happen to too many people..so why is 2 birth controls unreasonable? It’s actually the responsible thing to do—unless one is fine with having an accidental baby at any give time. There are plenty of options for birth control (including permanent ones as you mentioned). After searching through and trying a lot of options, I used the Depo Provera shot and condoms (and it’s not like I have to remember to take a pill everyday). There are really only two options to prevent an unwanted pregnancy at the wrong time—abstinence and using 2 forms of birth control..and there are many medicines doctors won’t prescribe unless you are on at least 2 forms because of the high risks of health problems to a possible fetus (which shows that many times one form of birth control is just not enough).

Of course there are a lot of things to consider when choosing birth control because of the hormones associated with them. But there are options, and it is always better to be extra prepared than to deal with a child for the rest of your life that can cause a lot of financial and emotional burdens.

Jessie
wrote on July 21 2009 @ 11:27 am: [report]

My boyfriend got a woman pregnant when he was 18 years old. They were in an on-again, off-again relationship. She offered to give the baby up for adoption or have an abortion, but he wanted to get married instead. Their marriage lasted 10 years, but they have an amazing little boy together. Knowing how he handled that situation was one of the reasons I got involved with him. I am personally pro-life and know that if I were to get pregnant, I would be keeping the baby. I figured he
would be more likely to support me and be an involved father. And when we did have the “what if” conversation, I asked him, “How would *you* feel if I got pregnant?” His response: “I’d be happy for us.” If he had in any way suggested he’d expect me to have an abortion or simply walk away, no strings attached, that would have been a big clue that we were not compatible.

But damn, I still take those birth control pills at the same time every single day.

Symian
wrote on July 21 2009 @ 12:50 pm: [report]

I’m going to agree with Phil here.  No man has a right to tell a woman what to do with her body.  I personally don’t believe in abortion, but I understand why women turn to it.  However, whatever decision a woman makes about an unplanned pregnancy should involve both parties discussing what they would like to happen.  If a woman chooses abortion and the man is against it, she should be able to understand that the gravity of the situation may push the man away and he will not offer any sort of support.  OR if she decides to keep the pregnancy and he doesn’t want to, she should be prepared for the financially difficult yet emotionally rewarding experience of single-parenthood that awaits her.

In a perfect world people would both want to be parents to this new life and be supportive of each other, but this isn’t a perfect world and we have to make difficult decisions.  It’s unfair that some women want complete control over this type of situation yet expect the other party to be supportive because whatever it is you do, it will probably impact the lives of both people, but still she’ll have to physically bear the burden of her choice either way.

skywalk
wrote on July 22 2009 @ 11:15 am: [report]

I’ve both had an abortion and had a planned baby and I feel that it is the woman’s right to choose.  As it has been stated either way it is the woman’s body.  That said I do think if the man gets a woman pregnant and doesn’t want the baby he should have the right to sign away his rights.  But I do not like the fact that a man has NO say as to whether he has a baby or not.  He can’t make a women carry it and shouldn’t be able to but I don’t believe he should be made to be a father or financially support a child he didn’t bargain for because birth control is a two way street.  That is a huge financial hardship and I don’t want to hear oh if he lays down with a women and she gets pregnant (whether he used birth control or not) he needs to be financial responsible if the woman wants to keep the baby.  If the shoe was on the other foot these women would not be saying the same thing.  Yeah I know firsthand how hard mother hood is but it was MY CHOOSE and my husband’s so we are up to the challange even though we divorced years ago we still raise her as we would if we were together because we both chose to have (planned) her together.  She is happy and well adjusted because she has two parents who love and support her with no qualms, children shouldn’t be forced onto anyone it doesn’t do anyone involved any good.  By the way I think the cost of an abortion should be at least 50/50.

Green_Juniper
wrote on July 24 2009 @ 09:10 pm: [report]

I’ve accidentally become pregnant twice. When I was 20, I was very idealistic and, having become pregnant while shirking birth control, I felt compelled to give my child up for adoption. My partner and I discussed this and made an informed decision. His discomfort through my pregnancy was palpable, though he did his very best to be supportive and encouraging. At 20 years old, he understood that I had all of the power in that decision making process, and it made him feel vulnerable. As we know, a lack of power can be traumatic, whether it is happening to a man or a woman. I cared about his feelings (as one would expect in a relationship) and did my best to reassure him that I would not have a hospital room change of plans (many told us I would). We found a wonderful family for our child, and they received him within minutes of his birth. My relationship with my partner ended amicably a year and a half later.
I was 23 the second time I became pregnant. I was using birth control, and it failed. I was in a fairly new relationship, and my partner was adamant about not having children. He had made his wishes clear to me numerous times (before the pregnancy). When I became pregnant, I checked in with him and we agreed on an abortion, which he helped to pay for. He remained supportive throughout, as well.
I have no regrets about either decision.
Currently, I live with a man who has a child from a very casual hook-up. He has done much to overcome his bitterness and sense of powerlessness regarding his child. After years, he’s come to love his child. I have learned this, however - it is painful for all (the mother, the child, the father) to have a child without some sort of agreement. When a woman chooses to have a child against the father’s wishes and then calls upon Child Support Enforcement to makes him pay for 18 years, it seems to cause much more harm than good. The child support system is not intended for the health and well being of mothers and children. It is the shifting of blame from “welfare mothers” to “deadbeat dads” and, for the most part, it’s based on lies and treats non-custodial parents as criminals. The system is steeped in the rhetoric of politicians who sought to unburden taxpayers from paying into a system that took care of vulnerable children and families since the Depression. (As a social worker, I wholly reject PRWORA (1996) as necessarily oppressive and a failure.)
While I would love to simplify this issue into “her body, her choice”, there are many experiences at stake here. Simply dismissing the experience of fathers is destructive and dangerous. Without agreement, all three suffer. There are no easy answers. We can educate about pregnancy prevention. We can encourage each other to be mindful about our our wants, our choices, and our decisions. But, it seems, one of the best ways to deal with this question is to remain compassionate and open to the experiences of those involved. There are no formulas to apply. As much as we want to simplify the matter, it isn’t possible. So I would hope that, as a society, we would work toward education, a healthier understanding and relationship with sex, and the idea people’s experiences are complex. Unplanned pregnancies are much less painful, overall, when we can remain and communicate openly and compassionately with ourselves and our co-parent.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 10:59 am: [report]

you mean, “Should a man have a say in what a woman does with their child’s life?”

of course he should. both of their DNA and actions went into making this child. and it isn’t just a simple decision; it is a child with a heartbeat, nervous system, and detectable brain waves.

a man should not be able to pressure a woman into having an abortion, thus damaging her emotionally, nor should she make the choice to end the child’s life without consideration for the father’s feelings. it is a life(and a woman’s self-respect) hanging in the balance.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:15 am: [report]

@greenbird321, yeah, because nothing says “self respect” like allowing someone else to force you to carry a pregnancy you don’t want.  Jeez.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:18 am: [report]

nothing shows a lack of self-respect like ending the life of another human out of base convenience.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:27 am: [report]

I’d ask you to explain what that has to do with self-respect, but I know that’s not possible, so I won’t ask you to over exert yourself.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:35 am: [report]

I know it’s impossible to reverse the brainwashing that many women have undergone, unfortunately, but as a strong pro-life feminist, I feel I must attempt to explain: a woman who respects herself and her body and humanity in general would never undergo a procedure to end her own child’s life unless a real crisis necessitated it.

to anyone with a shred of rationality, the fact that the Unborn Victims of Violence Act exists is testimony to the sick absurdity of legal, widespread abortion in cases other than crisis(i.e incest, rape, danger to the mother’s life).

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:40 am: [report]

If by “pro-life” you mean “anti-choice,” then you’re definitely not a feminist and you owe the feminist community an apology for misappropriation of the term. 

A woman has the right to self-determination.  Additionally, if she doesn’t not wish to risk her life to carry an unwanted pregnancy, then she has the most basic human right of self preservation.  That is the ultimate act of self respect.  Allowing one’s self to be forced to do something against one’s will is tantamount to slavery.  I doubt you’d argue that any other form of forced slavery is self respect, would you?  Of course not.

*sam*
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:41 am: [report]

@greenbird: I’m with Alexa, how in any way does this have to do with self-respect?

“nothing shows a lack of self-respect like ending the life of another human out of base convenience.” wow, really? I’m all for having your own opinions a/b whether or not YOU would ever have an abortion, but to imply that making that *incredibly* important decision reflects upon one’s self-respect, is just, stupid. sorry.

