Rights of the father. Watch

Zargabaath
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#201
Report 4 years ago
#201
(Original post by seventhdemon)
I agree but I think the man needs to take more responsibility for the consequences of his actions as he is also the one who got her pregnant in the first place. The majority of responsibility will obviously lie with the mother as the primary caregiver but the man should be prepared for things like unplanned pregnancy too and not just assume that if anything happens he doesn't need to face the consequences of his 'contribution'
They are both equally responsible for the pregnancy, they both have the opportunity to wear protection. That's fine, they both have an equal opportunity to prevent the pregnancy. It's all good up to this point.

Now when the woman is actually pregnant, the decision to keep the baby is all hers, if she doesn't want it she can relinquish all responsibility by aborting it, the man has no say in whether or not the child is born. (Which I'm not arguing with, a woman shouldn't be forced to carry out a pregnancy she doesn't want and definitely shouldn't be forced to abort her child) however for the sake of equality and fairness, in this period where the woman can decide whether or not she wishes to be a mother, the father should also have the same opportunity. Denying him this is blatantly unequal and unfair. Why should the woman get the chance to walk away with no responsibilities but not the man?
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#202
Report 4 years ago
#202
(Original post by limetang)
Where does this myth come from that that without child support a child will be doomed to a life in poverty unless the tax payer picks up the tab? You are aware that women can and DO work right?

Again you seem to be very happy to say that women have these rights and responsibilities but seem wholly unwilling to admit the obvious fact about what that means for the sake of what's fair when it comes to parental obligations.
It isn't a myth. I don't have spout the statistics about increased crime, poverty and poorer outcomes in single parent households to know that removing Child Support will make that worse unless the Tax Payer picks up the tab.

It doesn't matter what it means for parental responsibilities because it is already too late for a man to intervene. The Man and Woman are only in "equal" positions before Pregnancy.

Once Pregnancy starts, they are no longer in the same position and therefore, will never have the same rights.
0
reply
RandZul'Zorander
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#203
Report 4 years ago
#203
(Original post by Zargabaath)
They are both equally responsible for the pregnancy, they both have the opportunity to wear protection. That's fine, they both have an equal opportunity to prevent the pregnancy. It's all good up to this point.

Now when the woman is actually pregnant, the decision to keep the baby is all hers, if she doesn't want it she can relinquish all responsibility by aborting it, the man has no say in whether or not the child is born. (Which I'm not arguing with, a woman shouldn't be forced to carry out a pregnancy she doesn't want and definitely shouldn't be forced to abort her child) however for the sake of equality and fairness, in this period where the woman can decide whether or not she wishes to be a mother, the father should also have the same opportunity. Denying him this is blatantly unequal and unfair. Why should the woman get the chance to walk away with no responsibilities but not the man?
It is true that during pregnancy a woman has the choice and ability not only about whether or not to continue the pregnancy but ultimately to decide if they want to parent the child. Arguably this continues even after birth as giving a child up for adoption is always available. However, this is not really the case for men. Well...they do. They can choose not to be present and therefore not parent the child. But courts can enforce child support payments as long as the child is in the care of it's mother.

Why? This has to do with the rights of the child, which changes the game so to speak after it is born. At that point, there is a life that needs protecting and first and foremost that responsibility falls upon those who produced the child. It is inarguable that the man is an essential component to the creation of a human life, and unless a father has reached an agreement against being supportive of said child with the mother there doesn't seem to be a reason against enforcing their responsibility. Even if the pregnancy occurred by accident that doesn't remove the right of the child to be cared for. A father, even unwittingly, played an essential part in the actualization of the outcome (the existence of said child) and so what reason is there to absolve them of their responsibility?

I can think of only very few options. 1. It is financially unfeasible for the the father to give an appropriate amount of support. In this case I would say they should pay an amount that is reasonable to their circumstance. 2. A father was fraudulently made to father a child (think holes in a condom, intentionally not/lying about taking the pill, or more extremely rape/sexual assault). Note: I am not claiming these are common, just that they would seem to be situations in which responsibility seems to not fall on the father. 3. An explicit agreement between the father and mother that the father would have no obligation towards a resulting child.
...can't think of any more off the top of my head BUT it's important to note that these are not absolute or certain as there needs to be a weighing of the child whom without proper support suffers and has no means to help itself.
0
reply
limetang
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#204
Report 4 years ago
#204
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
It isn't a myth. I don't have spout the statistics about increased crime, poverty and poorer outcomes in single parent households to know that removing Child Support will make that worse unless the Tax Payer picks up the tab.

