Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So if a woman is forced against her will by the State to carry an unwanted pregnancy, what happens if there are serious complications and the woman is permanently disabled or even dies? Can her family sue the State?
These are the risks of pregnancy and childbirth:
Normal, frequent or expectable temporary side effects of pregnancy:
§ exhaustion (weariness common from first weeks)
§ altered appetite and senses of taste and smell
§ nausea and vomiting (50% of women, first trimester)
§ heartburn and indigestion
§ constipation
§ weight gain
§ dizziness and light-headedness
§ bloating, swelling, fluid retention
§ hemmorhoids
§ abdominal cramps
§ yeast infections
§ congested, bloody nose
§ acne and mild skin disorders
§ skin discoloration (chloasma, face and abdomen)
§ mild to severe backache and strain
§ increased headaches
§ difficulty sleeping, and discomfort while sleeping
§ increased urination and incontinence
§ bleeding gums
§ pica
§ breast pain and discharge
§ swelling of joints, leg cramps, joint pain
§ difficulty sitting, standing in later pregnancy
§ inability to take regular medications
§ shortness of breath
§ higher blood pressure
§ hair loss
§ tendency to anemia
§ curtailment of ability to participate in some sports and activities
§ infection including from serious and potentially fatal disease
(pregnant women are immune suppressed compared with non-pregnant women, and are more susceptible to fungal and certain other diseases)
§ extreme pain on delivery
§ hormonal mood changes, including normal post-partum depression
§ continued post-partum exhaustion and recovery period (exacerbated if a c-section -- major surgery -- is required, sometimes taking up to a full year to fully recover)
Normal, expectable, or frequent PERMANENT side effects of pregnancy:
§ stretch marks (worse in younger women)
§ loose skin
§ permanent weight gain or redistribution
§ abdominal and vaginal muscle weakness
§ pelvic floor disorder (occurring in as many as 35% of middle-aged former child-bearers and 50% of elderly former child-bearers, associated with urinary and rectal incontinence, discomfort and reduced quality of life)
§ changes to breasts
§ varicose veins
§ scarring from episiotomy or c-section
§ other permanent aesthetic changes to the body (all of these are downplayed by women, because the culture values youth and beauty)
§ increased proclivity for hemmorhoids
§ loss of dental and bone calcium (cavities and osteoporosis)
Occasional complications and side effects:
§ complications of episiotomy
§ spousal/partner abuse
§ hyperemesis gravidarum
§ temporary and permanent injury to back
§severe scarring requiring later surgery
(especially after additional pregnancies)
§ dropped (prolapsed) uterus (especially after additional pregnancies, and other pelvic floor weaknesses -- 11% of women, including cystocele, rectocele, and enterocele)
§ pre-eclampsia (edema and hypertension, the most common complication of pregnancy, associated with eclampsia, and affecting 7 - 10% of pregnancies)
§ eclampsia (convulsions, coma during pregnancy or labor, high risk of death)
§ gestational diabetes
§ placenta previa
§ anemia (which can be life-threatening)
§ thrombocytopenic purpura
§ severe cramping
§ embolism (blood clots)
§ medical disability requiring full bed rest (frequently ordered during part of many pregnancies varying from days to months for health of either mother or baby)
§ diastasis recti, also torn abdominal muscles
§ mitral valve stenosis (most common cardiac complication)
§ serious infection and disease (e.g. increased risk of tuberculosis)
§ hormonal imbalance
§ ectopic pregnancy (risk of death)
§ broken bones (ribcage, "tail bone")
§ hemorrhage and numerous other complications of delivery
§ refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease
§ aggravation of pre-pregnancy diseases and conditions (e.g. epilepsy is present in .5% of pregnant women, and the pregnancy alters drug metabolism and treatment prospects all the while it increases the number and frequency of seizures)
§ severe post-partum depression and psychosis
§ research now indicates a possible link between ovarian cancer and female fertility treatments, including "egg harvesting" from infertile women and donors
§ research also now indicates correlations between lower breast cancer survival rates and proximity in time to onset of cancer of last pregnancy
§ research also indicates a correlation between having six or more pregnancies and a risk of coronary and cardiovascular disease
They allow for that exception probably because it's similar to self-defense or they realize that forcing the woman to carry the by product is the equivalent of punishing her.
No, it is not the equivalent of punishing her. It is in fact nothing whatsoever even remotely similar to punishing her. You might as well say that flowers are the equivalent of jet airplanes. It's a complete non sequitur to say that banning abortion is punishing pregnant women.
We don't allow pregnant women who have been raped to rob banks. Is that punishing them? No? Then neither is not allowing them to get an abortion. If abortion is wrong at all, then it is wrong because it terminates human life. If that is the case, then nothing about being raped alters this.
If a woman and her boyfriend have a child this year, then he rapes her and she is impregnated due to that rape next year, does that means she is being punished by not being allowed to kill her 1 year old child? If not, then she should not be allowed to get an abortion either. Given the presupposition in the "except in cases of rape or incest" that abortion is ever wrong, there is no difference between the two. If it is a criminal act to get an abortion, nothing about being raped changes anything about the abortion. However the child was conceived, once it is conceived it then exists. Nobody says she has to enjoy the pregnancy, but facts are facts. If you really need money, that doesn't give you a license to steal. If you really want to get across town fast, that does not give you license to exceed the speed limit. That is not the way rule of law works.