However, I do agree with the importance of at least discussing the decision with the father (in *most* cases anyway). You’re right, it is also his (potential) child, and he should therefore have a right in the decision making process. but, in the end, I think the woman should get the final say—not b/c the man is somehow less important, but b/c it is in fact *her* body and *her* life that it will undoubtedly have the greatest impact on.

*sam*
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:44 am: [report]

oh, and I don’t consider the Pro-Choice movement to be “brainwashing”—at least not anymore than organized religion, which, BTW, is where most Pro-Lifers lay their claims and get a majority of their financial backing.

@Alexa: THANK YOU!! :D

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:46 am: [report]

alexa, no—I’m definitely not anti-choice. women have the choice to use birth control. and if that fails, they have the choice to keep the child or seek other options(such as open adoption—a very feasible and wonderful thing for all parties involved).

abortion is tantamount to choosing which human beings’ lives are worthy or worthless.

sam—I’ll refer you to my previous comment.

PinkRanger
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:47 am: [report]

@Alexa: Being pro-life does not exclude you from feminism. It can simply mean that she has a very different core belief about pregancy and life in general. I am pro-choice, but I would never discredit amazing women I have known that happen to be pro-life *inlcuding a woman who spent 4 years in South Africa building and teaching at schools for young women that never would have had that oppourtunity if not for her. She is pro-life. Is she suddenly not a feminist?*

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:51 am: [report]

oh, and about your last comment, Sam—many, if not most Pro-Lifers lay their claims on scientific facts, such as:

*a child’s heart starts beating at 21 days in the womb.
*the child in utero’s central nervous system begins developing within the 3rd week.
*the child has detectable brain waves by 6 weeks.

those are all solid facts that determine how I feel about abortion. I have no problem with b/c and the morning-after pill.

another thing many Pro-Life Feminists(such as myself) base their opinions upon: the words of the very first, foremost feminists, such as Stanton and Anthony. those women were intelligent and independent-minded enough to realize that a woman who respects herself would never end the life of her child.

*sam*
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:53 am: [report]

@greenbird: yeah, when I typed that up, your other comment wasn’t posted yet… but that being said, I disagree with your argument. but then again, I’m fiercely pro-choice, so, that’s pretty expected.

and I still think your ‘brainwashing’ comment was pretty harsh.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:53 am: [report]

@PinkRange, if you are anti-choice (which is what the vast majority of people mean when they say “pro-life”), then you advocate denying women the right to self determination, which is one of the fundamental tenets of what feminism is all about.  You cannot be anti-choice AND a feminist (not legitimately, anyway).  Period.

@greenbird, I guess it didn’t occur to you that BC fails sometimes?  And your comment “abortion is tantamount to choosing which human beings’ lives are worthy or worthless” is right on.  If someone is threatening my existence (i.e., through a pregnancy), then I certainly have the right to self defense.

PinkRanger
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:56 am: [report]

@Alexa, we’ll just have to disagree on that one. Most pro-lifers do not refer to themselves as anti-choice for a reason. To them it’s not about denying choice, it’s that the fetus is already a child. I realize that that is not how most anti-aboriotnists feel, but I think it’s a difference in opinion.

God, I can’t believe I"m defending pro-lifers…...but seriously demonizing each other leads to bad things.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:57 am: [report]

Alexa, if you’d actually take the time to read my comments, I addressed the b/c issue, and I have no problem with abortion in cases of crisis(such as the mother’s life being endangered).

and about your comment to PinkRanger, “then you advocate denying women the right to self determination”. any woman who advocates denying someone else(including millions of female babies—potential women) the right to life cannot call herself a feminist, honestly.

*sam*
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:57 am: [report]

greenbird: yes, I know the movement uses scientific info—it’s used to justify *when* life begins, and if life begins at conception, or 21 days, or w/e, then abortion is ‘wrong’ or ‘immoral’—and *that* is usually based upon religious ideals.

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:57 am: [report]

@greenbird - yes, but a lot of times when pro-lifers advocate for (and get) anti-abortion laws passed, two problems occur:

a) they push their own choice on other women (not very feminist)
b) they create barriers for the women who are unfortunate enough to have to make the choice between getting an abortion and losing their own lives

I know your original comment was towards women who choose to terminate a pregnancy out of ‘base convenience’ ... but you can’t really know what is in the heart and mind of anyone making that choice.

I am now curious enough to ask: do you feel your pro-life views should be legislated onto the rest of us, or are you simply stating your own personal opinion?  The terms pro-choice/pro-life make it difficult to easily tell if someone is actually anti-choice, which you say you aren’t.

lawyrgrl
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:58 am: [report]

@greenbird321 - A womans’ choices do not end with a failure of birthcontrol.  There is no requirement that a pregnancy be carried to term.  Period.  A woman can choose abortion for any one of hundreds of reasons and that is no one’s business but her own. 

If you view abortion as choosing which “life” is more important (although I disagree that the pregnancy should be termed a “life”) then that is your right.  Viewed that way, the life of the person presently in existence trumps the one that is only a potentiality.  All the theorizing in the world does not change that.  You have no say in what anyone other than yourself does with their own body.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:59 am: [report]

@PinkRanger, I wasn’t “demonizing” her.  I believe everyone has the right to believe as they wish, so long as they don’t impost their beliefs on everyone else (which is what most anti-choicers wish to do).  But I’m not going to allow an anti-choicer to co-opt the true meaning of the term “feminist.”  The feminist movement has never, NEVER been about forced pregnancy.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:59 am: [report]

Sam, read the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.

it’s not about religious ideals, or morals, anymore than condemning the murder of a child outside the uterus is a ‘moral’ argument.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:03 pm: [report]

“it’s not about religious ideals, or morals, anymore than condemning the murder of a child outside the uterus is a ‘moral’ argument. “

Except that a child “outside the uterus” is an independent, living being and is not living off my body.  I am under no moral obligation to allow someone else to live off my body?

Greenbird, it is technically possible to allow someone who’s having kidney failure to attach tubes to someone else’s body in order to live, against that person’s will.  Would you be in favor of that kind of concept?

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:03 pm: [report]

do we have the right to tell a mother she can’t smother her child once it’s born? do we have the right to tell a parent not to end the life of their severely disabled child(at any age of their life)? after all, it’s inconvenient for the parent to be burdened. which lives are worthy? when is a person a ‘person’?

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:05 pm: [report]

Alexa, first of all, a child outside the womb cannot live independently.

secondly, I’ve heard that straw-man kidney argument before. nice try, not anywhere near the same thing.

PinkRanger
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:05 pm: [report]

I feel the term “feminist” can be more fluid than that. There are disagreements and debates within feminism now, and I feel that that is very healthy *as long as it isn’t hostile of course* but that feminism can still be used as an umbrella term to refer to a rejection of traditional gender roles, which you are free to define as you wish. But everyone usually has their own personal definition of feminsim, which is fine too.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:06 pm: [report]

Nothing like using a straw argument to try to support your position, eh, greenbird?  lol

*sam*
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:07 pm: [report]

Greenbird, that still entails that a fetus is a life, and therefore has the entitlement to basic human rights. and personally, I feel that a fetus is not a life—only a mere **potential** for life.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:07 pm: [report]

LOL except for the fact that my examples are so closely related to the issue at hand.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:10 pm: [report]

Greenbird, it’s hardly a straw argument.  You folks purport to be “pro-life,” yet when other situations other than forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies arise, you ignore it, conveniently.  If you’re pro-life, how can you not defend the forcing of one person to save another person’s life through forced organ donation, for example?

You can’t, of course, but I sure do enjoy seeing you guys try.  lol Hypocrisy’s never been a problem for you.

“a child outside the womb cannot live independently.”  Of course it is.  The fact that it has to be fed doesn’t mean that it isn’t living independently.  It’s not deriving life from another person’s body, is it?  Of course not.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:15 pm: [report]

Sam—how can you think that unique human DNA, a heartbeat, a CNS, and detectable brain waves do not constitute a human life? I’m honestly curious.

Alexa—other situations like what? why would I advocate forcing someone to save another person’s life by donating an organ? you don’t lose any organs by giving birth to a child.

a child outside the womb needs care and attention to survive.

lawyrgrl
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:16 pm: [report]

@Alexa - Totally agree.  A feminist supports choice in all ways and under all circumstances for women.  Anyone who supports closing off an avenue of choice for women in favor of the “rights” of a being not even in existence yet is not a true feminist, IMHO.

