Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    1-protection (condoms mainly) is the MAN's responsibility.. thats how it is looked at here.

    2-It takes two to tango.. so its not ONLY the woman's fault if she "gets pregnant."

    3-I think most mothers would opt to adopt children out if they were born alive because they ended up giving birth anyways.. (IMO.. thats what I'd do)

    4-And who are we to decide whether or not a fit/unfit mother should have to go through the pain, and discomfort of having a child if she doesn't want it? I say its up to her. SHE is the one that has to live with the shame, SHE is the one that has to live with the pain of knowing she could have had something and doesn't. Let HER make the decision.
    Why should protection be "the MAN's responsibilty"? That's a bit like saying everyone who carries a gun must wear a bullet-proof vest. With an attitude like that you're gonna get pregnant a lot!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calumc)
    Why should protection be "the MAN's responsibilty"? That's a bit like saying everyone who carries a gun must wear a bullet-proof vest. With an attitude like that you're gonna get pregnant a lot!
    Maybe because it's ebcause we wear them?

    (Original post by Amb1)
    I agree. But it happens. Of course there should be better education and young people should be taught to control themselves... but in the past and at the moment it just doesn't get through for one reason or another. Exactly. Whatever the resons are for the girl becomming pregnant (even if it is down to ignorance/stupidity...) terminating the pregnancy can be the best way to avoid these safety risks?
    Would you shoot a person in the result to kill him because he's gone a bit funny in the head and keeps injuring himself and his own property? The usual procedure is to take him to a police cell, strip him or her of their existing clothes with replacements, and then take medical action.

    (Original post by Amb1)
    Did I say that adopted children have no life?? I just think that adoption can cause a lot of confusion, stress and pain for the child, the adoptive family and the biological parents. So in the event of a pregnancy (for whatever reason) termination should be available. There's always a chance.
    Sure it can create stress and confusion and so on, but it is certainly less than divorce. However you can get divorces so easily and look at the divorce rates too. So this argument whilst I agree with it in part, in terms of numbers I'd reckon it is a handful. Let me know if you have any figures to hand But I don't think these symptomns are stong enough in order to justify a termination because of it. You may well disagree.

    BTW I never said that you thought they had no life, at least that wasn't my intent

    Bad parenting also results into stress a lot more, mere arguments between parents can often create children to become upset, even when they are a teenager and not a baby! In extreme cases this could affect the children's academic progress at school.

    (Original post by Amb1)
    What I meant by it was unable to cope with the situation, being confused, becoming depressed...
    Sheer confusion, can't cope? Well if this is what happens during pregnancty then we should really find out what part of the DNA is responsible for this and either sieve them out or sterile them at an early age? Whilst there can be differing degrees in terms of gravity on the situations you describe these will not provide an excuse for other things in life which require responsibility.

    (Original post by Amb1)
    Couples who have babies invariably need support from family and friends. Not just in a practical (eg babysitting) way but emotionally and sometimes even financially. Sometimes parents don't want to leave their children with complete strangers when they need some time for themselves. I'd much prefer to leave my child with someone who I know and trust.
    Well you would not know the situation I described earlier but we were hardly friends with the parents (I knew them what less than 24 hours). Later on after they came back from the nightclub the mother started being inpolite to my friend and ungreatful, next you know we decided to leave. Earlier on during that weekend, the mother decided to sit on the window sill at night with the window wide open cradling her baby. I'm sure but if you slip you both fall out of the window and probably die considering she lives in a flat and this was the 3rd floor I believe. I can understand your point though.

    If you can't afford to have a baby don't have one. If this situation arised after birth fine, but should not be an excuse for a termination. I would never take out a loan I cannot afford to pay back the interest, although I do realise there are stupid people on this planet.

    In terms of emotions I guess there is a substantial element to you from your upbringings. This is not completely their fault but you can change of course. I do not go around to my parents asking for money, I learn to live with what I have and do the best I can from that. Stand on your own two feet if you like (for me anyway).

    Perhaps if people are so not wanting the risk of an unwanted pregnancy to engage in activities which result the secreted fluid elsewhere other than inside the woman's female reproductive system. Just a thought.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    2. True and I'm not sure if the user who have responded has actually disputed that point.
    Yes but people are always talking about the mother when looking at abortions. Very few people thing about the father. Where is he? Is he supporting the women in her decision to have an abortion? Does he want her to keep it? Is he pressuring he into having an abortion? There is a father to every aborted foetus and I think he gets and easy ride in the whole debate. No one is calling him a murderer.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    Maybe because it's ebcause we wear them?
    Wear what, the pill? :rolleyes: The facts that there are several other forms of protection and that it's the woman who will get pregnant don't matter?

    It's the woman who'll be left "holding the baby", so to leave it to the man is really irresponsible.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calumc)
    Wear what, the pill? :rolleyes: The facts that there are several other forms of protection and that it's the woman who will get pregnant don't matter?

