The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Risking women's health, breaching Australia's laws > Comments

Risking women's health, breaching Australia's laws : Comments

By Jocelynne Scutt, published 11/5/2007

Confidentiality and privacy laws are little protection against the determined anti-abortionist.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. All
It never ceases to amaze me how irrational discussions on abortion get on both sides. People say some really over-the-top things. People on both sides are sometimes scary and aggressive.

I understand why passions run high. Two sacred cows are considered to be at stake here: the value of human life or women's rights. Which issue is it? For many of course the question is very personal.

Surely we can't work this issue out by shouting in each others' faces. We must listen to both sides of the argument (the sensible voices, that is) and ask ourselves which issue we consider to be really at stake here.

I have done this, I believe. As a strong believer in women's rights I oppose all attempts to force, mislead, deny or violate them. But I also find it difficult to accept that we can decide when a human life is valid and when it is not. The development of a lifeform is on a continum. The decision about when it becomes human is largely philosophical. Science chooses where to draw that line. Many are happy to accept that. But what's at stake if they're wrong? Human life obviously trumps women's rights.

I do think it's wrong to accuse a woman of having murderous intentions. But I also think it's misleading to deny that abortion is killing something. It's a huge responsibility to make a decision about whether that thing is human or not.

It's an important issue to consider, a hard matter to decide on. Science has things to say on both sides of the argument. Such muddy water on such a crucial issue. No wonder there is conflict. Both sides believe that what is at stake is so important that we can't give up the fight. Little wonder policy-makers end up in a muddle
Posted by kt mcf, Friday, 11 May 2007 10:56:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
kt mcf, what is illogical about pointing out how devious government is, when health care counselling money, is given only to those agencies that promote the religious point of view? And yet this point of view is deceitfully undeclared. There is NO confusion by those male politicians just a determination to get their way by foul means.
Posted by think, Friday, 11 May 2007 11:24:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I hope that there are many women on this forum and not too many men. Every single woman with an unplanned pregnancy has no choice at all in making a decision on an unplanned pregnancy and living with the consequences. This does not apply to men.

One poster made a comment: it is about the rights of an unborn human's life vs women's rights. How simplistic is that.

Firstly, a foetus is a 'potential' human. Many things can happen before birth before this foetus is an independent human.

Secondly, it is not just women's rights, it is also her rights to life. Contrary to rose coloured glasses, pregnancy is not totally without risks. So, to demand a woman continues with an unwanted pregnancy is to insist she has no choice in taking on the risks of pregnancy. Would all men accept this demand if this was placed on them?

During birth, if it comes to a choice to save a woman's life or the baby's life, which do you think should be saved? The answer you give to that will determine what value you give to a woman's life. Either way, why should the one have precedence over the other?

If a pregnant woman looses her unborn baby through assault or negligence, why isn't the perpetrator charged with murder or manslaughter? If we are going to talk of murdering babies, let's start here.

And re rape. How could any of you possibly know the percentages of terminated pregnancies because of rape?

I cannot understand why we there are people implying abortions should be banned in Australia. It is not a compulsory option you know.

An unplanned pregnancy is the result of sex with failed or non-existent contraception. Nothing more and nothing less. We should be more concerned that there seems to be such poor understanding at how to avoid an unplanned pregnancy in the first place.
Posted by yvonne, Saturday, 12 May 2007 1:49:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"I hope that there are many women on this forum and not too many men. Every single woman with an unplanned pregnancy has no choice at all in making a decision on an unplanned pregnancy and living with the consequences. This does not apply to men." yvonne

What a sexist statement, Yvonne.

Pregnancy planned or unplanned has consequences for the potential alleged father as well.

So a pregnant woman's choice will affect not only her own life, but potentially the lives of up to three individuals.

On one hand male partners are now expected to partake and be supportive throughout pregnancy and child birth as well as taking a greater share and responsibility in child care.

I guess we are only a convenient tool which can be discarded when fathers become an inconvenience.

"An unplanned pregnancy is the result of sex with failed or non-existent contraception. Nothing more and nothing less. We should be more concerned that there seems to be such poor understanding at how to avoid an unplanned pregnancy in the first place."

Research shows that up to 40% of women will lie about birth control in order to get pregnant! So I don't think these women have a poor understanding of birth control. Their motives are less than honourable
Posted by JamesH, Saturday, 12 May 2007 6:51:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
YVONNE said:

Every single woman with an unplanned pregnancy has no choice at all in making a decision on an unplanned pregnancy and living with the consequences. This does not apply to men.

Really?

Hmmm.. I think just like a man can walk away from a girl he has impregnated, a girl can walk away from the child once she has given birth to it. They both tango'd and a child was the result.
The only difference I can see is the chronology. He can take a walk 9months earlier than she.
But lets not forget, a child has genese from both man and woman. Why is it so easy for a woman to assume or project the idea that a man has no feeling for offspring?

JamesH has it pretty right in suggesting that 'special interest' groups are very careful in what information they present.

Pro Abortion campaigners will try to tug on our heart strings with "Children conceived as a result of rape" etc...

Pro lifers will possibly show examples of brilliant children saved from abortion.

Personally, I don't think we should divide things into 'womens' health and 'mens' health... sounds too much like 'us/them'. Why not 'community health'?
Why not recognize that we are all in this together, and seek solutions which encompass the whole of the community ?
Posted by BOAZ_David, Saturday, 12 May 2007 7:23:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Australia is a secular state, no religion has any precedence over any other in our law. Large portions of our population do not have moral or religious strictures against abortion being available. Large portions of our population are clearly more worried about bringing a child into the world they can't afford rather than committing a mortal sin by having an abortion. I, for example, know the term mortal sin but not what it means and as a protestant not interested in learning either.

A first trimester abortion is less injurious to a woman's health than a full term normal pregnancy

I have been told by an ex-minister that women who placed babies for adoption always regret it but very few women regret having an abortion.

Then why should tax payers pay for a counselling service that
1. tells lies, like abortion will lead to increased rates of breast cancer, when in fact full term pregancy is a greater risk factor.
2. records all calls, "counselling" implies confidentiality
3. mark the woman's health record with an abortion item number
4. not actually inform women of all their options because the service doesn't actually mention abortion as an option
5. pushes the agenda of a vocal minority of the population

This counselling service wastes women's time when they want to have an abortion, in effect wiping out one of their choices. Clearly many of the potential fathers are quite happy by the decision to abort. We haven't heard any poster saying "my girlfriend got pregnant and I am still sore that she had an abortion. The abortion ruined my life."
We have heard many women say over the years that the unwanted baby changed my life and in some cases their lives were ruined especially in Ireland where fallen women were incarcerated in the Magdalene laundries and held there for 20 years until they were broken old crones.
Posted by billie, Saturday, 12 May 2007 10:51:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy