Teen In Critical Condition After Botched Abortion

reply to post by dawnstar


if thats the case, the doctor is obligated to save one of them. it has happened many times in history and typically the mother makes the decision.

again, small percentage.

i was referring to the majority that just did an "Ooops!"

reply to post by RelentlessLurker


Here we go again...

everything you just listed could be easily avoidable by not having sex or sterilization.

1. What is the likeleyhood of abstinence? sure a few religious types will do it but sex sells and unless we ban all things purtaining to sexual relations this will never happen.
2. Sterilization? That sounds familiar.. have you heard of Germany's eugenics program under the Third Reich?

it seems more proactive to me to spend energy as a society fixing the rapists, rather than allowing them to rape and just "fixing" the result of their act

And how do you suggest we find these people to "fix" Anyone could be a rapist (even you) and until they have committed such crimes they are innocent..

mental implications? i would have thought they reviewed those as they took off their pants and climbed into bed. but of course not, that would be responsible

well to be fair the first thing that crosses my mind when me and my partner go to bed is the possibility of the trauma that we might have to go through if we dare to share our love!?

S*$t happens, condoms break, pills don't work.. no contraception is 100% effective. Are you suggesting that a loving or married couple who can't afford to have a baby abstain from sex altogether just in case? ridiculous.

just because its written as law doesn't make it common or the least bit sensible.

nevertheless it IS law and if you actually read my post i was not suggesting the law is common sense only that I had put my argument forward using my own common sense and not making ridiculous claims.

i have no problem with a rape victim getting an abortion as that is a result of force. nothing else you've presented is a result of force, but a result of irresponsibility that could have easily been avoided had correct precautions been taken (IUD)

Again please try to read and understand the context in which I say something. I wasnot only referring to rape victims, but those in abusive relationships, drug addicts, mentally ill people unable to look after a child. There are so many factors you are not taking into account. not everyone is the promiscuous sex addicts you're painting them out to be.

so your saying that so long as im qualified, i can strap down my girlfriend against her will and preform an abortion?

I was being sarcastic.. thanks for rising to it though.

perhaps im suggesting a change in the laws would be a more proactive solution to this issue for society

like forced sterilization again?

but where i live planned parenthood seems to know people on a first name basis.

Then you live in an area that has some serious problems and it sheds some light on your views.

1. What is the likeleyhood of abstinence? sure a few religious types will do it but sex sells and unless we ban all things purtaining to sexual relations this will never happen.
2. Sterilization? That sounds familiar.. have you heard of Germany's eugenics program under the Third Reich?

way to exaggerate kiddo. ever heard of an IUD? procedure takes 30 minutes.

And how do you suggest we find these people to "fix" Anyone could be a rapist (even you) and until they have committed such crimes they are innocent..

anyone could be a rapist? wow what a great attitude. i wonder how many issues you take that stance on. you know, just lumping all of society into one category, carpet prohibition ftw!

its an easy fix. death penalty. you'd be surprised how quickly the problem goes away.

well to be fair the first thing that crosses my mind when me and my partner go to bed is the possibility of the trauma that we might have to go through if we dare to share our love!?

was this a glimpse of responsibility or more sarcasm?

S*$t happens, condoms break, pills don't work.. no contraception is 100% effective. Are you suggesting that a loving or married couple who can't afford to have a baby abstain from sex altogether just in case? ridiculous.

far as i know IUD is 100% effective. the others work well if your not careless. we live in a day and age where you have many options, much more so than days of old, there should be no excuse. maybe my overall point was sex shouldnt be so casual to the point where simple things like this become lax, and abortion clinics become the fix.

until somebody says otherwise, i stand by my estimation that the "quick fix's" far outweigh the "special cases".

nevertheless it IS law and if you actually read my post i was not suggesting the law is common sense only that I had put my argument forward using my own common sense and not making ridiculous claims.

interesting. i did in fact read your post and what i got from it was that your current position is the same as the law. if that be the case then you should have no problem explaining why the male aspect of procreation is not recognized at all in the law. surely it takes 2 to tango. im not asking you to defend the law, just the position you took when stating it.