Full disclosure going in, I am pro-choice and believe abortion should be a woman's legal right up until the point the fetus is viable with medical intervention. I believe that since we have no unanimous scientific/non-partisan consensus about when life begins we must lean toward less government oversight regarding reproductive rights and concede that we can all agree a baby, capable of living outside its mother's body even with the help of machines is unique individual with legal rights and protections. So anyway, that's my belief just to be open up front
I COMPLETELY understand and respect why people are pro-life. I can imagine if I believed it were murder I would also be adamantly opposed to it and I don't disrespect people who are pro-life nor label them as anti-woman or misogynistic. I admire their passion in fighting for the innocent lives they perceive as being lost.
Here's where I get stuck though, and I ask this question with genuine curiosity. I hear so many people say they are against abortion except in cases of rape or incest. By WHY this exemption? Surely if you believe it to be an innocent life it is innocent from the moment of conception regardless of how it was conceived? If it should have the rights of a full-term infant, why is it ok to terminate because at least one of its parents was a criminal or sexual deviant?
Thanks so much for helping me understand
In a nutshell:
The difference for anti-choicers seems to be that the woman or girl who was raped was 'innocent' and shouldn't be 'punished' by being forced against her will to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term.
But the woman or girl who had consensual sex is a 'sl-ut' who should have kept her legs closed and should be 'punished' for having sex by being forced to carry the pregnancy to term and have the child.
I hear it underlying their rhetoric all the time. Especially those who are also against contraception.
It's nothing to do with 'saving the lives of innocent babies!'. They don't appear to care about the children once they are born.
Until we can deal with the hundreds of thousands of children already here and unwanted.....why would we want to add more. Why don't we care about them first.
That is where those against abortion fail, they do not care about the children that are already here and unwanted. I do not see them flocking to adopt the 400,000 annually unwanted children in the USA. It is inhumane of us humans to just keep popping out babies as if the world can handle more of us on top of the 7.33 billion of us on the planet. We are already deminishing the resources on the planet and anti abortionists want to add more children to the situation.
Until we can deal with the hundreds of thousands of children already here and unwanted.....why would we want to add more. Why don't we care about them first.
We don't have hundreds of thousands. You can tell when it's getting more difficult to defend a position, the exaggerations get bigger and bigger. There are very, very few unwanted babies. There are kinds in the foster system but that is a different subject concerning how we want to run that.
It's not the big reason but it is one reason why I support gay marriage, it opens up a whole new venue for the few that are born that are not wanted.
So if a woman is forced against her will by the State to carry an unwanted pregnancy, what happens if there are serious complications and the woman is permanently disabled or even dies? Can her family sue the State?
There has never been a law written that would not allow an abortion if the woman's life was at risk.
That is where those against abortion fail, they do not care about the children that are already here and unwanted. I do not see them flocking to adopt the 400,000 annually unwanted children in the USA.
That's because you just made this up. There are long waiting lists for people who want babies. That is why some had turned to going to places like China to adopt babies.
Quote:
It is inhumane of us humans to just keep popping out babies as if the world can handle more of us on top of the 7.33 billion of us on the planet. We are already deminishing the resources on the planet and anti abortionists want to add more children to the situation.
No, it is not the equivalent of punishing her. It is in fact nothing whatsoever even remotely similar to punishing her. You might as well say that flowers are the equivalent of jet airplanes. It's a complete non sequitur to say that banning abortion is punishing pregnant women.
of course banning abortion will "punish" women. no woman should be forced to bear a pregnancy to term, or is that a position you stand behind? flowers compared to abortion, get serious.
We don't allow pregnant women who have been raped to rob banks. Is that punishing them? No? Then neither is not allowing them to get an abortion. If abortion is wrong at all, then it is wrong because it terminates human life. If that is the case, then nothing about being raped alters this.
your comparisons are completely off base. robbing a bank is no where close to a woman and her rights to govern her own life as she sees fit. "if abortion is wrong" it is our right to choice, our right to run our life according to our moral value not yours. "nothing about rape alters" alters that.
If a woman and her boyfriend have a child this year, then he rapes her and she is impregnated due to that rape next year, does that means she is being punished by not being allowed to kill her 1 year old child?
killing a one year old, this is another dumb reasoning. a one year old is not in a womb and has nothing to do with abortion. trying to tie the two together will never work.
If not, then she should not be allowed to get an abortion either. Given the presupposition in the "except in cases of rape or incest" that abortion is ever wrong, there is no difference between the two. If it is a criminal act to get an abortion, nothing about being raped changes anything about the abortion. However the child was conceived, once it is conceived it then exists. Nobody says she has to enjoy the pregnancy, but facts are facts. If you really need money, that doesn't give you a license to steal. If you really want to get across town fast, that does not give you license to exceed the speed limit. That is not the way rule of law works.
"nobody said you have to enjoy the pregnancy" how cavalier you are about a woman who has been raped.
have you ever been pregnant and raped? how about been pregnant at all?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