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:21 pm: [report]

@lawyrgrl - great breakdown, though I do feel that’s a bit harsh towards people who identify as pro-life because that’s the choice they would make/have made, since not all pro-life women actually believe in, as you say, closing off an avenue of choice for women.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:21 pm: [report]

lawyrgrl—a feminist does not compromise her morals and her logic in favor of blind approval of ‘choice in all ways and under all circumstances’. a true feminist respects herself and all women too much to do that.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:23 pm: [report]

lawyrgrl—a feminist does not compromise her morals and her logic in favor of blind approval of ‘choice in all ways and under all circumstances’. a true feminist respects herself and all women too much to do that.

*sam*
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:25 pm: [report]

Greenbird: I think that regardless of what makes up a fetus, I think that the qualifications for person hood (which I interchange for ‘life’, which may not be the best or most correct way to do it), depends upon whether the mother and/or father have given it that quality. For example, when I had an abortion at 18, I did not consider the fetus a ‘person’ and therefore, any arguments relating my abortion to murder, or anything of that sort, did not concern me. (not that they weren’t hurtful, but, I just didn’t accept their logic b/c I never attributed those characteristics to that fetus). However, when my sister became pregnant, they attributed the qualifications for person hood to their fetus, as soon as she found out. They called (her) “peanut” and consistently considered her a valued member of the family.

does that make sense?

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:30 pm: [report]

well, Sam, life and personhood are two seperate things, whether one chooses to acknowledge that or not. here in America, we are all guaranteed our ‘right to life’. I do understand what you meant, but *logically*, the legality of widespread abortion makes no sense, especially when you consider the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:35 pm: [report]

It’s incredibly ironic that you keep bringing up the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.  It exists specifically to keep someone from taking the life of a fetus while it is in the mother’s body.  In other words, it could be used to prevent the guy from forcibly aborting it against the mother’s will.  It also specifically excludes a woman wishing to terminate her own pregnancy, by the way.  There’s nothing illogical about that whatsoever.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:39 pm: [report]

Alexa—nothing illogical that there is a clause excluding abortion from the 38 violent acts covered by that law? you find nothing illogical about the fact that a child in utero is protected from violence…unless the mother condones the violence done to the child?

wow. you leave me speechless. your head must be buried 6 feet underground, love.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:45 pm: [report]

off to take a bath; more later, I suppose, though I’m sure we’ll eventually have to agree to disagree.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:45 pm: [report]

I suppose that’s better than having it buried up my ass. 

I’m guessing you’ve ignored all of us posting about the mother having the right to determine for herself if she wishes to be pregnant?  She’s the only one who can decide if she wants to carry a child to term (not the government, not YOU, not me).  If she wishes to terminate her own pregnancy, whether *you* consider that an act of violence or not, she can do so.  The SCOTUS has decided that that is a fundamental right in this country.  Get over it and move on with your life, and allow the rest of us to make our own decisions, okay?

lawyrgrl
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:50 pm: [report]

@greenbird - A feminist does not impose her morals on others!!!!!

*sam*
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 12:55 pm: [report]

Greenbird, I just looked up the UVVA, and it explicitly does not include cases of abortion, and IMHO does not really have a place in the argument for (or against) abortion. Moreover, while I’m certainly not familiar with the ways in which laws are applied, my argument would still hold. Namely, that if, say, I were assaulted during the brief time that I was pregnant, and it caused a miscarriage, I do not feel as though I would have the obligation (or right, honestly) to press charges based upon UVVA d/t the fact that I myself, did not consider that fetus a person. Moreover, I would not support a lawyer in my defense that insisted on adding the charges b/c *they* did.

It is my understanding that UVVA was signed into law in order to address the concerns of mothers and families of those who lost an unborn child d/t violence—NOT abortion, and therefore only considers those who considered *their* fetus a person and therefore had the ‘right to life.’

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 01:41 pm: [report]

Alexa—I was being nice by saying ‘buried in the ground’
and yes, the mother does have the right(according to the law) to end her child’s life. it is unfortunate, but we also saw acts of violence legalized and condoned during the Nazi regime.

Sam—“those who lost an unborn child d/t violence—NOT abortion”...abortion is just one of many acts of violence against the child in utero; see my comment about the illogicality of abortion in the face of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. why should it matter WHO decides that it’s okay to harm the child—the mother, or some third party w/o the mother’s permission. the end results are the same. it’s farcical.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 01:49 pm: [report]

lawyrgirl—by that ‘reasoning’, feminists who speak out against wife-beaters have no right to do so. I mean, imposing their morals on those men who can do whatever they choose to their wives, right?

brandyalexander
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 02:08 pm: [report]

In regards to the original question, I think its best for people who have sex to talk about this upfront before they get intimate.  If you are pro-life and your partner would never want a child, or you aren’t ready for children but your partner would never want you to abort, maybe you aren’t such a good match. 
Not that I’ve ever had such a conversation, so I’m certainly not tearing down anyone who finds themselves in such a dilemma, but this seems like it would be a wise rule for all of us to follow in the future.  That way, if there is an accidental pregnancy, at least you know beforehand what you are going to be dealing with, theoretically.

*sam*
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 02:20 pm: [report]

Greenbird, your argument that abortion is violence doesn’t really apply here. UVVA specifically, does not apply to abortion, and to claim otherwise, is a direct misinterpretation, and unwarranted.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 02:28 pm: [report]

just because people have chosen to be willfully ignorant to the fact that abortion is violence against an unborn child, does not make it any less true. it’s as if someone convinces themselves that the sky is red. you may not be able to unshake that notion, but it won’t make that person any more correct.

*sam*
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 02:44 pm: [report]

I wouldn’t call that a ‘fact’ but an opinion, and the fact still remains that it’s not a part of UVVA and therefore your arguments using it, aren’t really valid.

GreenAura
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 02:50 pm: [report]

How do I disable the emails related to this article?? It’s pretty draining to continuously delete emails where people are arguing over a topic that has been debated, over-analyzed, examined and torn apart since Roe v. Wade.  And honestly, some of you are running in circles (lookin at you greenbird).  FRISKY EDITORS: HOW DO I DISABLE THE EMAILS??  THANKS!

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 02:52 pm: [report]

first of all—certain things are fact—there are no two ways about the fact that it is a life. believe it or not, some things are black and white, and clear cut. people can believe what they choose, and convince themselves of what they wish to be true.

anyway, the point I was trying to make IS valid: it’s illogical to protect the child in utero in some cases, while in other cases(abortion), the child’s life is not protected. it does not make sense to any person with a shred of rationality that a child’s life is of value ONLY when the mother says it’s of value. who are we to determine who deserves to live or die? and where does it end?

Amelia McDonell-Parry
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 02:54 pm: [report]

@GreenAura Will DM you with an answer shortly

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 02:55 pm: [report]

@greenbird - given your argument, is it safe to assume you oppose war and capital punishment as well?

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 02:55 pm: [report]

it seems as if I’m ‘running in circles’ because I’m using obvious logic to combat the flimsy excuses people use to cover their blatant denial.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 02:59 pm: [report]

I oppose war, but of course support our troops(after all—they didn’t start the war, and they’re not there for the reasons the gov’t is). as for capital punishment—I’m all for leaving all violent and repeat offenders on an island, with armed guard boats all around. saves the taxpayers money, and keeps the scumbags from raping/killing/hurting anyone else.

of course, let’s hope we all know that there’s a huge difference between a rapist/serial torturer-murderer and an infant.

*sam*
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:06 pm: [report]

All I’m saying is that, given the scope of UVVA, you simply cannot use it to substantiate your claims, regardless of your personal beliefs.

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:06 pm: [report]

well, at least you aren’t a hypocritical pro-lifer then.

I would still actually like a straightforward yes or no on whether or not you think Roe v. Wade should be reversed (guess I wasn’t clear enough earlier).  I can agree to disagree, since Roe v. Wade allows you to handle your life as you see fit.  What I really don’t like is when pro-lifers want to reverse Roe v Wade, which allows them to continue making choices according to their values but removes that choice from people who disagree with them.

Because really, there’s not much point to the back & forth - I have never seen anyone change their mind about abortion rights based on a “nuh-uh/yes-huh” conversation.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:13 pm: [report]

joyy—yes, I believe Roe v. Wade should be reversed. ideally, abortion should only be legal in cases of crisis(i.e rape, incest, and threat to the mother’s life). do you believe that we should legalize ‘mercy killings’ of severely disabled people(organic and accidental disability)? it’s not about values, unless valuing human life is some absurdity. if you wouldn’t want any other type of killing legalized, then overturning Roe v. Wade is only logical.