    It's the woman who'll be left "holding the baby", so to leave it to the man is really irresponsible.
    Exactly. I wonder what are the costs of the pill. If in doubt after intercourse you could take a pill as soon as possible after the event. This is better than wasting your own time, feelings, taxpayers money to have a termination.

    Yes there are other forms of protection and since I've come across plenty of girls intending to go out on the pull it is totally incorrect to expect guys to have condoms. I think I mentioned femindoms in my previous post above. If not sorry about that, such a long post

    You see if we hold this responsibilty for which you described surely we must have more rights over a say on abortion etc? But no, so it doesn't seem correct. Hope that made sense!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    Yes but people are always talking about the mother when looking at abortions. Very few people thing about the father. Where is he? Is he supporting the women in her decision to have an abortion? Does he want her to keep it? Is he pressuring he into having an abortion? There is a father to every aborted foetus and I think he gets and easy ride in the whole debate. No one is calling him a murderer.
    I have mentioned about fathers before on this topic, not so much on this forum though. It does seem biased but isn't it because of the current situation we have currently on this topic have some part to play? Fathers do have an easy ride and for those who consider abortion as murder against the mother must also adhere to equivalent criticisms of fathers in allowing it. I mean it would be a participation to the killing. They obviously can't be called murderers because it's not them who have killed the foetus, but have participated in the killing nonetheless.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    Would you shoot a person in the result to kill him because he's gone a bit funny in the head and keeps injuring himself and his own property? The usual procedure is to take him to a police cell, strip him or her of their existing clothes with replacements, and then take medical action.
    I was talking about the woman who has to carry the baby, not the child. What should happen if the woman carrying a child that she doesn't want is not 'of sound mind'? Should she be allowed to terminate the pregnancy??

    Let me know if you have any figures to hand But I don't think these symptomns are stong enough in order to justify a termination because of it. You may well disagree.
    Unfortunately I don't have statistics to satisfy you. And I do disagree :rolleyes:

    BTW I never said that you thought they had no life, at least that wasn't my intent
    Ok.

    Bad parenting also results into stress a lot more, mere arguments between parents can often create children to become upset, even when they are a teenager and not a baby! In extreme cases this could affect the children's academic progress at school.
    So why should the incapable parents be forced to bring child into the world?

    Well you would not know the situation I described earlier but we were hardly friends with the parents (I knew them what less than 24 hours). Later on after they came back from the nightclub the mother started being inpolite to my friend and ungreatful, next you know we decided to leave. Earlier on during that weekend, the mother decided to sit on the window sill at night with the window wide open cradling her baby. I'm sure but if you slip you both fall out of the window and probably die considering she lives in a flat and this was the 3rd floor I believe.
    SHe aounds quite irresponsible, must have been annoying.
    I can understand your point though.
    cool

    If you can't afford to have a baby don't have one. although I do realise there are stupid people on this planet.
    I agree. If you're unable to realise the financial implications (nevermind all the others) of having a baby you're probably more likely to 'accidentally' get pregnant. I think the option of a termination should be available, otherwise there is likely to be an increase in bad parenting (from people who don't want to be/aren't ready to be parents).

    Perhaps if people are so not wanting the risk of an unwanted pregnancy to engage in activities which result the secreted fluid elsewhere other than inside the woman's female reproductive system. Just a thought.
    For some reason, sex education just isn't getting the message through to people, or if it is, it seems to be the wrong message?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    They obviously can't be called murderers because it's not them who have killed the foetus, but have participated in the killing nonetheless.
    But then it is the doctor in most abortions who actually kills the foetus so surely in the majority of cases the mother couldn't be called a murder. If anyone is a murderer (which I don't agree with anyway) then it would be the doctor not the mother.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=Amb1]So why should the incapable parents be forced to bring child into the world?

    Well arguably they shouldn't be allowed to have children at all. I know I will be criticised for this, but I would not take risks on the roads (if I was on a vehicle) if I was incapable of advanced techniques that you learn on your advanced driving lessons. It could also teach them a lesson may be that you should not indulge in activities you are not worthy for? You could also argue that repeated abortees could be made sterile. One reason being that they do not take this topic seriously so how can you expect them to bring a child up properly and not dragged up?

    (Original post by Amb1)
    SHe aounds quite irresponsible, must have been annoying. cool
    Yes she was. The ironic thing with the public is that my friend and I took the child in a pram and boy did my friend get some dirty looks from women in the streets. Typically assuming she's a young mother and I'm the father. For all they know we could be siblings and the baby in the pram could be our nephew! Stupid people.

    (Original post by Amb1)
    I agree. If you're unable to realise the financial implications (nevermind all the others) of having a baby you're probably more likely to 'accidentally' get pregnant. I think the option of a termination should be available, otherwise there is likely to be an increase in bad parenting (from people who don't want to be/aren't ready to be parents).
    Are you dismissing the possibility of adoption? I have acknowledged your previous posts on this matter. It also depends how you mean bad parenting. We have recently discussed child chastisement as a mthod to discipline your children. So this is really up for interpretation.

