When is it acceptable to force an abortion on a mother?

[lawtonfogle]

I have seen a few individuals admit it is acceptable in a few cases, so I am wondering what the average person feels here. I'm not going to point out the cases in question here, but I am just wonder for those who think a female should have control of her own body, when is it acceptable to remove that control and force them to have an abortion (or to let someone else make the choice for them). Before you say 'NEVER!', please think about any cases where a female does not have control/say over what she does with her own body (such as having a baby or getting an abortion).

 

[Jade Margery]

Well, 'NEVER' was my first response, but I guess IF the woman was in a coma or vegetative state and IF the pregnancy was likely to cause her serious health problems and IF her family felt it was more important to keep the mother than the child in this case, then maybe. Maybe.

And maybe in very extreme cases of child impregnation, like the girl who became a mother at 5 years old, because that was obviously a case of rape and no child is equipped to give birth even if they have started puberty ridiculously early, but those cases are incredibly rare.

I can't think of any other scenario when a woman shouldn't have complete control over what is or isn't in her body.

 

[jayem]

but I guess IF the woman was in a coma or vegetative state and IF the pregnancy was likely to cause her serious health problems and IF her family felt it was more important to keep the mother than the child in this case, then maybe.

Of course. A good example is eclampsia. Which occurs generally in younger women (teenagers) with first time pregnancies. When full blown it causes seizures, mental status changes, and extreme hypertension, which can progress to cerebral hemorrhage, multi-organ failure, and death. Usually, it can be controlled with medication, but if these don't work, the only option is immediate delivery. Severe eclampsia usually occurs at 20 weeks or later, but delivering a 20 week fetus is pretty much tantamount to an abortion. (I think there's been only one well-documented case of a 20 week preemie who survived.) I saw one case of severe eclampsia, unresponsive to medical treatment early in my training. She was only about 18 weeks along, and was having almost continuous seizures. The family gave permission for a C-section, and the baby was put on a ventilator but died after an hour or so. The mom survived, but I think she had some residual kidney damage. Fortunately, this is pretty rare, but it's one of those dramatic cases you don't forget.

 

[solarwave]

When the mother is too young

 

[knowledgeIsPower]

In the event that carrying the pregnancy to full term will kill the mother or the foetus itself (I realise this sounds a little weird but think about it: if the foetus is going to experience nothing but trauma and confusion followed by death is it ethical to allow it to be carried to full term?... for what purpose?).

I would say perhaps also in the event of the foetus testing positive for an untreatable disease that will make the foetus' life unbearably painful.

 

[Zebra1552]

Well, 'NEVER' was my first response, but I guess IF the woman was in a coma or vegetative state and IF the pregnancy was likely to cause her serious health problems and IF her family felt it was more important to keep the mother than the child in this case, then maybe. Maybe.

Yes, let's get rid of new life to keep the shell of a person alive. That's a great idea.


I'll maybe give you the child pregnancy gig, but that's about it. Hardly ever bordering on never.

 

[keith99]

I have seen a few individuals admit it is acceptable in a few cases, so I am wondering what the average person feels here. I'm not going to point out the cases in question here, but I am just wonder for those who think a female should have control of her own body, when is it acceptable to remove that control and force them to have an abortion (or to let someone else make the choice for them). Before you say 'NEVER!', please think about any cases where a female does not have control/say over what she does with her own body (such as having a baby or getting an abortion).

The all to natural assumption is that forcing an abortion would always be against the woman's wishes. A woman, especially a young woman may be preasured to not abort, even when her life is put at extreme risk.

In that case one who really knows the woman and really cares could force an abortion, relieving the woman in question of the guilt that would otherwise be pushed upon her.

Sadly there are many today who cannot understand of believe this could be the case.

 

[Jade Margery]

In the event that carrying the pregnancy to full term will kill the mother or the foetus itself (I realise this sounds a little weird but think about it: if the foetus is going to experience nothing but trauma and confusion followed by death is it ethical to allow it to be carried to full term?... for what purpose?).

I would say perhaps also in the event of the foetus testing positive for an untreatable disease that will make the foetus' life unbearably painful.

If carrying the fetus to term could kill the mother but not the fetus, or the fetus would only live a short and painful time before dying, and the mother is conscious and capable of making decisions, IT IS STILL HER CHOICE. A woman may well decide she would rather risk death than end her pregnancy, or decide that she would rather know her child outside the womb, even for a few short seconds, than give it euthanasia. In neither of the cases you've mentioned would it be alright to force the abortion on the woman without her consent. Only if she is rendered completely incapable of making that choice herself should it be made for her by those who know and love her best.

Yes, let's get rid of new life to keep the shell of a person alive. That's a great idea.

I suppose you missed the connection between "IF her family felt it was more important to keep the mother than the child in this case" and the word 'coma' earlier in the sentence. You should really pay attention to what you're commenting on.

Most comas are not fatal or permanent and people can come out of them at any time. While in a coma though, a woman would be unable to make her own decisions regarding her health, so her family should have the ability to do so if something like a pregnancy complication threatens her life. Although it is much rarer for people in persistent vegetative states to recover, it has happened before, so the same rules should apply.

 

[wanderingone]

When the mother is too young

What is too young?

 

[Zebra1552]

I suppose you missed the connection between "IF her family felt it was more important to keep the mother than the child in this case" and the word 'coma' earlier in the sentence. You should really pay attention to what you're commenting on.