Sam—as for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act—the scope of that Act DOES substantiate my claims. I don’t think you understand what I’m saying. the fact that it doesn’t include abortion shows that we are placing life in the hands of human beings—life is only valuable when such-and-such a person(the mother) says it is. which is nonsense.

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:21 pm: [report]

actually, I can support legalizing euthanasia, as far as “other type of killings legalized”.  My problem with reversing Roe v Wade except for x,y,z is that our legal system moves to slowly and is flawed (as all systems are), not to mention that the state of affairs pre-Roe are something I would not like to return to.  I mean it’s a nice theory, but pretty much impossible in practice (see also: India’s current legislation in this matter).

Abortions will always happen, whether you like it or not.  They can either be safe and available or they can be dangerous and illegal, producing a black market that exploits women who make the choice for whatever reason (be the reason rape, incest, health, or personal reasons, even if you vehemently disagree with them) to terminate a pregnancy.

I don’t expect to change your mind, but in case you’d like a glimpse into why I (and some others, likely) hold this opinion, check out this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/03/health/views/03essa.html

It’s about being realistic.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:27 pm: [report]

true, abortion has and will always be, legal or not. it really comes down to: what kind of woman cares so little about her body to have a back-alley abortion IF Roe v. Wade was ever reversed for cases other than crisis? The Darwin Awards spring to mind, honestly.

lawyrgrl
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:29 pm: [report]

Greenbird - The Unborn Victims of Violence Act is based on a woman’s property interest in her pregnancy.  She has a right to continue the pregnancy if she chooses and it can not be denied her by an act of violence.  However, if she chooses to give up her property interest and voluntarily terminate the pregnancy, the surgeon who performs tha abortion is protected from prosecution by the specific exemption in the Act.  That is all the act says.  It is about property rights - not “humanity” or lack thereof.

You may not like the idea of a fetus as property but that is the only legal identity that it may have.  Legally a fetus has no identity or value greater than that of an organ already within the body of the woman.  The Act does not give any greater protection to a fetus than that.  It is similar to the Workers Compensation statutes giving value to a leg or arm that is removed from the body during an industrial accident.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:33 pm: [report]

“When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit.”

~Elizabeth Cady Stanton

the attitude you portray is sadly demeaning toward women, and the fact that it is so widespread impairs feminism and true womens’ rights.

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:34 pm: [report]

Um, quite possibly ‘women in crisis’ who are denied legal, safe, abortions by restrictive laws.  I’m sure you’re familiar with how little rape is actually reported, let alone successfully prosecuted.  Legal only for x,y,z is a fair tale, because even some of those women in crisis will end up seeking back alley abortions or losing their lives.  Look up the reality of countries that enacted the laws of your fairy tale.  What looks great to you in theory is actually atrocious in practice.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:37 pm: [report]

and the only reason abortion should be legalized for cases of rape is because of unfortunate, base social stereotypes.

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:38 pm: [report]

huh?

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:41 pm: [report]

I do know that if RvW is overturned, I’ll do everything in my personal power to ensure women can still get an abortion if they wish to have one, including paying for them to go where they can get one, helping build new Jane Networks, and ensuring women have access to information on how to self-abort if they wish.

Every woman who supports abortion rights should have a copy of this book, just in case:

http://www.amazon.com/Natural-Liberty-Rediscovering-Self-Induced-Abortion/dp/0964592002

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:44 pm: [report]

ah, sorry joyy. the comment directed towards you got cut off(the beginning). I meant to say that you may think it is nonsensical to attempt to protect the millions of human lives ended by abortion every year, but I believe that everyone with a conscience and a sense of rationality should fight as hard as possible to: A)end unwanted pregnancies via widespread and better education about B/C, B)help pregnant women in need financially and by opening up other options for them, such as open adoption, C)revamping the foster care system, and D)overturning Roe v. Wade in cases other than crisis.

and, my previous comment was directed at lawyrgirl’s ‘property’ statements.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:46 pm: [report]

Alexa—and I’ll be doing everything in my personal power to actually *help* those women, rather than aiding them on their way to becoming the next recipient of a Darwin Award.

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:50 pm: [report]

Do you really think women in crisis will have access to the care they need under laws like that though?  It doesn’t work anywhere else.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:51 pm: [report]

Help them by forcing them to carry an unwanted pregnancy?  How compassionate of you.

/sarcasm

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:55 pm: [report]

also, thought I should add I do agree with parts A, B, and C of your plan, despite disagreeing with part D.  Though you can’t end unwanted pregnancies - like abortions, they will always happen.  They can and should be reduced though (as much as humanly possible), and that I think that’s something everyone can agree with.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 03:55 pm: [report]

What’s interesting is that, in countries where abortion is ilegal, the abortion rates are actually far higher than they are in places where it isn’t.  For example, in Brazil, where abortion is illegal, the rate is 44 per 1000 pregnancies, while here in the U.S. it is less than half that.  I doubt the anti-choicers realize that.  lol

And I suspect that’d be the case here as well because most abortions would be done underground and you wouldn’t have to worry about going to a clinic and dealing with all of the idiots protesting and shouting insults at you. 

With the improvements in technology, self-aborting is actually much safer now than it was in the Pre-Roe days, though it is certainly not the best solution (like a clinic visit).  But, you do what you have to do.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 04:09 pm: [report]

joyy—yes, I do think they will be helped, and have access to proper care. (and yes, I meant to say ‘reduce’, not ‘end’).

Alexa—that statistic you parroted is widely disseminated and highly suspect. I doubt an anti-lifer like yourself would know that or care, though. (and no, I don’t consider all pro-choicers to be anti-life…just a select, ignorant few).

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 04:18 pm: [report]

http://blog.culturejamforlife.com/2008/03/if-abortion-is-made-illegal-more-women-will-not-die/

interesting facts from Planned Parenthood and NARAL themselves. educate yourself, if you choose to.

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 04:19 pm: [report]

You have much more faith in the integrity and expediancy of our judicial system than I do, especially concerning rape prosecution and reporting.  You’re obviously ignoring how pitifully this idea works in other countries that actually implement it as well.

bumbler
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 04:23 pm: [report]

I don’t understand pro-lifers who agree with abortion in cases of rape or incest.  Now let me say to begin with I am staunchly pro-choice and believe that life begins when the fetus is capable of surviving outside of a woman’s body.  What I don’t understand is the argument that life begins at conception but it’s ok to abort a baby of rape or incest.  Isn’t it a life by that argument?  Should the baby be blamed and killed for the actions of a parent or parents?  Why don’t these fetuses count as life?  It seems like a gaping hole in pro-life reasoning to me.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 04:30 pm: [report]

bumbler—I do not agree with abortion in cases of rape or incest. I simply said that, in the case of realistic reform, it would most likely be allowed in those cases due to unfortunate social stigmas.

Alexa
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 04:32 pm: [report]

@greenbird, anti-lifer?  How original.  Not.

That statistic comes from Guttmacher, which is the pre-eminent source for reproductive health information in the world.  Even the anti-choice crowd uses them.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 04:33 pm: [report]

yawn, yawn. time to watch Law&Order;...I may be back later, if Alexa is still busy beating the dead horse and trying to stay firmly locked in her denial.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 04:35 pm: [report]

the founder of Guttmacher was the president of Planned Parenthood, so you can’t claim that the institute is objective in any way. they have the same agenda as PP.

joyy
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 04:36 pm: [report]

actually greenbird, this thread was put to bed for a while until you started flapping it up today, so you’re as guilty of beating the dead horse as anyone is.

Gingee
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 07:31 pm: [report]

There is NO such animal as a ProLife Person.

There ARE groups of terrorists, who are firmly on the side of a foetus.  The female involved is not imporant, she is seen as being a life sustaining machine.

ProForcers are determined to FORCE all unwillingly pregnant gals to give birth, no matter what the circumstances.  Those who waffle and wail thar Rape and Incest make a difference are acknowledging that their Real Agenda is about women’s sexuality.

If ANYONE ever tried to coerce any of my relatives into doing this, tried to compel her to continue an unwanted condition, my family would share our feelings.

Try them, though:  Tell one of those people that you are pregnant and are getting an abortion. They will promise to “help” which means getting you signed on for welfare and the moment that the new human being is here, they will drop you.

They are NOT our friends; they are enemies of freedom and invididual liberty and they are willing to murder to prove it.