Again please try to read and understand the context in which I say something. I wasnot only referring to rape victims, but those in abusive relationships, drug addicts, mentally ill people unable to look after a child. There are so many factors you are not taking into account. not everyone is the promiscuous sex addicts you're painting them out to be.

please understand that i am only talking about rape victims. abusive relationship? get out of it. addicted to drugs? go to rehabilitation. mentally ill? do not have sex or see a doctor until the doctor feels your suitable to be a parent. you see how easily it starts becoming the quick fix for everything? just because people do it anyway doesnt mean we need to lower societies standards to adjust to them. they should adjust to society, after all they were the ones that were not responsible.

you can sit here all day trying to think up obscure reasons one might need an abortion (and i gave you one), however i ask you to recall a time when there was no safe simple abortion procedure, how did folks deal? surely all those problems were still rampant? ahh...they learned their lesson and moved on. they didnt try to find all these alibi's that justify killing a baby. just because everybody has convinced themselves that they arent killing doesnt make it ok either.

like forced sterilization again?

not sure why you think its "forced"? and why is it such a ludicrous notion in your mind to take preventive measures when your only desire is sex? if your not responsible enough to do this one simple thing than you shouldnt be having sex period.

reply to post by RelentlessLurker


Off topic I know, apologies mods.. but

The birth control effectiveness of the IUD has been shown to have 99% success rate in the prevention of pregnancy. However, individuals should keep in mind that IUDs do not protect against sexually transmitted diseases.

Not every woman can use an IUD. Some women experience allergic reactions to the copper found in IUDs.

IUD's at Womens Health

There is no such thing as 100% effective contraception.. unless of course you sterilize, which is irreversible..

I/m just wondering how many men use a condom while they have sex with their wives....
ya know, just in case the iud, pill, or whatever doesn't work???

many of these birth control methods for women have side effects if used long term.....
endangering the women....

and yet, alot of men won't consider using a condom....especially if within a marriage when they know there is no risk of stds.....

don't think I've ever heard of a condom causing cancer though....

reply to post by RelentlessLurker


Doctors are life-savers.

To be a doctor and a murderer means you are not a doctor.

reply to post by RelentlessLurker


and...you know this particular women....and she isn't one of the few...you know this, this is how you can judge her?

see, that's the problem, people paint the world with these broad strokes, then proceed to act as though those fine little details don't exist....

reply to post by catwhoknows


well i guess when your right your right

reply to post by dawnstar


could you please make sense?

although your right about the condoms, i suppose that would take care of that 1% the IUD leaves over.

although im a bit skeptical still about that claim, i do not know of any cases where it has failed.

reply to post by RelentlessLurker


I'm one of those people who are allergic to all kinds of things, ain't no one putting anything like an iud in me to begin with. because of other factors, my doctor insisted that I get off the pill before I was 30 years old...and well....at that time, the other methods weren't that reliable...
well....i used various other methods, and have three kids instead of one.

ain't none of them 100% effective, the only thing that is is abstinance....
so well, if your wife or significant other decides she doesn't want any more kids....
are you willing to take that route??
if not, well, there IS AN EXCUSE!!
don't see where I am not making sense!

You all know there is a risk to any surgery right? I once had a mass in my neck, I went to the doctor who sent me to a specialist, the specialist knew exactly what it was, took a biopsy of it to confirm, then scheduled me for surgery.

He told me the risks. He could nick my carotid artery and I could bleed out and die. Obviously that didn't happen, but it could have.

Abortion should remain legal.

People should know the risks by now. Accidents happen, and there are legal remedies for said accidents.

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. No one should tell a woman what they can and cannot do with their body.

reply to post by dawnstar


if the wife doesnt want any more kids, she gets her tubes tied.

if im not mistaken this has been available for quite some time.

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. No one should tell a woman what they can and cannot do with their body.

except the government.

oh sure sperm is fine, load up on that all you want

start putting illicit drugs in that body though and she will quickly find out how much control over it she really has.



how ironic too, as they are both after the same feeling.

i love double standards

reply to post by RelentlessLurker


umm...wonder how much that costs now days...wonder if insurance pays for it...

ya know, some of do actually have to pay for our medical care...or go without...
a tubal was one of the things I did without!

ant tubals aren't 100% effective either....

so well, that leaves abstinance...you gonna answer my question??

