How do we Reduce Abortions?

[uberd00b]

I'm sure someone will have already pointed this out but the obvious answer would be to cut the number of unwanted pregnancies. Readily (possibly freely) available contraception would be a step in the right direction.

 

[PsychMJC]

edit

 

[flicka]

It's such a difficult thing because as we all consider what WE would do to reduce unwanted pregnancies it's difficult to comprehend the vastly different mindsets, lifestyles, traditions, influences, and realities of OTHER PEOPLES LIVES. I mean, I even jokingly argue with my sister-in-law about stupid things like mayo vs mirical whip and whether pet cats should be allowed to roam freely outdoors or not. Coming to a consensus over sex and abortion seems impossible.

I choose to deal with it this way; once I realized there was no choice but pro-choice for me it no longer became a concern. I have personal feeling about when they should and shouldn't be done but I know I can't be there making the decision on a case by case basis, nor can any laws do that for me without exceptions. So one abortion or one million, it doesn't change things for me or the world. Numbers don't even matter anymore.

But for someone who thinks it's a baby from day one it's more difficult. Especially since they can't know when those 'babies' are there are not.

 

[Joachim]

Since you don't want the school to do it, and you have already admitted you can't handle the responsibility to do it.. who is supposed to? Oh thats right, just be Christian. No need to educate, just act like it doesn't exist.

Why would they only have an interest in teaching about birth control, who said that? Was that just another one of your opinions? Shouldn't teens be educated on sexual health if we really do want there to be less unplanned pregnancies and less sexually transmitted disease?

Either way, did I say the teachers should be giving explicit instruction on dental dams? Hmmm let us look back at my post.... Hey would you look at that, I didn't say that at all. I said they should be readily available. Please try to keep the discussion honest. .

And I disapprove of my tax money going to fund that. Condoms, the pill, those are fine enough. Plus, given that what dental dams are used for is sort of really, a sort of niche area that a lot of teenage boys aren't going to do (women aren't into the sort of thing until they are a tad older and even then the man will only do it so he can get a reward of well, conventional relations).

You are the one who can't decide which is right or left. Figure it out.

I am neither right or left. I am a moderate. It used to be all the rage in this country but became unpopular under W. Fortunately though, signs are appearing which say that we are taking the country back from radicals on both extremes.

 

[rahmiyn]

On the OP, I do agree that the number of abortions is alarming, and in particular the partial-birth abortion is just horrible. I also agree that if everyone strived to live as we are instructed to in the Bible, the need for abortions would literally cease!

But, even Jesus understood that not everyone will follow him. So, if this is a question to Christians, I believe the answer is to seek to follow Jesus and all his teachings (with God's help.) But, as for the world, suffering will continue until the end.

Having said that, I do agree with the posters that say education would be helpful. In the last statistics on abortion I consulted, in America, the average age of abortions ranges in the early twenties. I know so many in this age group who do not have access to healthcare, as so many employers do not provide it. I really believe if we had a nationalized healthcare that offered affordable birth control and care that this would decrease the number of abortions. I do think many women would not get pregnant if they had easier access to birth control.

The thing is, I suppose as Christians in a true effort to reduce abortion, we would have to choose the lesser of two evils, as it is completely irrational to go on the premise that everyone can be forced through legislative means to live moral lives (as designed in the Bible.)

 

[Jade Margery]

Why should the parents do it when the parents are paying thousands a dollar a year to schools to teach their kids these things? I learned sex ed in religion class and human biology. Why should I do any different for my kids than was done for me?

Why indeed should you try to raise your kids in any way different from yourself? I am sure your parents were perfect in every way and never made any mistake or bad judgment call when they raised you. How can you possibly hope to improve? We should all just do the same things over and over and over again.


Children go to school to learn many things, but not all things. Some concepts can only be learned from life and family, such as compassion, respect, love, morality, spirituality, etc. etc....

On a side note, if you were raised as you describe, this may explain why you seem to have almost no empathy.

Because schools that are running on state money only have an interest in teaching about devices regularly related to birth control, such as condoms and the pill. A dental dam is a device that is not used in sexual intercourse, but rather in other practices that some people consider sexual, but that Clinton said was not sex. I'm sorry, but knowing why they use a dental dam, the state has absolutely no business instructing teenagers on the use of one.

