Hamlet,

I don't think that the consequences of sex are left out of the debate at all. I think they are constantly discussed. This, along with sexual health, are the primary drivers for debate over sex education, and the accessibility of contraceptives.

I also feel that our society very heavily, and primarily, still links sex with reproduction. Just because advertisers use sex to *sell* power, money, lingerie, cars, food etc doesn't mean society no longer *links* it to reproduction. It's just far more lucrative to use it to sell cars than it is to sell babies. And in a materialistic society, babies don't confer the 'status' that other objects do.

As Scout, Enaj and Laurie have pointed out, I know very few women of childbearing age who ignore the consequences of sex. Statistically, around half of women presenting for abortion were using contraception at the time of conception. This would indicate that the consequences of sex were foremost in the woman's mind, and preventative measures had been put in place; only these measures failed.

I do agree that modern attitudes of reproduction have shifted towards children being considered more a 'burden' than a blessing. This has everything to do with economics, individualism and changes in the structure of community.

To my own mind, one significant problem in the rate of abortion is that the way abortion is so hotly and divisively debated leaves little room for us to discuss it openly and productively.

I think the question you pose, "Do I choose to have sex now when this may lead to conception and its consequences?", is an excellent one, and one that should kick off how we educate young people to take responsibility for their sexual activity. It is the question my mother-in-law posed to her son (my husband) when he became a teenager. And it worked: when I became pregnant to him five months after starting our relationship, he stuck around to take responsibility. He was 23.

Hope I understood your question better this time.

Tracy
I'm with you on the issue of finding ways to lower the abortion rate, rather than just having a rant about it.

One of the key issues I think needs to change is the social stigma attached to single mothers and adoption.

I'd like to focus on adoption though. Although I must admit this isn't my area of expertise, accounts of my friend's personal experience has been that it is very hard to adopt in this country. This seems to come down to two main issues; social stigma and tight regulations.

I can't comment on the regulations as I really don't know a lot about it, maybe I will do some research into it after exams. However I've always thought that keeping the mothers identity secret from the child throughout life has been a silly rule and really needs to be changed. The natural birth mother will always have something to contribute.

As for the social stigma, it seems adoption tends to be assaulted in every direction. I remember reading an article over here in WA where everyone was hot under the collar because a homosexual couple were placed on the adoption list. Although not the ideal circumstances, I thought it represented a irony; we'd rather terminate the child than give him a chance with a couple who from all accounts were loving people.

Couple this with the stigma attached to continuing with the pregnancy. We all know about the overbearing threatening family members, and then there's the social embarressment a woman gets put through when she everyone sees shes not just put on a few kilos. My friend got pregnant to her boss, and proceeded with the pregnancy because she wanted to give the child a chance. She lost friends; and the attention from the males, being a good looking girl, has almost evaporated.

No wonder abortion can appear at the time as a clean quick-fix option. The truth is women who proceed with pregnancies to give their children a chance should be given a medal, not stigmatised.

Justin86 your idea of insisting that adopted children can always contact their natural mother absolutely stinks. There is nothing more disgusting than the cheque book journalism [indulged in most recently by Australian Story] where the journalist with camera recording confronts natural mother and asks why did you give up your seriously disabled child.

The decision was made privately 18 years before and as journalists won't back off then adoption looks a really unviable option.

I estimate that if all abortions were converted to adoptions there would be a surplus of 60,000 babies per year. Put them in orphanages? The state who would ultimately pick up the bill for rearing the children would find it cheaper to continue to subsidise abortions.

Justin,

I completely agree with you about the stigma attached to continuing with an unplanned pregnancy. It's something I had to deal with when I became pregnant, unexpectedly, with my first son.

The cost of me continuing my unplanned pregnancy was that I became a social outcast. It was like I had some hideous disease. I suspect I'd have had much more support if I'd chosen abortion: my social circle simply had experience dealing with that situation. It was what they advised me to do, I wouldn’t have had an inconvenient child floating around, and I'd have been back at the pub drinking with them sooner rather than later.

I also put on far more weight than was acceptable, and that put off any remaining friends from that period in my life(!). I worked in youth media at the time, and the sudden halt in invitations to media launches and related events was embarrassingly noticeable...

Through the pregnancy, during and after the traumatic birth, I was socially isolated, and unfortunately dealing with unresolved child sexual abuse issues and financial instability. It all came back at me. I experienced five months of Postnatal Depression as a result. Lucky for me I had a wonderful and supportive partner, and great parents (both sets).

Abortion would never have been the right choice for me. And I have never regretted my decision to have my baby (he's now four!). But honestly, there was so little social support out there for me.

Sometimes I feel so outraged at how unwelcoming our society has become towards pregnant women, mothers, and children. But then I'm equally dismayed at how some people can be so hostile towards women who feel that abortion is the most suitable decision they can make, in a society that is ill-equipped to support them to continue with their pregnancy.

I seriously believe that we can do better than the current polarised ‘abortion debate’: collaborative, creative solutions come from discussion and dialogue – not a fight over which ‘side’ wins.

Tracy A,
Thanks for sharing your experience. All the best to your family.
Your experience highlights that the 'abortion debate' is only the tip of the iceberg, and there are so many underlying considerations, both personal and societal.
Abortion is our society's most troublesome symptom. Masking the symptom with a painkiller, like mifepristone, does not treat the illness.

Tracey,
I agree completely with your comments regarding pregnancy and kids. The most miserable time of my life was being isolated at home with two kids (even though I adored them and wanted them both) under 4 and a husband who travelled all the time.
Our society loathes children, taking toddlers or crying babies anywhere in public is an exercise in disapproving looks, muttered remarks and barely concealed irritation. I was once asked to leave a library because my small children were laughing. (I had asked an assistant to help me find the book so I would not be in the library long, the assistant was incompetent and taking forever.) Another assistant asked me to keep them quiet and when I asked her "How?" because all I could do was take them from laughing to crying, she asked me to leave! However, none of this made me regret having my kids, it just opened my eyes to how purse lipped our society is about kids, and, how sanctimonious. Motherhood is good as long as you don't bother me with your kids.
I also agree completely that women should be supported whatever their reproductive decisions.