    (Original post by Amb1)
    For some reason, sex education just isn't getting the message through to people, or if it is, it seems to be the wrong message?
    Yes SE is a load of tripe. What I needed to learn I had to either watch films or read books. I did not want to go out and find out physically. I think we should talk about sex in more explicit detail it's not like no one in year 11 doesn't know what it is! By doing so you could help improve youngster's sex lives as well as knowledge surrounding this topic, which may result in fewer terminations, people taking more responsibility and so on. Apparently SE is responsible for the increase in (underage) teenage pregnancies.

    I wish to add that many of the view points I have stated I may not necessarily hold but find it interesting on other people's response. Just in case this turns into a flame war, which I hope it doesn't.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    But then it is the doctor in most abortions who actually kills the foetus so surely in the majority of cases the mother couldn't be called a murder. If anyone is a murderer (which I don't agree with anyway) then it would be the doctor not the mother.
    You may also have nurses involved in some point and perhaps pharmacists too. Though I did want it kept simple And yes I agree. It seems like the foetus is up against it when you consider all the people involved in the termination.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    You may also have nurses involved in some point and perhaps pharmacists too. Though I did want it kept simple And yes I agree. It seems like the foetus is up against it when you consider all the people involved in the termination.
    well you might even consider abortion a form of euthanasia...
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BloodyValentine)
    well you might even consider abortion a form of euthanasia...
    This concept is either too subtle or too ridiculous for me to comprehend. Could you elaborate please?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    This concept is either too subtle or too ridiculous for me to comprehend. Could you elaborate please?
    I suppose it could be if the foetus is going to have a very short and painfull life once born. However I think this argument is slightly dubeous.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    I suppose it could be if the foetus is going to have a very short and painfull life once born. However I think this argument is slightly dubeous.
    The number of abortions carried out for this reason is so miniscule as to be worth completely disregarding.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    The number of abortions carried out for this reason is so miniscule as to be worth completely disregarding.
    I am aware of that but I think that this is the only case where abortion can be consider euthanasia.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    1. This is an oversimplification. It's not unknown that girls work on guys even if they are not too willing as they know they do not have any protection on them, such as trying to persuade them not to do so, but give in. Yes I know this has happened to someone in real life and the reasons for giving in were understandable. You could use femidoms?

    2. True and I'm not sure if the user who have responded has actually disputed that point.

    3. Well I think most of them will. What would you feel like when your child has learnt that your mother tried to abort you. Some would probably take criminal against you perhaps resulting in death.

    4. Doctors could decide? Sure many abortees will be ashamed but with people's views on this matter becoming more lenient do you think there will be the same proportion of abortees who still feel ashemed? As for discomfort what if the child was born and have serious conditions not necessarily mental ones such as CF? Many children are born that can be rather unpleasant to bring up, but life is not perfect.
    CP hun CP..
    Only a heartless person would tell their child that their mother tried to abort them.
    And yes.. the pain of losing a child will ALWAYS be with the mother. Even if she wanted to get rid of it in the first place. My mother has a saying.. "No parent should have to bury their child." And this works for women who abort anyways.. because they will always have a void inside of them.. that will never be filled.. even with the birth of another child.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    I am aware of that but I think that this is the only case where abortion can be consider euthanasia.
    Yes i wasnt having a go at you there, i was simply stating that in referrence to the initial quote.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    I suppose it could be if the foetus is going to have a very short and painfull life once born. However I think this argument is slightly dubeous.
    This actually happens more than you would think it does. A few of my friends were pregnant.. 3/4 of them got abortions because when the blood test on the fetus was done, it showed CP in two of them, and something completely different in another.
    Not saying CP is deadly and painful.. but theirs were serious cases.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    This concept is either too subtle or too ridiculous for me to comprehend. Could you elaborate please?
    sorry i actually got confused with the other debate on euthanasia/abortion/death penalty however since i've now started it its just that either way you're killing a human being that in the case of euthanasia would have already had a painful life whereas in the case of the foetus being born alive when he was supposed to be aborted (look back lots of debate/explanation about that one) would probably have a quite painful life. Sort of like pre emptive euthanasia

    may i just say that i don't actually agree with this view i personally think that the foetus/baby should be given a chance to life regardless however the comparison struck me as interesting
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BloodyValentine)
    sorry i actually got confused with the other debate on euthanasia/abortion/death penalty however since i've now started it its just that either way you're killing a human being that in the case of euthanasia would have already had a painful life whereas in the case of the foetus being born alive when he was supposed to be aborted (look back lots of debate/explanation about that one) would probably have a quite painful life. Sort of like pre emptive euthanasia

    may i just say that i don't actually agree with this view i personally think that the foetus/baby should be given a chance to life regardless however the comparison struck me as interesting
    Yes it makes sense now. Personally i would only condone an abortion for reasons of disability if it was severe mental retardation, which is to say the child would be a body without a mind in which case whats the point of wasting so much time and money keeping a bit of flesh without any sentience alive?
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.