Title is a bit misleading, teen generally means 13-17 yes while 18 and 19 year olds are technically "teens" they are also adults...
But this is my god's way of punnishing the mother and the unborn baby.

reply to post by dawnstar


it costs less than an abortion, and should be more likely to be covered than an abortion procedure.


not sure what your question was. however i did look up your claim and it says that the procedure is "more than 99% effective". i can only assume that means the remaining margin is a very small fraction of a percent....if your worried about a less than 1% chance, your welcome to use a condom too, as those are free in most clinics, and take roughly 2.6 seconds to put on.

and before you come at me with the allergen excuses, they make them in many different materials for that very reason.

i cant believe i have to sit here and defend why contraceptives are a smarter, more humane and viable method to prevention than murder. its always the same barrage of excuses that rarely apply to the person spouting them.

however i do see your point, there is a very small number of people in this world who have no other choice. if you think you are one of those people i strongly urge you to rethink your options. it would be much more noble in my opinion to have the child, regardless of how much it ruins your own life.

if you cant afford to get pregnant don't have sex (until you can).

just like if you cant afford to eat out, don't eat out!.

you wouldn't expect somebody to go to a resturaunt with no money, sit down and order, eat the food, then when the waiter comes to collect the check give him a response of "oh well i cant afford this meal right now, and im allergic to food in other places so, rather than pay you im just going to stab you with this knife"

just because you have the option of killing the waiter to make the problem go away, and the ability to convince yourself that it was justified for the reasons stated, doesn't mean you SHOULD or that its the best viable option. it also doesn't remove the fact that you knew you couldn't afford the meal when you walked in.

reply to post by RelentlessLurker

try again???

The cost of tubal ligation usually ranges from $1,200 to $6,000

www.yourcontraception.com...

The normal cost of a first-trimester abortion runs between $350 and $550, depending on subsidies, the method used, and other variables such as cost of living.

civilliberty.about.com...

as far as weather or not insurance covers it, not sure....it didn't when I was having my kids, it was considered an elective surgery....
and well, consider this, the way our insurance is being dealt with in this country, well, as long as you work, you maybe be able to afford it, if your company is nice.....alot of companies don't even provide a insurance plan anymore...and well, far less will expand that coverage over to family plans, my insurance plan doesn't, you want to provide it for your family, hey you pay full price for it. stay at home moms are far more likely to be unemployed than other groups in this country!

gee, thinking back to all those backalley abortions....long ago, just wondering here....who paid for those...I mean, back then most women were lucky if they could earn enough to live on, I don't think the women were paying for the abortions...were they?? I highly doubt it!! more than likely is was the father of baby being aborted....

so, now we have all these guys screaming about abortions that are done in nice clean sterile environments by people who are supposedly trained medical doctors.....and I can't help but think that at least some are the same ones crying about the injustice of the child support laws....they don't want to support those kids anyways!! well got to ask...just what is all the griping about anyways? do they really care about the kids, or is it that they are just ticked off that it's the women making the decisions and having the ability to pay for it themselves, and they aren't able to call the shots anymore?

by the way.....
I've reached the age where I have found the other 100% effective method of birth control....it's called menopause...

and well, there's a blind lady in poland that is an example of what happens when that small percentage is ignored.....she's blinds, the doctors told her that if she carried the baby full term, there was a possibility that she would go blind, well, a court had to okay the abortion, and regardless of what her or her doctors said, the court thought that risk wasn't worthy of considering...so, well, now there is a blind lady in poland trying to take care of four kids by herself...and well, a nice judgement hand down by the international court against poland for interferring with her rights.

I had three kids, and found out I was pregnant with the fourth. Had a very hard time carrying my third, it was very hard to walk. also had a husband who didn't want to be a husband or a dad, I was left to fend for those kids 24/7 and really didn't see much hope of that changing...
so, well, if I had carried that fourth child full term, there was a very good chance that I wouldn't have been able to care for the three! and well, experience already told me that there would be no one around to help with that!
you can preach about not having sex all you want, but in much of the world, women do not have a choice in the matter! and, I have met a few abused women who opted to live in a car rather than stay in their home!!! I was in a shelter once, me and my three kids walked out of the place with pnumonia..the place was so cold...
so well, like I said, you can preach about the not having sex, wearing condoms....which is the man's responsibility anyways, all you want....

like I asked, are you willing to go without having sex with you significant other long term if one of yous decides that kids aren't wanted at the time? you seem to being saying that na, the women can throw toxic chemicals in her body, she can have foreign objects placed inside, but na....birth control has nothing to do with the men, who want the sex, who needs the sex...who in the past have written laws, made up commands from God, have engineered great economic systems which well, all in all force the women to give them the sex!!

reply to post by dawnstar


ok well, my step mom had the procedure done last week and she told me it was $330, so now im thinking that might have been after coverage? i dont know how it works, im also a stranger to that system. forgive my ignorance if thats the case.

and for the record, my initial position in the argument was abstinence but i guess thats just an impossible fantasy because i was quickly bombarded with laughs and "do you REALLY think people wil not have sexz?!?1"