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 07:40 pm: [report]

are you willfully ignorant? or just brainwashed? there are as many “ProForcers” as there are “AntiLifers”—militant, extremist splinter groups and individuals. the vast majority of ProLifers care deeply for all human life—that of both the mother and the child.

and, by the way, have you ever heard of open adoption? wow. people like you make some ridiculous knee-jerk judgments and thus come to irrational, stereotypical, uneducated conclusions.

Gingee
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 07:49 pm: [report]

To those of you who cherish your freedom and your life:

Should Roe v. Wade evah be reversed, there are groups ready to begin the Jane in Chicago groups. ABORTION WILL BE AVAILABLE, and legal and safe and again, it will be available. 

GREENBIRD, is there any part of you that can understand this:  The gal who wants an abortion is not interested in adoption.  NOR should she be intereted.

No gal in her right mind would work for 9 months to produce something and then give away that new product, especially when she goes through all of that and at the end all she gets is a, a,  baybeeeeeeeee.

Your views on abortion apply only to YOUR BODY and to your life.  You are not welcome in my world.

Are we understanding each other?

lawyrgrl
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 08:17 pm: [report]

@Gingee - Well said!!!

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 08:35 pm: [report]

Gingee—and why shouldn’t she be interested in adoption? because you’re not? not everyone is a selfish, sadistic P.O.S, dear. many women actually care for more than just their own convenience.

your sad, sorry views that dehumanize women and children are not welcome in my world.

Gingee
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 10:18 pm: [report]

I have had two abortions, and my abortions were the two most loving choices I have ever made.

I’m happy, my husband and family were happy, because I did the right thing. I kept my promise to my husband that we would remain childfree.

Dial down the nonsense on “selfish” as you haven’t a clue as to what it means.

Gals MUST put their own wants and desires ahead of others.

And for the record:  NONE of you are welcome near my co-workers, friends or family.  REALLLLY NOT WELCOME.

Gingee
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 10:35 pm: [report]

If Green whatehername is so Very Pro-Life, then she will, upon demand, give up her kidneys, eyes, skin, heart, any and every organ that is needed by another:

She MUST comply.  To refuse to donate her organs is murder. She is, after all, deciding who will live and who will die. 

This nonsense over a gal who kills a fetus:  Yes, an abortion kills something but so what?  As I call it, it is either the woman OR her essense, her self-worth die or the zygote will die.

Having an abortion is a legal, moral and ethical decision, that ONLY the woman can make.  It is that simple, and those who object to this have my blessing to remain under the boots of the men who want to force us back into a ghastly life of booze, bingo and boredom.

ACers: Get over yourself.

Contraception and abortion have made us more equal to men, and you are NOT going to force us back onto the farm.  We LIKE being able to work. We like the freedom of not marrying.

We cherish our ability to remain childfree while also being sexual creatures.

We like our freedom and we are going to retain that freedom.  The men who love us are with us. 

greenbird321
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:41 pm: [report]

Gingee, dear…a few things:

“I have had two abortions, and my abortions were the two most loving choices I have ever made.

I’m happy, my husband and family were happy, because I did the right thing. I kept my promise to my husband that we would remain childfree.

Dial down the nonsense on “selfish” as you haven’t a clue as to what it means.”

you just defined it wonderfully, thank you, love.

next, organ donation constitutes giving up one’s organ, a physical part of oneself, so that straw-man won’t fly here.

abortion equals a lack of maturity, responsibility, and accountability.

a human life > a woman’s ‘essence’ (if your flimsy excuse there were even plausible, which it’s not—a woman’s ‘essence’ and ‘self-worth’ does not die with the birth of her child. it can, however, die with her shunting of self-respect when she chooses to end her child’s life).

a true feminist is a woman who respects herself, respects her gender, and respects humanity as a whole. thus, a pro-life woman. women who claim to be ‘feminists’ while touting the merits of abortion are fooling themselves while demeaning true womens’ rights and dehumanizing women altogether.

that’s really the final word. you can rant and rail against it, but you’re only desperately trying to convince yourself that your denial is well-intended and rooted in truth. I’m sorry.

fallonthecity
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:49 pm: [report]

@greenbird321: You’re not going to change anyone’s mind. So why the insults and condescension? Both sides of this argument would benefit from kindness and discussion, but you’re just throwing jabs.  Not that this tired old abortion debate is relevant here, but anyhow.

Amelia, if you’re still reading… I’d very much like to disable e-mail notifications for this article as well!

sigma1932
wrote on July 27 2009 @ 11:54 pm: [report]

Indeed, it takes two people to create a pregnancy… including the WOMAN.  Except that, given our current legal precedent, a woman can exempt herself from all obligation and responsibility concerning the child as she sees fit, however the man (who is no more or less responsible for the pregnancy than the woman), has no choice but to submit to the woman’s whim, which is something that is actually unconstitutional based on gender bias.  Why, if both parties are considered to have made equal contributions to the pregnancy, should he not have the same choice as the woman and be able to exempt himself from all obligation and responsibility resulting from the pregnancy?  He’s already not given the choice of keeping the child if he wants it and she doesn’t.  Furthermore, the law is so twisted that even if a woman rapes a man and ends up pregnant, the courts will currently still force him to take financial responsibility for the child—possibly ruining any chance he might have at taking care of a REAL family that he actually WANTS—even though the act that created the kid was legally against his will).

Regardless, given current legal precedent, my stance is this: NO SAY, NO PAY.  If women don’t want to get pregnant and/or be stuck with the bill for the kid, then they should have the same choice as men: don’t have sex.  THAT would be good start at real equality.

On a sidenote: Hey, Gingee… why do you and your husband do something REALLY special for each other, and also for the kids you don’t want to have: you can get your tubes tied, and he can get snipped! You could even make it a festive occasion… have it done for Christmas and have the doctor put in red and green stitches, and tie the end in a little bow.

It would save you both the trouble (not to mention medical risk) of having yet another abortion (because you know you will), and think of all the money you’ll save on birth-control(and abortion costs)! It’ll give the both of you a much greater peace of mind about remaining childless, and as an added bonus, it’ll give the rest of us who choose to think differently than you our own peace of mind knowing that your DNA would be removed from the gene pool.

Gingee
wrote on July 28 2009 @ 01:02 am: [report]

Again with this Old Tired Suggestion and attempt at feeling superior?

We have already been where you were going, sat down and had a Coke.  He has had his vasectomy, ditto my tubal ligation, when I was 22.

Ya see, we WERE able to think of all of the benefits of permanent contraception before we even met.

It is NO big deal that our DNA has been extracted from the gene pool. 

As for your suggestions about other women’s not having sex with men:  All for it.  If ALL women agreed to abstain, we would own the other 25% of the world.

PinkRanger
wrote on July 28 2009 @ 01:18 am: [report]

@Greenbird: Seriously, don’t attack my self-indentification as a feminist with your difference in opinion as ammo. Do you think that’s going to make me rethink my values, or just get pissed off at you and attempt to further distance myself from your beliefs? Since you identify yourself as a feminist, shouldn’t that in some manner make us allies? I’ll admit, being pro-choice is something that’s very important to me, but I would never attack your sense of self for no reason other than to boost my own ego. Healthy debate and solid arguments should be able to speak for themselves, without the condescension, so I’m just going to assume that you lack those.

GreenAura
wrote on July 28 2009 @ 09:14 am: [report]

Alright, since I keep getting the damn emails for this, I might as well comment.

First off, I am Pro-Choice.  BUT, I also believe that life begins at conception.  How is this possible you ask?? Simple, I do not believe in abortion for myself, but I cannot tell another human what to do with their body.  I don’t agree with the Pro-Life movement because to me, Pro-Lifers are very staunch about trying to force their beliefs on others.  WHAT THE HELL DO YOU CARE WHAT A WOMAN DOES WITH HER BODY?? Is it a religious thing??  Do you think they won’t “get into heaven” if they abort?  If thats the case, then again I ask, WHAT THE HELL DO YOU CARE?? Obviously, she chose to abort because she doesn’t feel she can raise it.  And don’t start going into your adoption rants because there are only a lucky few children that actually make it into loving homes.  Most become products of the system, are shuffled from foster home to foster home and grow up with a mindset that they are victims, thereby creating a life for themselves that is usually filled with crime, violence and an overall hatred for society.

Okay, so you feel that abortion is a form of murder (as do I), and we all know murder isn’t right.  But they aren’t affecting you.  You aren’t their judge.  You don’t make life decisions for them.  YOU AREN’T GOD.  If a woman wants to “play God” by aborting, let her. She is the one to deal with the consequences of that (if there are any!)