Pregnancy lasts 9 months, correct? If the mother's wish is to have the baby, then she would have made it quite well known before being in a coma during the final stages. Either that, or she was in a coma long enough that she could not make her wishes known. In the first case, forcing someone to do something they clearly don't want to would be bad. In the second, she would have been in a coma for at least several months. Correct me if I'm wrong, but being in a coma for that long and then coming out of it is rare.

Most comas are not fatal or permanent and people can come out of them at any time. While in a coma though, a woman would be unable to make her own decisions regarding her health, so her family should have the ability to do so if something like a pregnancy complication threatens her life.

In one case, she's made her wishes known, in another, she probably won't live a normal life again. It is again a no-brainer.

Although it is much rarer for people in persistent vegetative states to recover, it has happened before, so the same rules should apply.

The same 'rule' does not apply as there is much less ambiguity about what will ultimately happen to the mother. She will probably die one way or another.

I may have oversimplified slightly, but my point still stands: It would be foolish to off the baby if the mother is incapacitated unless the mother has already decided to do so herself, in which case it would not be forced.

 

[Jade Margery]

I may have oversimplified slightly, but my point still stands: It would be foolish to off the baby if the mother is incapacitated unless the mother has already decided to do so herself, in which case it would not be forced.

YOU may believe it would be foolish, but each case is specific and different, and it is the painful responsibility of the family to make that call. Your oversimplification of complex situations to support your own views is noted.

A few fun examples: The pregnancy begins before the coma, but the complication only becomes evident during the coma (or because of whatever caused the coma to begin with). The woman didn't know she was pregnant before she became comatose. The woman's chances of recovery would improve without the added stress of a pregnancy. The variation and nuances are endless. If a woman is incapable of making her own medical decisions, someone else has to make them for her.

 

[lawtonfogle]

The all to natural assumption is that forcing an abortion would always be against the woman's wishes. A woman, especially a young woman may be preasured to not abort, even when her life is put at extreme risk.

In that case one who really knows the woman and really cares could force an abortion, relieving the woman in question of the guilt that would otherwise be pushed upon her.

Sadly there are many today who cannot understand of believe this could be the case.

It should not be that hard to tell if a mother wants an abortion but is being coerced not to or if she doesn't want an abortion at all.

 

[Zebra1552]

YOU may believe it would be foolish, but each case is specific and different, and it is the painful responsibility of the family to make that call.

The question of the thread is 'when is it acceptable to force an abortion', and my answer, which I have now supported, excludes your examples of a coma and a vegetative state. If you disagree, you can attack my support rather than merely stating quite obviously that this is just my opinion as that does not support your position.

Your oversimplification of complex situations to support your own views is noted.

Your ad hominem is also noted.

A few fun examples: The pregnancy begins before the coma, but the complication only becomes evident during the coma (or because of whatever caused the coma to begin with). The woman didn't know she was pregnant before she became comatose. The woman's chances of recovery would improve without the added stress of a pregnancy. The variation and nuances are endless. If a woman is incapable of making her own medical decisions, someone else has to make them for her.

In either case, the chances are slim that she will recover to begin with. A small increase in the likelihood that another will live by causing another to die is a gamble, not a decision.

 

[solarwave]

What is too young?

I'm not a psychologist or doctor, but I would assume somewhere younger than 13.

 

[lawtonfogle]

I'm not a psychologist or doctor, but I would assume somewhere younger than 13.

Well jeez, you just aborted Jesus.

I find the pro-life argument that if we allowed abortions Jesus would have been aborted because the whole "God told me about this" would have made Mary not want to abort at all, but considering Jewish marriage tradition, she could have very well fallen in the 'too young' bracket, in which case you just held her down and aborted Jesus.

 

[Nazzul]

Im in the never camp, being pro choice i believe that it is the choice of the women to have an abortion even if giving birth would mean death for her. Now this line becomes grey when you start throwing in variables like if she was in coma. Honestly we have to hope she made her wishes clear before, or someone very close knows what she would want.

Well jeez, you just aborted Jesus.

XD

 

[Zebra1552]

Well jeez, you just aborted Jesus.

I find the pro-life argument that if we allowed abortions Jesus would have been aborted because the whole "God told me about this" would have made Mary not want to abort at all, but considering Jewish marriage tradition, she could have very well fallen in the 'too young' bracket, in which case you just held her down and aborted Jesus.

Mary would have been 14 or 16, not 12 or 13.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Mary would have been 14 or 16, not 12 or 13.

Mary had not yet married, but was likely of marital age. This would indicate she was likely around the stage of a na'arah, which is around 12 years old (in modern days though this is actually younger due to puberty starting earlier, at least in those countries where it is starting earlier).

Reference:
Title: The Disposal of Virgins
Author(s): J. Duncan M. Derrett
Source: Man, New Series, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Mar., 1974), pp. 23-30
Publisher(s): Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Stable URL: JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

 

[solarwave]

Well jeez, you just aborted Jesus.

I find the pro-life argument that if we allowed abortions Jesus would have been aborted because the whole "God told me about this" would have made Mary not want to abort at all, but considering Jewish marriage tradition, she could have very well fallen in the 'too young' bracket, in which case you just held her down and aborted Jesus.

Well maybe God shouldn't force such a thing on such a young girl

Anyway I thought Mary was about 14. God would have used someone of a decent age if what you say is the case.

Do you mind me asking if you think it is ok impregnate a 12 year old then if she consents?

 

[solarwave]

Mary had not yet married, but was likely of marital age. This would indicate she was likely around the stage of a na'arah, which is around 12 years old (in modern days though this is actually younger due to puberty starting earlier, at least in those countries where it is starting earlier).

God made a 12 year old girl with a 10 year old body give birth?

If this is true I'm far more likely to think the virgin birth didn't happen.