Your assumption is quite flawed. Schools (the state, in effect) have an interest in teaching about all things related to producing happy, healthy, knowledgeable citizens. 'Health' includes sexual health, regardless of the kind of sex or the items used. Given that many teenagers participate in the 'not sex' you're referring to (INSTEAD of intercourse, which of course means no abortions from that, yay) then the device is a useful thing for them to know about and use.

Preventing disease is also an interest of the state, since diseased citizens are less capable of producing work and also dangerous to others, so devices which protect people from disease are (or should be) a valuable part of the health curriculum. Babies aren't the only unintended consequences of sex, after all.



A lot of people are talking about the importance of parents talking to their kids about sex. I'm not saying that isn't important--it is--but there is more to it than that. Many teenagers agree to sex not because it is fun, but because they are pressured by their social groups or their boy/girlfriends and lack the self esteem to assert themselves.

It's not just what you tell your kids about sex, it's how you tell them, and how you treat them, that is going to determine their sense of self-worth and their ability to decide what happens to them free of peer pressure. Teenagers who spend their childhoods being shamed, controlled, and yelled at will be more likely to either accept a partner who does the same or become one.

 

[flicka]

Another thing that doesn't get addressed is just the fact that we are all responsible for ourselves and our lives. When a woman (and her partner if applicable) has an unplanned pregnancy she will automatically try to protect the life she already has, and in order to keep it everything needs to be in balance...health, money, job, time, space, desire, the present and the future. If she can't see a way to make it work with a pregnancy and a child then abortion is probably going to be an option. Other people CAN'T do that for her. This is usually when people claim she is being "selfish" and perhaps so, but we are all selfish when it comes to our life and our survival because nobody else is going to live our life for us. Going ahead with something that will change everything and just hoping it all works out is not always the best way to go. We can't tell women that everything will be ok because we don't know that.

 

[fated]

Personal local assistance.

 

[Jade Margery]

And I disapprove of my tax money going to fund that. Condoms, the pill, those are fine enough. Plus, given that what dental dams are used for is sort of really, a sort of niche area that a lot of teenage boys aren't going to do (women aren't into the sort of thing until they are a tad older and even then the man will only do it so he can get a reward of well, conventional relations).

I just couldn't let this one go. Personal experience aside, I have known a lot of young men who enjoyed the aforementioned activity and I would say that it is analogous to the number of girls who enjoy the yin-yang equivalent. Similarly, girls enjoy being on the receiving end as often as guys do. The only difference between the two is that one is more advertised than the other, so not as many young couples consider it when they think about their activities. To say 'women aren't into that sort of thing' and 'the man will only do so etc.' is just plain silly.

It is true that girls performing sexual favors are more common than boys doing so, but this is again a problem with self esteem. Studies have shown that on average, a girl's self confidence falls with puberty and boy's rises. This means girls are more likely to perform acts that they are not comfortable with or don't enjoy.

 

[PsychMJC]

edit

 

[jayem]

A point that needs to be made is that there is no consistent correlation between restrictive abortion laws and lower abortion rates. Poland has criminalized most abortions, and they report very low abortion rates (though whether women are traveling out of the country is still debatable.) But The Netherlands has freely available abortion up to 24 weeks, and also one of the lowest rates of abortion in Western Europe.

Conscientious use of birth control is the obvious answer. Birth control should be covered by insurance plans, and generic oral contraceptives should be available OTC at modest cost. I include abstinence as another means of birth control. It is the best way to prevent pregnancy for people who are not in mature, committed relationships. But young people should be taught the unbiased scientific facts about all methods of birth control (in an age-appropriate manner.) Working in health care, I see a lot of ignorance just regarding very basic reproductive biology, too. I know there'll be disagreement, but I see nothing wrong will allowing birth mothers to be paid by adoptive parents in exchange for assigning them parental rights. It doesn't bother me if some women try to make a living by getting pregnant. If $20,000 or so is an incentive for a woman not to terminate her pregnancy, and provide a baby to someone who really wants a child, then that's fine by me.