It doesn't matter what it means for parental responsibilities because it is already too late for a man to intervene. The Man and Woman are only in "equal" positions before Pregnancy.

Once Pregnancy starts, they are no longer in the same position and therefore, will never have the same rights.
So would you say that fundamentally your position is based upon the fact that the rights of a born child to a good life come before the rights of the father to have a meaningful choice about his parental obligations.
0
reply
Wade-
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#205
Report 4 years ago
#205
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
It isn't stupid. Men have the choice.

It is only stupid because it doesn't fit into your narrative.

It doesn't matter if it is discriminatory. Women can get pregnant. Men can not. Therefore, they have never been in the same position.
I don't see why you keep saying that, once a woman is pregnant the man has no choice, that is an undeniable fact.

I'm not giving a narrative so I'm not really sure what you're talking about.

I could use the things you say to say justify pretty much anything, 'it doesn't matter if it's discriminatory'

(Original post by DorianGrayism)
It is a lie. You wrote that there is a 1 in 200 chance.

That is correct. A man has no financial responsibility to pregnancy unless he chooses to.

A simple Google search will tell you the Physical changes that a woman undergoes during pregnancy, The fact you are completely ignorant is not an excuse.

I am simply stating a fact. Pregnancy is dangerous. That is why hundreds of millions is spent on it on a year.
I didn't say that.

If you think a man has no financial responsibility if he gets his girlfriend pregnant then you it shows you don't understand relationships very well.

There's a difference between physical change and injury. Also please name one permanent change caused by pregnancy.

Pregnancy is not dangerous, that is wrong. An incredibly small percentage of women die from pregnancy. You keep repeating this lie for some reason



Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
dyslexicvegie
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#206
Report 4 years ago
#206
(Original post by Wade-)
The baby inside of the woman isn't her body either



Well then if you're pro-choice you're a hypocrite



But being forced into having a child you don't want isn't fair either. With the solution I proposed you have both the mother and the father getting an actual say in whether or not they have a child, not just the mother. Why is fair that the father who, once the child is born, will be equally effected by the life of the child has no say in whether to have the child or not




Posted from TSR Mobile


I am not saying it is fair! That is what I have just been saying.
But ur proposed 'legal abortion' and an actual abortion have entirely different consequences- because the first option still produces a child!

A kid will still need all the same things whether or not the Dad wanted it. In very few arrangements does a child have an equal impact on both parents.

If a man does not want to raise a child there is nothing anyone can do to force him.
There are some legal routes which means after a lot of paperwork the absent parent can (but not all the time) be obligated (if he does not feel that morally) to make payments the HELP support there own child. If he can afford it.

I'm sure when you gents do become fathers your own flesh and blood will be more important to you then the size of your wallets.
0
reply
Wade-
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#207
Report 4 years ago
#207
(Original post by dyslexicvegie)
I am not saying it is fair! That is what I have just been saying.
But ur proposed 'legal abortion' and an actual abortion have entirely different consequences- because the first option still produces a child!

A kid will still need all the same things whether or not the Dad wanted it. In very few arrangements does a child have an equal impact on both parents.

If a man does not want to raise a child there is nothing anyone can do to force him.
There are some legal routes which means after a lot of paperwork the absent parent can (but not all the time) be obligated (if he does not feel that morally) to make payments the HELP support there own child. If he can afford it.

I'm sure when you gents do become fathers your own flesh and blood will be more important to you then the size of your wallets.
I didn't say you had said anything?

If the 'legal abortion' as you phrase it leaves children deprived then it is the fault of the mother. She would know that she is not going to have the support of the father and has had the child anyway


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#208
Report 4 years ago
#208
(Original post by Wade-)
I don't see why you keep saying that, once a woman is pregnant the man has no choice, that is an undeniable fact.