Again, abortion doesn’t sit well with me BUT, I would never try to impose my view onto others.  I believe every woman, when faced with the decision, will make the choice that it best for her and that is her right because GUESS WHAT GREENBIRD, you aren’t the one carrying that child.  You aren’t financially responsible for that child, you aren’t compromising your life and your body, so please quit telling women what pieces of #&@$% they are for making decisions regarding THEIR body.

IMO, the only pieces of #&@$% are the ones who judge and belittle and force their opinions onto others.

*sam*
wrote on July 28 2009 @ 09:29 am: [report]

GreenAura: well said   (oh, and sorry that this is yet ANOTHER email in your inbox)

Gingee
wrote on July 28 2009 @ 04:03 pm: [report]

The POS terrorists: All it takes to show what they are truly like:  Offer them a neonate, and they will run.

Literally and figuratively.  There are around 582,000 throw away children as wards of the state.  NO ONE wants them, not even the most militant of the Fetus Freaks.

For that kind, there is only one form of life that matters:  The free-floating blob of DNA that is always shown in photographs as if it were an astronaut, the body of the host is NEVER shown.

Worse, these ignorant types seem to believe that gals who are pregnant are so dumb that they do not know that the thing is ALIVE, and if only we can be forced to look at the thing, “you will change your mind.”

GREENBIRD321:  BUZZ off.  I was alive before you started to drive so don’t try to lay none on me. 

To the rest:  Have ya noticed the physical appearance of the rabid FetusFreaks?  They are UGLY.  Of course they are ugly on the inside, otherwise they wouldn’t be sitting around sunning their rumps while dreaming of other women’s vaginas.  They are so hideous, one can say that the outside matches the inside.

PLEASE DISABLE NOTIFICATION FROM GREENBIRD321.

VX967
wrote on October 1 2009 @ 07:58 pm: [report]

The problem is legal. As well as emotional.  I do not believe that a male should have any financial responsibility to any pregnancy that is unplanned.  No matter if married or not!
  Lord Hays 18th century ruling that “a man supports his family”: does not stand in the 21st century. The forced child support is a way of discrimination against men and a matter of control. 
  There are other issues than the couple like making money off the people.  Population control for some section of society’s economic benefit.

lawyrgrl
wrote on October 2 2009 @ 08:30 am: [report]

@VX967 You are right - the problem is a legal one.  And as my Torts professor said in his rather salty way, this falls under the “Doctrine of Tough Sh*t!” 

The woman has a burden thrust upon her whether she likes it or not.  She must either terminate the pregnancy and live with that or raise the child and live with that.  Why should the man be able to just shrug his shoulders and walk away?  The only way that he can be forced to bear some responsibility is through financial means.  He should count himself the lucky one of the pair.

BTW - do you actually inform your sexual partners of this philosophy?  I shudder to think of the quality of women who would accept such a declaration and still remain in your company!

C.Munro
wrote on October 3 2009 @ 11:00 am: [report]

As a guy, my own perspective is that it ultimately boils down to the fact that it is happening in her body, and I neither have nor do I deserve any right to make a decision as to what she does with it.  Her body is her property.  Period. 

That doesn’t mean I like the idea that I could be stuck financially supporting a child I didn’t want with some hookup, or that my future wife could go out and abort a baby I wanted to have without any input from me, but to take away a person’s sovereignty over their own body, to me at least, is totally unacceptable.  And unfortunately, this is one of those situations in which any say I would be given would come at the expense of her own right to choose what happens with her body.  So I guess if women have to live with the unpleasant possibility of getting pregnant, these are the unpleasant possibilities that I have to live with as a man. 

One thing I think would make the situation easier for men would be an effective form of hormonal birth control for us guys.  Right now, women not only (rightly) have absolute say over whether to carry a pregnancy, they also have the means to choose whether their bodies are capable of conceiving. 

That’s what I truly envy.  Men don’t have this capability, so our only options for birth control are abstinence, pulling out, condoms, and vasectomies.  The first and last are not attractive for obvious reasons, and the other two aren’t as effective as some of us would prefer.  But if I could take a pill every day, or better yet put on a patch every week that would make me incapable of conceiving (without being a permanent effect), I’d be a lot more at ease with the whole thing. 

And I know a lot of you women ask, “but can men be trusted to take the pill?”  My answer would be that, as a women you have several birth control options available to you, and you should never rely on your partner to take care of such an important thing alone.  A male birth control pill does not at all mean that women should stop taking theirs.  So you don’t have to trust me to take their pills.  Keep doing what you’re doing.  Any pills we take would be for our own protection.

Gingee
wrote on October 3 2009 @ 11:12 am: [report]

There is a monthly injection for men.  It’s hormonal, reduces the sperm count to around 3%. 

There has been some mention of a temporary vasectomy.

Vasectomies have been terrific for the guys we know.  One is a father of 12, one has one child, and the others are childfree.

Cheers,

Gingee

C.Munro
wrote on October 3 2009 @ 11:18 am: [report]

Really?  I knew nothing about that.  Is it on the market, or still in clinical trials?  I hate needles, but this could change my mind ...

I had heard there was a pill under development, but that men would have to take it 2 hours prior to intercourse for it to be effective.  That’s not ideal, because very few men know 2 hours ahead of time that they’ll be having sex. 

Vasectomy is not an option for me.  I’m still unmarried, childless, and not entirely certain one way or the other on having children.

bumbler
wrote on October 3 2009 @ 11:42 am: [report]

I think it’s a wonderful idea to produce some sort of pill for men that they could take everyday and not have to worry about an unintentional pregnancy.  Right now the only real option for men is the condom which is less effective than a pill, why shouldn’t they have the same reproductive choices women do?  Another benefit for women would be that the small percentage of men who immediately accuse women of conspiring to trap a man by getting pregnant have nothing to fall back on.  They have their own options to prevent pregnancy.  It could also help committed couples who don’t want to have babies right now but the woman has an adverse reaction to BC.

Why haven’t we been researching this since the advent of women’s BC?

bumbler
wrote on October 3 2009 @ 12:04 pm: [report]

Technically these are conversations that should be had before sleeping together.  If a man is so concerned about being forced to pay for child support he should have a long talk with the woman he intends to sleep with beforehand and discuss whether or not she believes in abortion.

Sex can be fun and casual but too often we forget that there can be real risks and consequences that go along with it because it might “spoil the moment.”  If you’re not capable of having a mature conversation about birth control, abortion, STDs etc. then maybe you shouldn’t be having sex with that person. 

As of right now a man has several options (I’m all for increasing their options as I said).  They can choose whether or not to wear a condom, they can choose not to have sex with someone they don’t trust to be on the same page regarding an unplanned pregnancy.

Gingee
wrote on October 3 2009 @ 06:12 pm: [report]

I do not know if the Birth Control by Injection for men is on the market.

There is some talk of a pill, but it won’t be available for another ten years or so.

There is some chatter, in Canada, about an IUD for men, it blocks the sperm.

If I find any more information, on any kind of contraceptives for men, will post.

Gingee
wrote on October 5 2009 @ 06:37 am: [report]

Thanks to BUMBLER for the reminder of one of the most hilarious comments I have thankfully not heard in a long time:

That “small percentage of men who immediately accuse women of conspiring to trap a man by getting pregnant.”

Wouldn’t it be easier to just drug the guy, haul him off to Las Vegas and get married in a drive by chapel?

Back to Planet Earth:

Any guy who is that paranoid should not be allowed outside without a leash.

Men have so many more choices: They can have sex with other men. They can masturbate.  They can get a vasectomy.

Guys: It is your body, your sperm and if you are too lazy or stupid to use contraception, and there is a pregnancy, too bad so sad. 

The slob who can not keep his pants zipped, without a gun pointed at his head, willingly engages in amative sex and then blames the gal, worse, has the GALL to accuse her of trying to trap hy getting pregnant needs to be permanently sterilizied.

Again, thanks for the laugh.  The dears. They’re so replaceable.

bleachnut
wrote on October 10 2009 @ 09:12 am: [report]

Interestingly enough, my 7 year relationship JUST ended this week because my longtime boyfriend suddenly changed his position on having children.  I don’t want em, don’t want to raise one, give one up, or experience the hell of pregnancy+birth.  Him wanting kids made him incredibly unattractive to me, so we broke up.  I miss the wonderful man he USED to be, and can’t stand the man he’s suddenly become.  Even more disturbing, I am LATE. 

