|
Post by A Reasonable Rat on Oct 2, 2011 18:25:40 GMT -5
OK so, I was just hearing about yet another abortion debate. I've gone through a lot of mental hoops over that one, and I've come out on the side of pro-choice. In the theoretical event that it became cheap, easy, painless, and convenient to terminate fully formed fetuses, I'd be against that, barring sound medical reasons. But late term abortions are none of those things, and quite rare, so that argument is irrelevant IMO.
But I started to wonder, then, what if a woman, knowing she's pregnant, drinks and smokes and does drugs, and produces an infant that's not really fit to live? I'm not saying it wouldn't have a right to live, but that, without help, it wouldn't survive. Even worse, if that infant were looking forward to a life of suffering?
At this point, the mothers' actions have resulted in long-term pain and difficulty to what is legally defined as a human person. How accountable should she be held for that? Should it, like abortion, be considered within the realm of a human being's control over their own body?
It gets complex, I know, because what then of men who do things that damage their sperm and cause chromosome-borne congenital disorders? Though there's the difference between knowing they may father a child, and knowing they are carrying a developing child, is there any case in which it is fair to have a punishment that only applies to one gender?
I have the knee-jerk reaction that I want to punish women who drink or smoke while pregnant, it's repulsively careless and harmful, but I know I have no right to do so.
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Oct 2, 2011 18:58:01 GMT -5
Shane is the way he is physically because of his mother's actions while he was developing in the womb. She gave me up for adoption (which was probably the smartest idea she'd had for a while). My father also did some naughty things before he gave Sperm Me to my mother.
As for the idea of punishing people who do things that have been shown to be harmful for developing fetuses... I do not know. I think if they do give birth to a child with medical problems that they should be coached on how to handle it. In sex education classes it should be made clear that these are the things that can cause developmental problems and physical abnormalities.
As for actual punishment? I don't think know. All I know is preventative stuff.
|
|
|
Post by anti-nonsense on Oct 2, 2011 19:17:45 GMT -5
that's one of those sticky ugly situations that just doesn't seem to have a "right" answer, personally I lean towards not punishing them on the grounds that if there is significant doubt s to the justice of punishment we should err on the side of not punishing. But that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Oct 2, 2011 21:07:33 GMT -5
One would have to seriously doubt the mental health or informedness of the mother in such a case.
I remember reading, maybe a year ago, about how in certain sections of the UK lower class, teenage pregnancies are somewhat chic, and that it is not unusual for girls from 14 or so to deliberately fall pregnant, and to deliberately smoke their way through the pregnancy with the intention of causing a lower birth weight, in the belief that this will mean an easier delivery.
Now this is pretty horrible, for all sorts of reasons, but I don't think I would be happy holding such young women to account, because the entire mindset, to me, at least, does not suggest someone who is making decisions in a fully adult, informed fashion.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Oct 2, 2011 21:46:09 GMT -5
that's one of those sticky ugly situations that just doesn't seem to have a "right" answer This. I've thought about this issue before, and I always come away torn, at least from a legal standpoint. That being said, on a personal level, I'm very scornful of people who make an informed decision to keep the pregnancy (please take note of the word "informed"), and then proceed to drink and use drugs, with no regard for the health of their future child. When you choose to bring a life into the world -- even one you plan on giving up for adoption -- you take on certain moral obligations. I do realize that addiction can complicate the issue, especially when they have personal moral qualms with abortion, but if one isn't even willing to make the effort to try to get clean, they really don't have any grounds for moral superiority.
|
|
|
Post by clockworkgirl21 on Oct 3, 2011 0:35:30 GMT -5
I've often thought of this. My sister was born 2 months early and nearly died because of my mom's smoking and drinking while pregnant. My mom did the same when she was pregnant with me, but I was luckier and didn't have any problems. It's true they're directly responsible for the death of an infant.
|
|
|
Post by sylvana on Oct 3, 2011 2:28:56 GMT -5
I am one of those evil people who believe that children born with things like alcohol poisoning which basically results in them being brain-dead vegetables should be euthanized. However, the part of me that actually values all life, feels that such children also have a right to live. It just pains me to know that their life will be one of suffering. Not to mention it would have been entirely preventable. To compound the situation children like that are extremely unlikely to be adopted, unfortunately children like that are also the most common ones put up for adoption. As such, the adoption system is filled with children barely anyone wants.
In short, this is a completely screwed up situation. There is no 'right' answer.
With regards to punishing the parent. The emotional part of me says punish the parent. However, the more rational part of me knows that one cannot punish the parent for such actions while abortion is specifically still legal. Especially with regards to a woman having the right to self determine what they wish to do with their own body. The best I can come up with is that the original parent be responsible for the medical bills of the child they put up for adoption, while the child is a ward of the state.
Honestly, if this was ever to be brought up in some kind of political debate, I think I would abstain from voting. This issue is just too complex. Within just myself I have many different conflicting feelings on the issues I cant expect anyone to really be able to sort this mess out.
|
|
|
Post by askold on Oct 3, 2011 2:48:41 GMT -5
With regards to punishing the parent. The emotional part of me says punish the parent. However, the more rational part of me knows that one cannot punish the parent for such actions while abortion is specifically still legal. Especially with regards to a woman having the right to self determine what they wish to do with their own body. The best I can come up with is that the original parent be responsible for the medical bills of the child they put up for adoption, while the child is a ward of the state. Abortion might be legal, but an abortion is an medical procedure done by licensed people. And usually there is some questioning/screening before it is even considered. Also abortion being done in a clinic is safe/quick procedure. Featus alcohol syndrome and others cause babies that if they survive will have to suffer the results for the rest of their lives. So this is even worse than "coat-hanger" abortions as this is basically torture/intentional crippling.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Oct 3, 2011 3:55:38 GMT -5
As alcohol/tobacco poisoning can cause harm to a person, I would argue that, yes, they are definitively wrong.
Abortion does not cause harm to a person, necessarily, outside of late-term emergency abortions... and in those cases, it's generally necessary as it spares one life instead of allowing two to die.
|
|
|
Post by carole on Oct 3, 2011 11:52:37 GMT -5
I'm of the opinion that once a woman knows she is pregnant and decides to carry the pregnancy to term she has made an agreement with the fetus to share her body. She has acknowledged that a future human being is growing in her body. Therefore she should take care of her body and do what is right for the health of the pregnancy. I think therefore she should be held accountable if the child is born with birth defects that are a direct result of her actions.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Oct 3, 2011 12:10:00 GMT -5
Not to mention that not smoking is just the responsible thing to yourself overall.
|
|
|
Post by carole on Oct 3, 2011 12:59:20 GMT -5
Not to mention that not smoking is just the responsible thing to yourself overall. I agree that no person should be smoking. As for drinking if you can't refrain from drinking for a period of time so that another person can have a healthy start in life, then perhaps you have a problem. I love margaritas, but I can and have gone without them for long periods of time. Not drinking is not a problem for people who don't have a drinking problem.
|
|
|
Post by A Reasonable Rat on Oct 3, 2011 14:15:41 GMT -5
Should we then be encouraging and/or subsidizing abortions for drug addicts and alcoholics? Maybe enforced or rewarded birth control measures?
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Oct 3, 2011 15:13:29 GMT -5
Should we then be encouraging and/or subsidizing abortions for drug addicts and alcoholics? Maybe enforced or rewarded birth control measures? Ninja'd.
|
|
|
Post by A Reasonable Rat on Oct 3, 2011 19:07:27 GMT -5
Heh, I don't know how to interpret that response.
|
|