I'm not giving a narrative so I'm not really sure what you're talking about.

I could use the things you say to say justify pretty much anything, 'it doesn't matter if it's discriminatory'
][/SIZE]
Not really. They are not in equal positions to begin with. Men cannot get Pregnant. Women can. Therefore, giving them equal rights during Pregnancy is absurd when they have no Financial or Physical responsibility.


(Original post by Wade-)
I didn't say that.

If you think a man has no financial responsibility if he gets his girlfriend pregnant then you it shows you don't understand relationships very well.

There's a difference between physical change and injury. Also please name one permanent change caused by pregnancy.

Pregnancy is not dangerous, that is wrong. An incredibly small percentage of women die from pregnancy. You keep repeating this lie for some reason
That is a man's choice. He has no legal duty to do so. In the same sense, the grandparents have no financial responsibility for the child even they may choose to help.

If Pregnancy was not dangerous then a woman wouldn't be doped up to max with a huge number of monitors on her. So, your point is idiotic. Again, this is just another point you wish to ignore.

I don't care if a small percentage of women die. You are not taking the risk. You have no say in the matter.

If you cannot understand how a woman's body changes during pregnancy, then I suggest you look at the huge stretch marks. That is just one example of a permanent change, that anyone with common sense can tell you.
0
reply
dyslexicvegie
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#209
Report 4 years ago
#209
(Original post by Wade-)
I didn't say you had said anything?

If the 'legal abortion' as you phrase it leaves children deprived then it is the fault of the mother. She would know that she is not going to have the support of the father and has had the child anyway


Posted from TSR Mobile
Sorry I didn't make that clear the'legal abortion' thing is a phrase that was used a lot during the thread by other people.

Ok, so its the mothers fault?
If someone said to you "Im going to walk down the stairs" (I'm pregnant)

You say "don't walk down the stairs" (get an abortion)

They say no and walk down the stairs (she has ur baby)

She slips and falls down the stairs (begins to have financial problems and struggles to support ur child)

You leave the person on the stairs bleeding. You dont help Because its not ur fault they are bleeding.

Fault and blame is not the issue it is the consequence.
0
reply
Wade-
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#210
Report 4 years ago
#210
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Not really. They are not in equal positions to begin with. Men cannot get Pregnant. Women can. Therefore, giving them equal rights during Pregnancy is absurd when they have no Financial or Physical responsibility.
Like I said if you think a man has no financial responsibility when his girlfriend/wife is pregnant then you clearly have no understanding of how relationships work.

You have no legal responsibility during the pregnancy but you do after the birth, the two are undeniably linked.


(Original post by DorianGrayism)
If Pregnancy was not dangerous then a woman wouldn't be doped up to max with a huge number of monitors on her. So, your point is idiotic. Again, this is just another point you wish to ignore.

I don't care if a small percentage of women die. You are not taking the risk. You have no say in the matter.

If you cannot understand how a woman's body changes during pregnancy, then I suggest you look at the huge stretch marks. That is just one example of a permanent change, that anyone with common sense can tell you.
'Monitors' don't 'dope' anyone so I don't really know what you're talking about. Women are monitored to ensure there are no problems and 'doped' to relieve pain. These things remove the dangers of pregnancy that existed hundreds of years ago.

You're clearly ignoring what I'm saying, I'm not saying a man should be able to have say in the matter of abortion, I'm saying they should have the option to simply remove themselves from the child's life.

Firstly stretch marks are not an injury and secondly stretch marks are often not permanent. It isn't a reasonable argument to respond by saying 'I suggest you look it up'




Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#211
Report 4 years ago
#211
(Original post by Wade-)
Like I said if you think a man has no financial responsibility when his girlfriend/wife is pregnant then you clearly have no understanding of how relationships work.

You have no legal responsibility during the pregnancy but you do after the birth, the two are undeniably linked.
Again. Not everyone is involved in a relationship. A man does not have to pay. There is no legal responsibility on the man to pay for the woman.

These are simply facts that wish to deny.


(Original post by Wade-)
'Monitors' don't 'dope' anyone so I don't really know what you're talking about. Women are monitored to ensure there are no problems and 'doped' to relieve pain. These things remove the dangers of pregnancy that existed hundreds of years ago.