Edited to add: To clarify: payments to the birth mother are to compensate her for her time and the bodily wear and tear of being pregnant. Not, strictly speaking, for the baby.

 

[Joachim]

You are making all sorts of assumptions.
Plenty of teen males are getting lots of oral sex. Maybe SOME men only perform on women to get a return, but plenty do it for kicks. It also seems like there is a rise in anal sex. Both coming from the position that they can't get pregnant. It shouldn't be surprising that teens will, when afraid of pregnancy, attempt alternate means. Would it not be in societies interests to atleast give them SOME decent knowledge or a path of accessible information that DOESN'T come from some friend or uncle?
As far as your knowledge of what women do and do not want/like/enjoy, I am not even going to comment.

When I was 16, I can distinctly remember that one subject that was never brought up was that of male on female oral. Simply not brought up. Unless kids have changed in the last decade or so, I think it probably remains the same. Especially since, as a teenager, it is usually the male who is the one who pushes the sexual propositioning, the females who initially resist but then finally relent.

That isn't what I meant. You still haven't answered anyones responses to your original post about forced sterilization, so I'll wait until you do for further comment.

I thought I was clear. It is not "forced sterilzation". Sterilization is permanent. This is requiring a temporary birth control shot if you are going to receive welfare as we stereotypically think of it. I see nothing wrong with that. If they don't want the shot they won't take the check.

 

[fated]

A point that needs to be made is that there is no consistent correlation between restrictive abortion laws and lower abortion rates. Poland has criminalized most abortions, and they report very low abortion rates (though whether women are traveling out of the country is still debatable.) But The Netherlands has freely available abortion up to 24 weeks, and also one of the lowest rates of abortion in Western Europe.

Conscientious use of birth control is the obvious answer. Birth control should be covered by insurance plans, and generic oral contraceptives should be available OTC at modest cost. I include abstinence as another means of birth control. It is the best way to prevent pregnancy for people who are not in mature, committed relationships. But young people should be taught the unbiased scientific facts about all methods of birth control (in an age-appropriate manner.) Working in health care, I see a lot of ignorance just regarding very basic reproductive biology, too. I know there'll be disagreement, but I see nothing wrong will allowing birth mothers to be paid by adoptive parents in exchange for assigning them parental rights. It doesn't bother me if some women try to make a living by getting pregnant. If $20,000 or so is an incentive for a woman not to terminate her pregnancy, and provide a baby to someone who really wants a child, then that's fine by me.

Edited to add: To clarify: payments to the birth mother are to compensate her for her time and the bodily wear and tear of being pregnant. Not, strictly speaking, for the baby.

Rather correlation is a result of enforcement of restrictive abortion laws.

When discussing birth control, such as condoms with children, it might be helpful to give them something to compare to reality.

A twenty year marriage, relying on condom use as birth control will result in about 3 children.

Reliance on the pill apparently would result in slightly more, and the pill gets less effective with time. And I don't think the pill should be OTC, because it cause a bunch of problems, some very serious, that need to be discussed with a doctor. This is also true of plan B. Giving plan B out OTC will definitely result in grave side effects, and because no one will have talked to the women about the side effect, minor problems could become major, and major problems could become lethal. Having a doctor in the way of this medicine is a big deal, and it is not good consumer rights to have this stuff dispensed OTC, women deserve better.

 

[Joachim]

Rather correlation is a result of enforcement of restrictive abortion laws.

When discussing birth control, such as condoms with children, it might be helpful to give them something to compare to reality.

A twenty year marriage, relying on condom use as birth control will result in about 3 children.

Reliance on the pill apparently would result in slightly more, and the pill gets less effective with time. And I don't think the pill should be OTC, because it cause a bunch of problems, some very serious, that need to be discussed with a doctor. This is also true of plan B. Giving plan B out OTC will definitely result in grave side effects, and because no one will have talked to the women about the side effect, minor problems could become major, and major problems could become lethal. Having a doctor in the way of this medicine is a big deal, and it is not good consumer rights to have this stuff dispensed OTC, women deserve better.

Disagree. Birth control should be over the counter and the last thing we need to do is give doctors any more power over peoples lives than the already have. The biggest mistake this country ever made was passing the Controlled Substances Act because that gave doctors a power they do not need.

