Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calumc)
    From what I've read so far I get the impression that many people don't seem to understand that at or close to 24 weeks (the legal limit for abortion) many babies can survive. Babies which were to be aborted close to this stage have been known to survive for several hours, and babies which were not to be aborted but were born very prematurely have survived from this stage. Yes, they need life support but so does any premature baby, but the fact that some have been "earmarked" by their parents means that some babies are given all the support available, from which many will survive, while others are simply either left to die in a dish on the operating table or "helped along the way" with drugs.
    Of course.. but many babies are aborted before the 24 week stage. After which doctors refuse to abort the child and the mother is forced to carry the child full term.. yes?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    lol, one's a female *mesa* ones a male...
    oops - thanks! ahem - cool it people.....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shishi nee)
    oops - thanks! ahem - cool it people.....
    lol.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    Of course.. but many babies are aborted before the 24 week stage. After which doctors refuse to abort the child and the mother is forced to carry the child full term.. yes?
    I think you missed the point - even before the 24 week stage, while they can legally be aborted, babies can still survive.

    And it's not a case of "many", legally all babies have to be aborted before 24 weeks if they are to be aborted atall (though presumably there are exceptions such as if continuing the pregnancy would kill the mother).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calumc)
    I think you missed the point - even before the 24 week stage, while they can legally be aborted, babies can still survive.

    And it's not a case of "many", legally all babies have to be aborted before 24 weeks if they are to be aborted atall (though presumably there are exceptions such as if continuing the pregnancy would kill the mother).
    obviously.. but if a baby is aborted and still born alive, why would the parents try to keep it alive? Seriously.. why abort it just to have it then put it on life support? What sense does that make.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    obviously.. but if a baby is aborted and still born alive, why would the parents try to keep it alive? Seriously.. why abort it just to have it then put it on life support? What sense does that make.
    I think you've kinda failed to notice the whole moral issue here, which is generally the basis of any discussion on abortion unless you view it as simply a mechanical "procedure". Anyway, im hungry, I'll leave you to think about it or something.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    another point here which i've already mentioned but drago doesn't seem to have read is that babies that are aborted late i.e round the 24 week deadline in the main need to be aborted surgically and the mother "gives birth" to this baby, most of the time it will be dead (or sometimes more gruesomely in pieces) however it does sometimes survive. the point of the argument is not whether or not abortion should be allowed but whether or not what is now a baby since it has been born should be allowed to live? Even if the mother does not want it since she has now rejected the baby should she really be allowed to choose its fate i'm sure that there are many couples who are unable to conceive who would want this child
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BloodyValentine)
    another point here which i've already mentioned but drago doesn't seem to have read is that babies that are aborted late i.e round the 24 week deadline in the main need to be aborted surgically and the mother "gives birth" to this baby, most of the time it will be dead (or sometimes more gruesomely in pieces) however it does sometimes survive. the point of the argument is not whether or not abortion should be allowed but whether or not what is now a baby since it has been born should be allowed to live? Even if the mother does not want it since she has now rejected the baby should she really be allowed to choose its fate i'm sure that there are many couples who are unable to conceive who would want this child
    The who cares? Give the baby to someone who wants it. The mother has already given birth, allow her to wash her hands of it and move on. I was saying that the mother..if she does not wish to give birth to the child is allowed to abort the pregnancy. If the baby is born alive, then it is born alive, give it to someone else if she thus chooses not to keep it.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    The who cares? Give the baby to someone who wants it. The mother has already given birth, allow her to wash her hands of it and move on. I was saying that the mother..if she does not wish to give birth to the child is allowed to abort the pregnancy. If the baby is born alive, then it is born alive, give it to someone else if she thus chooses not to keep it.
    Exactly. I dont see why people seem so reluctant to simply put their child up for adoption, i mean when its a choice of that or taking its life for goodness sake...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    The who cares? Give the baby to someone who wants it. The mother has already given birth, allow her to wash her hands of it and move on. I was saying that the mother..if she does not wish to give birth to the child is allowed to abort the pregnancy. If the baby is born alive, then it is born alive, give it to someone else if she thus chooses not to keep it.
    no you said why bother keeping a baby alive if the mother wants to get rid of it
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Exactly. I dont see why people seem so reluctant to simply put their child up for adoption, i mean when its a choice of that or taking its life for goodness sake...
    Because they don't want to go through 9 months of hell to give birth to a child and then get rid of it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    Because they don't want to go through 9 months of hell to give birth to a child and then get rid of it.
    I think "hell" is something of an exaggeration. 9 months of pregnancy so that someone may live, not much to ask really.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CalumanGael)
    I think "hell" is something of an exaggeration. 9 months of pregnancy so that someone may live, not much to ask really.
    It is if the mother was raped and has to look at her belly and remember the awful incident.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    It is if the mother was raped and has to look at her belly and remember the awful incident.
    I had ,of course, forgotten that the vast majority of pregnancies arise as a result of rape.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CalumanGael)
    I had ,of course, forgotten that the vast majority of pregnancies arise as a result of rape.
    Sarcasm will get you no-where.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    Sarcasm will get you no-where.
    Nor will pedantry.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CalumanGael)
    Nor will pedantry.
    You think I get all my knowledge from books?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    You think I get all my knowledge from books?
    errr...what gave you that impression?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CalumanGael)
    errr...what gave you that impression?
    Forgive me if I'm wrong.. but doesn't pedantic mean "Marked by a narrow, often ostentatious concern for book learning and formal rules."

    As well as.. Pedant..."someone who makes a great show of learning or scholarship.. someone who emphasizes trivial details of learning."
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    Forgive me if I'm wrong.. but doesn't pedantic mean "Marked by a narrow, often ostentatious concern for book learning and formal rules."

    As well as.. Pedant..."someone who makes a great show of learning or scholarship.. someone who emphasizes trivial details of learning."
    I meant it not in the scholastic sense but that of nit picking as it were.
 
 
 
Poll
Favourite type of bread
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.