You're clearly ignoring what I'm saying, I'm not saying a man should be able to have say in the matter of abortion, I'm saying they should have the option to simply remove themselves from the child's life.

Firstly stretch marks are not an injury and secondly stretch marks are often not permanent. It isn't a reasonable argument to respond by saying 'I suggest you look it up'

Posted from TSR Mobile
I didn't say monitors dope anyone up. You are just making things up. Either way, these things exist because Pregnancy has significant dangers. A monitor and etc does not remove it without significant professional intervention.

I am not talking about Abortion either. Again, you wish to deny the obvious fact that a man has no responsibility in pregnancy and therefore has no rights during it that he can absolve himself of.

Sorry, we can talk about injury or change.

IF you want to talk about Injury, then you can say that a woman's vagina is ripped or she has a C section. If you want to talk about permanent change then there are stretch marks. Pick either one, it makes no difference. It is completely false to suggest a stretch mark is not permanent.
0
reply
Wade-
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#212
Report 4 years ago
#212
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Again. Not everyone is involved in a relationship. A man does not have to pay. There is no legal responsibility on the man to pay for the woman.

These are simply facts that wish to deny.
Please show where I've denied that men have no 'legal' financial responsibility for a pregnant woman. It's yet another thing you're claiming I've said that I haven't.


(Original post by DorianGrayism)
I didn't say monitors dope anyone up. You are just making things up. Either way, these things exist because Pregnancy has significant dangers. A monitor and etc does not remove it without significant professional intervention.
Ok well those professionals combined with the monitoring equipment remove the danger from pregnancy hence why there are so few deaths caused by pregnancy. You're consistently making it to be something that causes hundreds or thousands of deaths a year.

(Original post by DorianGrayism)
I am not talking about Abortion either. Again, you wish to deny the obvious fact that a man has no responsibility in pregnancy and therefore has no rights during it that he can absolve himself of.

Sorry, we can talk about injury or change.

IF you want to talk about Injury, then you can say that a woman's vagina is ripped or she has a C section. If you want to talk about permanent change then there are stretch marks. Pick either one, it makes no difference. It is completely false to suggest a stretch mark is not permanent.
I at no point said a man should being able to discharge any responsibility while a woman is pregnant because as you've repeatedly said 'a man has no legal responsibility during pregnancy'. When the child is born is when the man's responsibility should be discharged if he so wishes because at that stage he does have a legal responsibility but he should make his position clear whilst the woman is pregnant as his feelings will quite possibly have an impact on her decision.

It's not ripped, its stretched. I wouldn't describe that as injury as it's something a woman's body is designed to do. Surgery also doesn't really constitute injury either.

It's so ridiculous to claim that stretch marks aren't always permanent that the NHS makes that claim

'Most stretch marks aren't particularly noticeable and will fade over time.'
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#213
Report 4 years ago
#213
(Original post by Wade-)
Please show where I've denied that men have no 'legal' financial responsibility for a pregnant woman. It's yet another thing you're claiming I've said that I haven't.
Again, the legal case is that all that matters since you wish change a legal precedent.

Using your logic, then the Grandparents are also financially responsible since they may help.

So. Only Females are Financially and Physically responsible.


(Original post by Wade-)
Ok well those professionals combined with the monitoring equipment remove the danger from pregnancy hence why there are so few deaths caused by pregnancy. You're consistently making it to be something that causes hundreds or thousands of deaths a year.
Well, it causes hundreds of deaths a year according to your own statistics.

The fact Pregnancy is dangerous, is simply proven by the millions spent each year.

Again, it is irrelevant. She is the one who places herself at increased risk. Not you. So whether you believe it is dangerous or not is irrelevant.

(Original post by Wade-)
I at no point said a man should being able to discharge any responsibility while a woman is pregnant because as you've repeatedly said 'a man has no legal responsibility during pregnancy'. When the child is born is when the man's responsibility should be discharged if he so wishes because at that stage he does have a legal responsibility but he should make his position clear whilst the woman is pregnant as his feelings will quite possibly have an impact on her decision.
Nope. The Tax Payer should not be responsible to make up the difference that the Father should be paying.

His mistake. He pays for 18 years.