He has not educated himself on Roe Vs Wade, so he currently thinks he has some rights if I’m pregnant.  I laughed at him and told him to educate himself because I will NOT have a kid.  I will NOT take the over 80% risk of vaginal tearing during birth, and I won’t gestate just because he wants me to.  I’ve always been clear on this issue, so I don’t feel bad if he has a problem with my right to decide.

On another note, I feel forced gestation is sexist.  If you think of the fetus like a child, who somehow has the right of existing using the pregnant woman as its sole course of survival, then should people be allowed to force others to donate a kidney so that they can live?  Donate blood?  Donate organs after your own death, even if it’s not your desire?  If women are forced to gestate, I think it’s only natural that ALL people must sacrifice for the lives of others, and not just pregnant women.  Of course in AMERICA, we have privacy rights, and the right to choose whether or not we abort. 

Since abortion is 11X safer than childbirth, I think it’s only natural that a woman be the decision maker.  The pregnany whether carried out or not carries NO RISKS FOR THE MAN, which is why he isn’t entitled to make the decision for the woman, unless she decides that’s so. 

For me, there will be satisfaction in aborting if I am pregnant.  I appreciate that I can exercise my rights, and it would not only be theraputic, but it would be EMPOWERING.  I already know I won’t regret it because I have aborted before…and I used to be an unwanted child back in the day.  I know what the RIGHT choice is for me.  And that’s not having ANY unwanted kids.

So I would be aborting out of convenience according to some prolifers here, but guess what?!  IT DOESN’T AFFECT OR CONCERN YOU WHAT I DO WITH MY FETUS!

confused21
wrote on October 10 2009 @ 03:57 pm: [report]

perfect place for me to post a question… so i am 21 yrs old i have a 2 yr old son.. things didnt work out with his father and i so we went our seperate ways.. i met a guy who is 33 and i started dating him.. eventually had sex with him.. at the beginning he asked what i would do if i got pregnant and i said i think i would get n abortion ...i thought that this guy was for real with everything he was telling me and showing me.. anyways 4 months later i am pregnant by him and i dont have the guts to go get an abortion after i said i would.. its different when it actually happens and u r in the predicament.. it was both our fault.. i wasnt protecting myself and eventhough he said he didnt want kids he was having unprotected sex with me and busting inside of me.. i knew what i was doing was wrong but i was so sucked into wanting to please him that i let him do whatever felt good to him.. mind u while he were having sex he would say things like oh your going to have my baby and im going to take care of you.. and when i would say no no we cant he would say come on until he did it.. now im pregnant.. i told him i was pregnant and his reaction was ok go get n abortion it was mistake and i cant have any kids.. he never asked me what i wanted to do or how i felt.. so i told him i wanted to keep it and basically all hell broke lose… needless to say he said he wants nothing to do with me that i “tricked” him to never call him again in his life that he will change his number and move and he wants nothing to do with me or the child.. he said that im being selfish wanting to bring a child into this world when the father doesnt want it.. anyways he hasnt called me since.. im 7 weeks and im scared to keep it but im also terrified of going through an abortion.. im confused and i feel quilty for wanting to keep it and not doing what he said… my family is supportive although they said i should have been “careful” which i should have.. and im not trying to justify the fact that i was wrong… i live on my own and take care of my son.. im a college student i also work.. i really feel i should keep the baby.. however the way he is treating me makes me think twice.. any input is welcome.. thanks

Gingee
wrote on October 10 2009 @ 04:36 pm: [report]

Oh my gosh, that is just so something.  I ended a relationship that had barely begun because the guy, who is Jewish, said that his religion required that he produce offspring with his wife. 

For me, one of the most revolting of sexually transmitted diseases is pregnancy.  If my tubal ever fails, I will immediately have a vacuum aspiration abortion.  That thing will be extracted ASAP.  Wouldn’t have the stomach to wait for RU486.

It is so laughable that there are still men who think that they have some sort of rights that extend beyond where their noses end.

Your guy has “rights”, they just have nothing to with your body.

SCRMOM
wrote on October 10 2009 @ 05:48 pm: [report]

@Gingee: For me, one of the most revolting of sexually transmitted diseases is pregnancy. I don’t care if you never want kids, nor do I care if you have an abortion, but trying to label pregnancy as an STD is deeply offensive.

DancingGeek
wrote on October 10 2009 @ 05:57 pm: [report]

As a woman who has both suffered a miscarriage and been through childbirth I feel it is the woman’s and only the woman’s decision to carry a pregnancy to term.  Biologically, a fetus is a parasite, living off of the mother’s body and unable to survive on it’s own.  It’s not “giving” life if you’re forced into it. 

If a guy feels he has an undeniable right in the decision process, he should remember his right to decide to not sleep with a pro-choice woman, or maybe he should just wait until he is married. No uterus, no opinion, in my opinion.

bleachnut
wrote on October 10 2009 @ 06:35 pm: [report]

That is true…it’s NOT giving life if you’re forced into it, and even if abortion became illegal in my country, I’d be willing to travel to Canada to get one done regardless.  Nobody, not even the government will make me give birth against my will and create another kid like the one I used to be.  It was EXTREMELY traumatic to be unwanted, not that many prolifers seem to care about that, or even realize the depth of hurt it creates.

bleachnut
wrote on October 10 2009 @ 11:00 pm: [report]

I have yet to find a true prolifer.  I feel if you’re against a woman being able to choose, you should call yourself antichoice unless you’re also against war, the death penalty, and for donating organs during or after your own life, then you really should own up to the truth.  That you are sticking your nose into something that’s not your concern unless you are pregnant yourself…in which case you should be happy that your own fetus will be gestated. 

Or are you afraid that if the option is available legally that you might partake in that option when and if it suits you?

Gingee
wrote on October 11 2009 @ 09:07 am: [report]

There are NO true Pro-Lifers. I have asked them if they would die for a fetus.  They said yes, but backed out when told that the woman needs a new heart, pregnancy and childbirth is too risky, ahd she needs a donor heart.

I pointed out that a True Pler would donate his eyes, lungs, heart, becomng a Living Donor, anything to ensure the survival of the zygote, and n o n e of them were willing to fulfill the promise they’d just made.

Also, zero, none, zip, zilch, that is the number of AC/PLers willing to adopt any neonate. They have excuses aplenty for themselves:

They cannot afford the cost to raise a kid, but they expect a young lass to somehow be able to do this on their own, and by the way, the attitude is:  She made her bed, she can lie in it, but as is expected:

The Male is never blamed, yet he is the one who created the condition.

Gingee

Gingee
wrote on October 11 2009 @ 09:27 am: [report]

Dear CONFUSED21:

You asked for input.  Okay, my take is that you had a kid when you were 19.  You are now 21, and considering adding another child to the world.

What you wrote is that you live on your own and take care of your son. 

The 33 year old sperm donor/father has already let you know what he thinks of you:  Dust.

He has abandoned you. He is not a nice guy and he is not a good guy, and I’d say that his opinion was no longer relevant the day he walked away.

It is up to you to decide what you will do, but I have got to ask:

Why, oh, why oh why do you feel guilty for not doing what he wanted, for not doing what he said?  You are not his property, his chattel.

He is an adult, he surely knew how to prevent the conception, he chose to not do that, and he has left you to face all of the consequences.

Time to start thinking of what you want, of what is best for you and your situation, and you are the only one who can make that call.

C.Munro
wrote on October 11 2009 @ 10:37 am: [report]

The Male is never blamed, yet he is the one who created the condition.

No.  Both partners created the condition. 

I agree that it is sexist to blame the mother.  That sentiment also applies to blaming it on the father.  Sexism is not acceptable, regardless of at whom it is directed.

brandyalexander
wrote on October 11 2009 @ 10:45 am: [report]

Well-said, C.  The man has input, when he has sex with a woman.  Both partners need to discuss birth control pills, condoms, pulling out, whatever.  Once she’s pregnant, though, its ultimately her decision. Ideally, the man is involved in that decision, but in the end, its her choice, period.  Didn’t want to see it come to that?  Well, duh, should have been more careful.  Don’t like the idea of abortion?  Shouldn’t have hooked up with someone who finds it an acceptable option.
Its all about communication before the problem arises.

brandyalexander
wrote on October 11 2009 @ 10:48 am: [report]

CONFUSED:  why, oh why, were you not using protection?

Gingee
wrote on October 11 2009 @ 11:05 am: [report]

Oh, but sexism, in some case specific context or contexts,  is especially acceptable to me, and in the case of this 21 year old gal v. the 33 year old male, Sexism absolutely applies.

You’re still cute, even though you dare to disagree with moi.

