Schizophrenic and pregnant

And let's not forget the reason for that waiting period. Those same Red States who send you on your way with a list of "clinics" in your area which all magically turn out to be Christian based centers with programs geared to harass and guilt you into continuing your pregnancy as they slyly hook you up with decent Christian adoptive parents seeking more little soldiers for the cause. If abstinence is preferable to abortion, abortion is preferable to enlisting your unborn child into the ranks of the Christian "moral" right.

 

From the article posted by the OP:

This suggests to me that putting her back on her medications was contra-indicated due to her pregnancy.​

 

One woman in particular who was a neighbor of mine for a while, had gone through 4 abortions and had 5 children, none of whom lived with her on a consistent basis because they were constantly in and out of foster homes and she was in and out of jail.

Another woman who complained that BC made her fat so she refused to take it. She claimed to have gone through 3 abortions when she was younger but she believed she was unable to get pregnant anymore because of them. This appeared to be true because she had quite a string of guys in and out of her apartment. She also insisted that she was allergic to latex but would not believe me when I told her that not all condoms were made with latex.

I had a student at one point, who had one mother (his parents were a female couple), who had had multiple abortions. I am not sure how many she'd had at that time.

My brother's x-wife had two abortions that I know of, in the 5 years they were together. She also had 2 children by two fathers. This created the perception that she may never have used birth control pills or condoms.

** Granted in all of these cases the women didn't necessarily come out and say that they viewed abortion as a form of birth control but they DID behave in that way.

 

So you have 4 anecdotes that kind of look like they support an anti-choice talking point if you squint and look at them funny while disregarding the fact that none of them actually support the claim you're making.

 

Your re-wording of my original post and suppositions regarding my attitude appear to be somewhat antagonistic. I did not post making accusations and I do not believe that you have to 'squint and look at them funny' to WONDER how wise the women's choices were.

I never said that I did not support choice. I said that, if you continually make a choice that can be traumatic to your body as well as controversial and possibly unwise, that the choice to continue making the same questionable choice may need to be eliminated through sterilization. I know this would never be logistically possible but I believe that a policy of 3 strikes and you're out is not necessarily a bad idea. Of course, this policy would also have to take into account of the reasons for abortion. Simply a multiple unwanted pregnancies born of unprotected sex is not a good reason for multiple abortions. Unwanted pregnancies as a result of changes in health and danger to the mother or rape - these I can understand better. It could perhaps eliminate a stressor on a woman who was in an abusive relationship, who feared getting pregnant but where the abuser may appear to want a child - although this would be a completely hypothetical situation and I do not know the full psychology of it.

 

Have you been harmed in some way by the choices these women you referred to have made? Has society been harmed in any way? Why, specifically do you feel either yourself or society would benefit from a "three strikes you're out" approach to women who have had multiple abortions? Let me tell you. There is no benefit. Sterilization and abortion will result equally in the reduction of unwanted pregnancies. All your solution removes is a woman's choice. A woman in her 30's may make very different choices than the woman she was in her teens or 20's. A woman who may have had multiple abortions in her 20's may be stable enough in her 30's to be ready to care for a child. You would take that away from her.

Traumatic? I daresay, an abortion is not as traumatic to a woman's body as carrying a child full term.
Controversial? Only for those who continue to make an issue of abortion and the choices women make.
Unwise? Maybe, but who are you to judge what is wise or unwise for anyone other than yourself and possibly your young children.

It's not your choice to make and it doesn't concern you. (In other words, mind your own business)

 

Individuals have been harmed. NO, I am not speaking in terms of the fetuses. I am speaking of the children that WERE born from three of of these four women who as a result of their poor decision making skills were abused and neglected in EVERY case. These women have the choice to make this decision multiple times. If someone drives drunk multiple times but manages only to total their own car we would remove their license after a short period of time. Tinkering with the potential gift of life in the way that these women did is not something that should continue to be allowed. I am not a Pro-lifer or religious conservative that wants to take the choice away from a woman. If a woman needs an abortion so be it. But I expect them to consider other alternatives of preventing pregnancy. It is so easy to get ahold of the morning after pill, why would you want until you have to go through a more involved procedure? If you want to take the attitude that I taking the choice away from a women who has made what could be considered a questionable decision and could be a risky procedure (although it is much safer with today's medical advances) then YOU deal with all the drug addicts, dealers and criminals in prison when I let them out. BY the same token you can't take away their choices EITHER even if drugs may not be any worse than alcohol. Why do you feel it is your responsibility to defend a choice that is not as safe as simply wearing using condoms, cervical caps or diaphragms. Those CERTAINLY are much cheaper at least. Why aren't they using those? They DO have that choice TOO.

 

So, if I understand you correctly, you are stating that women who have multiple abortions make them more likely to be neglectful mothers. Do you have anything to back this up aside from personal experience with less than a handful of women you have known?

Drunk driving is illegal. Abortion is not. Drunk driving poses a threat to society (potential injury and death of innocent life) Abortion poses no such threat.

Bullshit. Your statement reveals exactly where you stand on the issue.

We are surrounded by stupid people. Shall we sterilize them all? How about the men in these situations? The men whose sperm was necessary to cause the pregnancy that resulted in abortion? Condoms are relatively cheap, no? Shall we castrate them? Fair is fair.

Irrelevant. Abortion, as stated above, is not a crime.

 

well if we're going for the betterment and progression of humanity, then why not kill two birds with one stone and keep the overpopulation to a minimum while allowing those who have too low of an IQ have sex all they want but without the ability to produce spawn?

 

If Newt Gingrich wins the Florida primary too, I think your suggestion is worth considering.

 

Sounds good to me...I'm sure I could fail an IQ test...

 

i just don't see why smart people aren't the ones fuckin like bunnies and the one darwin dropped on their heads are weeding the smart folk out

 

Really relevant.

 

While we all have our notions of parenting skills and having seen multiple forms of parenting idiocy in the media. Let's face it, many of us here have jokingly suggested that parenting is one of those skills that should be evaluated/tested/licensed in some manner. But what has history taught us? It was apparently long enough ago and not well enough publicized the history of eugenics in America and how our roles here in the United States were studied and data shared with Germany. These eugenics programs of forced sterilization were that little twinkle in the beginnings of the holocaust. Ever hear of the American Breeders Association? It wasn't about producing a fancy show dog breed, it was all about producing and maintaining the perfect anglo-saxon race. Even Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood was a supporter of eugenics. No government should have this power.