(Original post by Wade-)
It's not ripped, its stretched. I wouldn't describe that as injury as it's something a woman's body is designed to do. Surgery also doesn't really constitute injury either.

It's so ridiculous to claim that stretch marks aren't always permanent that the NHS makes that claim

'Most stretch marks aren't particularly noticeable and will fade over time.'
Yes. Stretch marks fade. They do not disappear.

Wrong. The Vagina tears in many cases. Especially in first time mothers.

The tear can be so serious then it can involve the Anus. So stop making things uo

Again. Surgery is serious. The fact you are so blasé shows that you have no concept of work that goes in.
1
reply
James Milibanter
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#214
Report 4 years ago
#214
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Again, the legal case is that all that matters since you wish change a legal precedent.

Using your logic, then the Grandparents are also financially responsible since they may help.

So. Only Females are Financially and Physically responsible.




Well, it causes hundreds of deaths a year according to your own statistics.

The fact Pregnancy is dangerous, is simply proven by the millions spent each year.

Again, it is irrelevant. She is the one who places herself at increased risk. Not you. So whether you believe it is dangerous or not is irrelevant.



Nope. The Tax Payer should not be responsible to make up the difference that the Father should be paying.

His mistake. He pays for 18 years.




Yes. Stretch marks fade. They do not disappear.

Wrong. The Vagina tears in many cases. Especially in first time mothers.

The tear can be so serious then it can involve the Anus. So stop making things uo

Again. Surgery is serious. The fact you are so blasé shows that you have no concept of work that goes in.
+Rep
1
reply
Wade-
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#215
Report 4 years ago
#215
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Again, the legal case is that all that matters since you wish change a legal precedent.

Using your logic, then the Grandparents are also financially responsible since they may help.

So. Only Females are Financially and Physically responsible.
You do realise that whole section is irrelevant? I said show me where I said that men have a legal responsibility to a pregnant woman


[QUOTE=DorianGrayism;54574401]Well, it causes hundreds of deaths a year according to your own statistics.

The fact Pregnancy is dangerous, is simply proven by the millions spent each year.

Again, it is irrelevant. She is the one who places herself at increased risk. Not you. So whether you believe it is dangerous or not is irrelevant.



Nope. The Tax Payer should not be responsible to make up the difference that the Father should be paying.

No in 2013 eight women died in the UK as a result of birth complications, there were 698,512 births so that means that 0.001 women who gave birth died which means it was a lesser cause of death than falling from a building which isn't something we consider enough of a danger to give people special rights that others don't have.

(Original post by DorianGrayism)
His mistake. He pays for 18 years.
Well by that logic we best do away with abortion; her mistake she looks after a child for 18 years.


(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Yes. Stretch marks fade. They do not disappear.

Wrong. The Vagina tears in many cases. Especially in first time mothers.

The tear can be so serious then it can involve the Anus. So stop making things uo
They may never be completely gone but they essentially fade to a point where they're barely noticeable.

In very few cases does a vagina actually tear, it is the norm for it to stretch.

(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Again. Surgery is serious. The fact you are so blasé shows that you have no concept of work that goes in.
Please quote where I said surgery isn't serious
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#216
Report 4 years ago
#216
(Original post by Wade-)
You do realise that whole section is irrelevant? I said show me where I said that men have a legal responsibility to a pregnant woman
Great. If it is irrelevant then move on because that is what I said.



(Original post by Wade-)
No in 2013 eight women died in the UK as a result of birth complications, there were 698,512 births so that means that 0.001 women who gave birth died which means it was a lesser cause of death than falling from a building which isn't something we consider enough of a danger to give people special rights that others don't have.
No. You wrote 324 ( Post 85).

.
(Original post by Wade-)
They may never be completely gone but they essentially fade to a point where they're barely noticeable.

In very few cases does a vagina actually tear, it is the norm for it to stretch.

Please quote where I said surgery isn't serious

So Stretch marks are permanent .

Again, you were suggesting that Surgery does not cause injury. Therefore, suggesting it is not serious. That is completely false and idiotic.

No, Tears are very common. 85% have tearing with 70% requiring suturing.