SCRMOM
wrote on October 11 2009 @ 11:25 am: [report]

@Gingee: “Oh, but sexism, in some case specific context or contexts, is especially acceptable to me.”  You can’t have it both ways.

While we disagree on this topic, I agree with you that C.Munro is still cute. 

Gingee
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 07:49 am: [report]

Does anyone else want to add any comments to CONFUSED21?

As I call it, the man still has all the advantages in sexual matters.  Not only can he enjoy burden-free sex, the most he risks is an STD, which is treatable.

If there is a pregnancy, he has most of the advantages if he does not want to become a father.  He can abandon the kid in so many ways without leaving his home.

The female cannot give up the kid for adoption unless the father consents to the adoption.  If a new guy wants to adopt the kid, the father can refuse, even if he is not paying child support.

About child support:  Forget it.  The guy who does not want to become a father, and who resents the kid, has ways to avoid paying:  Like working off the clock, moving to another country, and for some of them, they do not have to do that because:

All it takes is one female to take him in, and the abandoned lass and her child will be left with nothing but a court order that can not be enforced, because new woman is the Innocent Party (as defined by the IRS) and cannot be compelled to support the kid.

CONFUSED21:  Why oh why were you with that 33 year old man, who has no future?  Men who have something worth protecting avoid putting their assets at risk.

SCRMOM
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 10:20 am: [report]

@Gingee: My thoughts on CONFUSED21 are this - she should have been smarter and protected herself from another pregnancy.  It’s easy to play the victim, but she is just as responsible for the pregnancy as he is.  She was willingly having unprotected sex with him finishing inside her - what did she think was going to happen?

LayD
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 10:46 am: [report]

@Confused 21- You totally have the right to change your mind.  If you don’t want to get an abortion, then don’t do it.  Things will work out.  It will be hard, but you need to find resources and support and you will be ok.  The guy is a jerk and of course he should have been responsible about the situation.  You did not “trick” him.  You are young and really need to think about all the consequences of whatever you decide.  Yes, getting into this situation was very preventable and you made a huge mistake, but now you have to deal with it the way you think is best.  It is not selfish to keep a child, but you need to make sure that you will provide for it and take full responsibility.

C.Munro
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 12:55 pm: [report]

Oh, but sexism, in some case specific context or contexts,  is especially acceptable to me, and in the case of this 21 year old gal v. the 33 year old male, Sexism absolutely applies.

I don’t think the fact that the male in that situation is an a-hole has anything to do with the fact that he has outdoor plumbing.  I also don’t think any honest appraisal of what happened here would have him shouldering all of the blame for this pregnancy, regardless of how reprehensible his behavior has been.  If these two had wanted to avert a pregnancy, both partners had plenty of opportunity to take steps to do so.  Neither of them did. 

I also disagree with your opinion that men have more sexual power than women.  The way I see it, women have far more sexual power than men, at least in the legal systems of western countries.  I have had women do things to me in the bedroom that I would never think to do to them (like initiating intercourse without my consent, or even giving me the option of wearing protection).  And while I do not begrudge women for having power in sexual relationships, I do think that men today should take measures to empower themselves sexually.  One such measure I’ve found empowering is being able to say “no” to sex.

Gingee
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 01:40 pm: [report]

Okay, CUTIE:

What GINGEE wrote:

“As I call it, the man still has all the advantages in sexual matters.”  It is correct, and I am NOT talking about sex acts.

I am talking about the options men have to avoid fatherhood/child support.  Money.  The man who does not want to pay child support has so many ways out of it.

He may, as is legal under the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, refuse to work.  He may be sued and sued, and have judgement after judgement, but 100% of nothing is still nothing. 

The guy can probably find some female willing to take care of him. 

While he is refusing to pay child support, he still retains certain rights.  He may not sign away his parental rights unless and until another person agrees to be financially responsible for the kid.

The father/sperm donor could be in jail and some courts will compel the woman to take the child to visit him.

Meanwhile, the gal who got together with the guy is the one doing all of the caring work.

As for what women have done to you, against your will, jolly good thing for them that you are not my brother. As I call it, you were raped, and that is as morally repugnant as male/female sexual assault.  My Inner Lion would emerge, and I’d share my feelings with said predatory females, were you my brother.

C.Munro
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 02:25 pm: [report]

I’m not talking exclusively of sexual acts either, although there is a relation in that some women abuse the power they have.  Now I’m not exactly crying for us men or anything.  All I really want is for women to understand that they are in a position of power, and to think about the responsibility that comes with it. 

In my own situation, I would not call it, or even compare it to, rape.  The fact is, I was a willing partner, and I would have consented to the acts in which I was involved, had I been asked.  But I do consider their not asking to be unethical behavior, and I don’t think the women who did it ever gave it a second thought because they are used to holding the power in sexual relationships.  They’ve gotten so used to being the ones who say yes or no that they never even considered that I have that same right too, or maybe they held the sexist belief that no man ever wants to say no. 

The situations you describe involving deadbeat dads do totally suck, and I’m not going to say they don’t happen because I know they do.  Such behavior is inexcusable. 

But the flipside is that, once pregnant the decision on whether to have the child resides solely with the woman carrying it.  That is one form sexual power.  To say that all men have to worry about is an STD isn’t accurate.  Just because some men are douchebags who don’t contribute to the rearing of their progeny doesn’t mean all are, and while I’d never dare to say that pregnancy effects a male to the same degree as a female, I don’t agree that it has no effect on us at all.  It is thoroughly life-altering for (most of) us as well. 

In the end, though, we all can do things to be sexually empowered, and maybe the focus shouldn’t be on which gender holds more power but on what each of us can do as individuals to lead healthy and fulfilling sex lives.

Gingee
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 02:59 pm: [report]

Uff da.

Not only are you smart, you write very well, and you are easy on the eyes.

Thanks for shating your thoughts, and hope to read more of them on other topics. 

Be well,

Gingee

C.Munro
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 03:09 pm: [report]

Thank you.  And thank you for sharing your own views.  I really enjoy the atmosphere here, and appreciate the perspective offered by discussions such as these.

lawyrgrl
wrote on October 13 2009 @ 07:48 am: [report]

@Confused21 Your only concern now is your existing child and your own future.  The man that you were involved with has shown you how he feels and what his level of responsibility is.  For the sake of your own sanity, consider only what is in YOUR best interest now and the hell with him!

If you choose to terminate the pregnancy, you can do so on your own terms and without any drama from him.  If you chose to keep the baby, you need to be aware that unless he voluntarily terminates his parental rights he will potentially be a part of your life forever - and not a pleasant one.

confused21
wrote on October 13 2009 @ 03:52 pm: [report]

Thanks to everyone for their inputs on this matter… I have decided to keep the baby. 

@SCRMOM… no one is playing the victim.. I clearly know i was wrong for not protecting myself and for letting him finish inside of me. I was asking for advice on was it selfish to keep the baby when he doesnt want it.. I didnt say its all his fault.  We are both to blame.

Gingee
wrote on October 13 2009 @ 04:38 pm: [report]

Dear CONFUSED21:

Of course you are being selfish, but so what?  Being selfish - which is all about protecting our own well-being and survival - is a good trait.

Please, do yourself a favor and get a copy of “When I Say No, I Feel Guilty” by Manuel J. Smith.  He teaches people how to be assertive and one of Pete’s 10 rules:

You have the right to be irrational.

There are other rules, but he demonstrates in an eloquent manner that the only person who can judge your actions is you.

The only opinion that matters is yours:  And if you ask enough people their opinion on your decision, some will wrongly inform you that you are:

Selfish, self-centered, and on and on, for even having a baby, because of the cost of Carbon Offsets and other gibberish.

If you ask them:

What is it about my wanting my preferences that is so wrong, the answers can be amusing, especially from the Self-Annointed judges of other people’s lives.

In other words, they need to find a new hobby.

Yodar Critch
wrote on November 10 2009 @ 12:57 pm: [report]

One question:

Should a man wait until after the woman makes the decision not to have an abortion to tell her about his vasectomy?

senate78
wrote on November 14 2009 @ 08:55 pm: [report]

I think the man absolutly has a say esp if it’s a commited relationship.
But that being said men need to be honset how they feel. State what you want if you want the child or not and how you feel either way. Simply saying either way you’re fine isn’t enough esp. if you feel more one way than the other.

27intelligent
wrote on November 16 2009 @ 04:09 pm: [report]

I think a man should have a say in this matter but sometimes guys are not honest on how they feel this is a sensitive situation on both because a baby is involved. but a woman has to carried the baby not the guy.