 

[katautumn]

Hormonal birth control should not be over the counter. There are some methods of contraception that require the patient working under the supervision of a physician, such as an IUD or birth control pills. I think hormonal contraception should be more readily available, but the side effects and how each woman's body responds differently to the hormones is a good reason to keep such methods prescription-only.

 

[Wyzaard]

The ethical question is this -- do we not owe it to ourselves to take active steps to prevent the scourge of abortions in this nation?

Abortions are not a scourge, but they should be unnecessary. Some steps that can be taken to bring them down to European levels:

1. Multiple forms of contraception both widely available and provided free of charge; if women who need cost-assistance don't get pregnant, they won't need abortions.

2. Developmentally-appropriate comprehensive sex education at all ages free of discussion restrictions; the more men and women know about how sex and precreation works, the better they will be at avoiding the negatives.

3. Female empowerment; women who are in control of their minds, bodies, and labors are more likely to protect themselves and make better choices, as are men who respect those choices.

4. Socialized health care, day care, and expanded WIC services; women who have access to such advantages will feel more comfortable having children they might not have wanted due to financial strain.

That's about it... no nebulous moral prostrations required.

 

[fated]

Disagree. Birth control should be over the counter and the last thing we need to do is give doctors any more power over peoples lives than the already have. The biggest mistake this country ever made was passing the Controlled Substances Act because that gave doctors a power they do not need.

Your position would almost assuredly result in severe illnesses and death... what's funny about it is that it might ultimately work against the hormonal contraceptives in society... but, we're already seeing a steady decline in use, it seems, for the same reasons.

 

[wanderingone]

Then to be quite frank, you have no business having children.

A parent needs to talk to their children about all aspects of life, even topics they are not comfortable with. Parents like yourself who are too scared to talk to their kids about sex are only contributing to the problem.

Grow up and do your job.

While I absolutely agree with you that parents should be able to have these discussions, the fact is many don't, and the fact is many children don't listen when the message comes from mom or dad, and others won't listen when mom and dad are obviously uncomfortable with the topic the education MUST come from other places as well.

 

[jayem]

And I don't think the pill should be OTC, because it cause a bunch of problems, some very serious, that need to be discussed with a doctor. This is also true of plan B. Giving plan B out OTC will definitely result in grave side effects, and because no one will have talked to the women about the side effect, minor problems could become major, and major problems could become lethal. Having a doctor in the way of this medicine is a big deal, and it is not good consumer rights to have this stuff dispensed OTC, women deserve better.

That's highly debatable. Oral contraceptives are available OTC in some countries and I'm not aware of any reliable data showing significantly higher injuries due to side effects. Plan B has been OTC in Europe for some time without detrimental effects on users. In fact, it was this data that convinced our FDA's own expert panel to recommend that Plan B be made OTC for women down to age 17.

There was a pro and con discussion of OTC contraceptives published on-line last year by the British Medical Journal. This was from the pro position:

"Making oral contraceptives available without a prescription would not eliminate the option of clinician consultation," Dr. Grossman concludes. "The prescription requirement is an out of date, paternalistic barrier to contraceptive use that is not evidence based. If governments are committed to addressing the challenge of unintended pregnancy — and the related problem of maternal mortality in the developing world, health systems must create mechanisms to allow freer access to hormonal contraception for all women at low or no cost."

And even the physician opposing OTC status admitted that safety was not an issue. Her concern was that other prescription contraceptive services are more effective. But the better doesn't justify throwing out the good.

Dr. Jarvis notes that availability of the combined oral contraceptive pill without prescription may be safe, but that those using it would not be offered a full range of contraception on every occasion, including long-acting contraceptives that do not require daily compliance and are more reliable in practice.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/585899

 

[wanderingone]

. Plus, given that what dental dams are used for is sort of really, a sort of niche area that a lot of teenage boys aren't going to do (women aren't into the sort of thing until they are a tad older and even then the man will only do it so he can get a reward of well, conventional relations).

I am greatly amused when people with penises are so sure what women in general are into or aren't into.... and when anyone is sure they know what everyone is into based on their own inhibitions... you can't even talk about sex with children, do you really think you know what people are "into"?