Again, you have no experience in the issue and that is why you continue to make this facile statements about Child birth and Surgery.
0
reply
Wade-
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#217
Report 4 years ago
#217
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Great. If it is irrelevant then move on.
It's irrelevant because I asked you to provide evidence of where I said something, you failed to do so because I hadn't said it.


(Original post by DorianGrayism)
No. You wrote 324 ( Post 85).
As you seem to have gotten confused what I said what that between 2010 and 2012 324 women died in child birth. I'll correct the error I made in my last post; there are 8 deaths per 100,00 births so the correct number for 2013 is actually more like 55 which actually means you have a 0.008% chance in dying, hardly the dangerous activity you made out.

(Original post by DorianGrayism)
So Stretch marks are permanent .

Again, you were suggesting that Surgery does not cause injury. Therefore, suggesting it is not serious. That is completely false and idiotic.
So your view is that if something is serious it invariably causes injury? I hope I've misunderstood you because that would be an incredibly idiotic view to hold

(Original post by DorianGrayism)
No, Tears are very common. 85% have tearing with 70% requiring suturing.
Where did you get those figures from?

(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Again, you have no experience in the issue and that is why you continue to make this facile statements about Child birth and Surgery.
You're the one who acts as though mothers just deliver babies and drop dead on a regular basis. I may have no experience but I'm fully aware that mothers dying during or soon after child birth is so incredibly rare that it should not grant them special rights
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#218
Report 4 years ago
#218
(Original post by Wade-)
It's irrelevant because I asked you to provide evidence of where I said something, you failed to do so because I hadn't said it.
Ok.



(Original post by Wade-)
IAs you seem to have gotten confused what I said what that between 2010 and 2012 324 women died in child birth. I'll correct the error I made in my last post; there are 8 deaths per 100,00 births so the correct number for 2013 is actually more like 55 which actually means you have a 0.008% chance in dying, hardly the dangerous activity you made out.
Not confused.

324 women died. That is your statistic. Not mine.

That does not take into account any physical or psychiatric consequences of Child Birth or death during Pregnancy.


(Original post by Wade-)
ISo your view is that if something is serious it invariably causes injury? I hope I've misunderstood you because that would be an incredibly idiotic view to hold
A C section requires you to injure someone. You have to cut the womb open to get to the baby. .

(Original post by Wade-)
Where did you get those figures from?

You're the one who acts as though mothers just deliver babies and drop dead on a regular basis. I may have no experience but I'm fully aware that mothers dying during or soon after child birth is so incredibly rare that it should not grant them special rights
Nope. I said it was Dangerous. That is why millions is spent on it to help women along.

You will find the statistics in the same place that you found that Tears of the Vagina are "in very few cases " .... Oh no....you won't because you made it up.

http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/episiotomy-and-tears

Of course, this is just one complication of birth. I could continue to talk about other things such as Prolapses, PEs and etc.
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#219
Report 4 years ago
#219
(Original post by limetang)
So would you say that fundamentally your position is based upon the fact that the rights of a born child to a good life come before the rights of the father to have a meaningful choice about his parental obligations.
Why would I think that a Child will have a Good life if the Father pays? A single parent household is more likely to have crime and be in poverty.

The point is that someone has to pay and I don't want to pay. The two idiots responsible pay.
0
reply
Wade-
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#220
Report 4 years ago
#220
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Ok.





Not confused.

324 women died. That is your statistic. Not mine.

That does not take into account any physical or psychiatric consequences of Child Birth or death during Pregnancy.




A C section requires you to injure someone. You have to cut the womb open to get to the baby. .



Nope. I said it was Dangerous. That is why millions is spent on it to help women along.

You will find the statistics in the same place that you found that Tears of the Vagina are "in very few cases " .... Oh no....you won't because you made it up.

http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/episiotomy-and-tears

Of course, this is just one complication of birth. I could continue to talk about other things such as Prolapses, PEs and etc.
I wonder if you realise how stupid you're making yourself look. You are literally just making up what you think I've said


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How has the start of this academic year been for you?

Loving it - gonna be a great year (138)
17.72%
It's just nice to be back! (210)
26.96%
Not great so far... (280)
35.94%
I want to drop out! (151)
19.38%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed