If you had an abortion you really didn't want to have

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disgusting. I would not support the murder of a baby.

We sit silently while innocent children are slaughtered and then wonder why people have no respect for human life when someone beats up an old person or runs over a child and keeps driving.

Stop patting yourself on the back OP. You are a terrible friend and a sorry excuse for a human being.

When I see a post like this, I feel many emotions. Mostly I'm just thankful I'm not so stupid and closed minded. Good luck with your future, weirdo child-like person who thinks life is black and white.

Yes, I am closed-minded to the idea of killing babies.

A society that has no respect for the most innocent of lives is a very dangerous society.

+1000

So do you also condemn those who do IVF?

Pro-life poster, why do you keep avoiding this question? Did you yourself murder babies as part of the cost of getting the family you thought you deserved?

I'm pro life and don't consider that abortion. I guess we all have our own comfort level. Personally, I'm ok with the day/week after pill too.

So 0-7 days of life is fine. But 8 days? No, that's sacred. Seriously?

The decision to become a parent is HUGE. Would you ever want to be *forced* into adopting an unwanted baby?

12:02 again. No one forces anyone to adopt so I'm not sure where you are coming from with this. If anything, parents who wish to adopt wait a LONG time b/c there are, seemingly, not enough! And I did adopt one with special needs and our next one will have special needs too, and we are still waiting a LONG time, so don't tell me I just wasn't open to kids with special needs or some such thing.

It sounds as though you are ready to adopt unconditionally - you will accept and love the baby no matter what. FES, genetic issues, HIV infected, drug addicted...you will love and raise that child regardless.

In all fairness, do you think that all adoptive parents would accept such challenges? Or would the pool of such adoptive parents be fairly small and maybe not even available for some special needs babies..

Thank you. But you are in fact giving me more credit than is due. When you are adopting, you are allowed -- ENCOURAGED -- to consider which special needs you are open to and which you are not. For example, the special need our child has -- we said, "Yeah, we could do that. It's expensive, it'll take years (prob up to 18 or so) to work on, but we personally can do it." There were other SNs, however, we said, "You know what, we really couldn't." For example, we live in a townhouse with a lot of steps. So, we said, "You know what, we really couldn't realistically have a child who is in a wheelchair. NO harm no foul, but that just wouldn' work that well." SO, you can "pick and choose" (for lack of a better term) after a good deal of reflection, which would work for your family. It probably is different for everyone. Some people's medical insurance may cover this but it may not cover that. Some people say, "RAD is no big deal but I could never do cerebral palsy.:" Some people say, "I can do cerebral palsy but RAD scares the heck out of me." ETC.

So, in a long-winded answer to your question: adoptive parents (us included) do not have to be saints to accept blindly whatever comes along. But, yes, I must admit, I do think that my DH and I WERE more open to certain things, and hey, when you are biologically having a child, you have to be open to some sort of unexpected news anyway, so that is how we always looked at it.

Then in all fairness it is not as simple as the pregnant mom choosing an adoptive family for her baby. Her baby also has to be a good fit for the adoptive family, too.

Yes, and they are the ones who get to make this decision. It is entirely free and up to them. So, they can search for a family that fits with their background, morals, values, whatever is important to them. They think it would be cool for baby to have two dads? They can select the gay parents. They want a family who is church-going and Baptist? They can choose that family. Etc. They can ensure that the baby is brought up in a way that is consistent with the way they would want their child to be brought up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today my friend who had an abortion says she wished her "support" person had made some effort to talk her out of it. There were other options.

She and a lot of people. Her voice won't drown out the extreme voices on either side. These women suffer silently and when she talks about it, it will be taboo. Her pro life friends will drown her with crap about Jesus and her pro choice friends will trivialize her feelings. Those with good professional experience like some OBs can understand. The pain is immense and she will never stop thinking about her child, her little friend, who only she knew.
The extreme views make it hard for any logic to come into this. In the end there are women who are being hurt by a system that refuses to be intellectually honest. There IS post abortion stress, no different than PTSD. And for some women, that is not worth it, they would have rather struggled with the child than live through that. And these are NOT religious people, they are just humans with normal emotions.

OP here. This is the category my friend falls into. She has always considered herself pro-choice but didn't think she could ever have an abortion personally. Then she got pregnant at a very inopportune time in an exceedingly bad relationship and health situation, and she made the choice that would spare the child a lifetime of difficulty. It was heartbreaking for her, and I doubt she will ever forget about the little life that was inside of her. There was another young woman in the waiting room who was also there to have an abortion. She started chatting with me while my friend was in the back. She was perfectly upbeat and it was pretty clear that this was just like any other doctor's appointment for her, she was just bummed that her boyfriend couldn't get off work so they could go to Five Guys after. There seems to be a huge range of feelings women have about this procedure. It doesn't do anyone any favors to diminish or hyperbolize the degree to which something like this can weigh on a person.

Why didn't she consider adoption?

Yeah. I am the 12:02 poster. Why DIDN'T she consider adoption? Why don't MORE women in this situation consider adoption? I am an adoptive mom of one, waiting on #2, and wonder this CONSTANTLY!!!!

She didn't consider adoption because there is a huge difference between abandoning a live infant you have carried and loved for 9 months and ending a 5 week pregnancy. She has always wanted children and continues to want children, but the circumstances made it impossible for her to give that child the stable life it deserved. Just because she accidentally got pregnant doesn't mean she has to carry a baby to term and give it away to someone like you.

It would be a sacrifice indeed, but it is a shame that in fact she didn't even consider it. How sad. Such a momentous decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disgusting. I would not support the murder of a baby.

We sit silently while innocent children are slaughtered and then wonder why people have no respect for human life when someone beats up an old person or runs over a child and keeps driving.

Stop patting yourself on the back OP. You are a terrible friend and a sorry excuse for a human being.

When I see a post like this, I feel many emotions. Mostly I'm just thankful I'm not so stupid and closed minded. Good luck with your future, weirdo child-like person who thinks life is black and white.

Yes, I am closed-minded to the idea of killing babies.

A society that has no respect for the most innocent of lives is a very dangerous society.

+1000

So do you also condemn those who do IVF?

Pro-life poster, why do you keep avoiding this question? Did you yourself murder babies as part of the cost of getting the family you thought you deserved?

I'm pro life and don't consider that abortion. I guess we all have our own comfort level. Personally, I'm ok with the day/week after pill too.

So 0-7 days of life is fine. But 8 days? No, that's sacred. Seriously?

The decision to become a parent is HUGE. Would you ever want to be *forced* into adopting an unwanted baby?

12:02 again. No one forces anyone to adopt so I'm not sure where you are coming from with this. If anything, parents who wish to adopt wait a LONG time b/c there are, seemingly, not enough! And I did adopt one with special needs and our next one will have special needs too, and we are still waiting a LONG time, so don't tell me I just wasn't open to kids with special needs or some such thing.

It sounds as though you are ready to adopt unconditionally - you will accept and love the baby no matter what. FES, genetic issues, HIV infected, drug addicted...you will love and raise that child regardless.

In all fairness, do you think that all adoptive parents would accept such challenges? Or would the pool of such adoptive parents be fairly small and maybe not even available for some special needs babies..

Thank you. But you are in fact giving me more credit than is due. When you are adopting, you are allowed -- ENCOURAGED -- to consider which special needs you are open to and which you are not. For example, the special need our child has -- we said, "Yeah, we could do that. It's expensive, it'll take years (prob up to 18 or so) to work on, but we personally can do it." There were other SNs, however, we said, "You know what, we really couldn't." For example, we live in a townhouse with a lot of steps. So, we said, "You know what, we really couldn't realistically have a child who is in a wheelchair. NO harm no foul, but that just wouldn' work that well." SO, you can "pick and choose" (for lack of a better term) after a good deal of reflection, which would work for your family. It probably is different for everyone. Some people's medical insurance may cover this but it may not cover that. Some people say, "RAD is no big deal but I could never do cerebral palsy.:" Some people say, "I can do cerebral palsy but RAD scares the heck out of me." ETC.

So, in a long-winded answer to your question: adoptive parents (us included) do not have to be saints to accept blindly whatever comes along. But, yes, I must admit, I do think that my DH and I WERE more open to certain things, and hey, when you are biologically having a child, you have to be open to some sort of unexpected news anyway, so that is how we always looked at it.

Then in all fairness it is not as simple as the pregnant mom choosing an adoptive family for her baby. Her baby also has to be a good fit for the adoptive family, too.

Yes, and they are the ones who get to make this decision. It is entirely free and up to them. So, they can search for a family that fits with their background, morals, values, whatever is important to them. They think it would be cool for baby to have two dads? They can select the gay parents. They want a family who is church-going and Baptist? They can choose that family. Etc. They can ensure that the baby is brought up in a way that is consistent with the way they would want their child to be brought up.

Right, lots of choices here. Adoptive families can choose what kind of kids they are "open to," women who are giving up their kids for adoption can choose what kinds of parents they are open to, and other women are choosing to terminate their pregnancies. Everyone should make their own decisions about their families.

[Anonymous]

12:02 adoptive mom poster here:

I have to leave this conversation now to go do some other things, but will check back later. I am enjoying this conversation and hope others are too! I firmly and heartfully believe that adoption CAN be a wonderful *choice* and just want others to consider it more! And no, not to increase the "supply" for lack of a less-crude term, for potential adoptive families. But b/c like I said I try to talk the talk and walk the walk (so when we did IVF we only made a limited # of embryos and then went back multiple times to do transfers and make sure to use each one) so I try to have one, seamless and consistent outlook towards all of these decisions. Take care, all, and will be back later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today my friend who had an abortion says she wished her "support" person had made some effort to talk her out of it. There were other options.

She and a lot of people. Her voice won't drown out the extreme voices on either side. These women suffer silently and when she talks about it, it will be taboo. Her pro life friends will drown her with crap about Jesus and her pro choice friends will trivialize her feelings. Those with good professional experience like some OBs can understand. The pain is immense and she will never stop thinking about her child, her little friend, who only she knew.
The extreme views make it hard for any logic to come into this. In the end there are women who are being hurt by a system that refuses to be intellectually honest. There IS post abortion stress, no different than PTSD. And for some women, that is not worth it, they would have rather struggled with the child than live through that. And these are NOT religious people, they are just humans with normal emotions.

OP here. This is the category my friend falls into. She has always considered herself pro-choice but didn't think she could ever have an abortion personally. Then she got pregnant at a very inopportune time in an exceedingly bad relationship and health situation, and she made the choice that would spare the child a lifetime of difficulty. It was heartbreaking for her, and I doubt she will ever forget about the little life that was inside of her. There was another young woman in the waiting room who was also there to have an abortion. She started chatting with me while my friend was in the back. She was perfectly upbeat and it was pretty clear that this was just like any other doctor's appointment for her, she was just bummed that her boyfriend couldn't get off work so they could go to Five Guys after. There seems to be a huge range of feelings women have about this procedure. It doesn't do anyone any favors to diminish or hyperbolize the degree to which something like this can weigh on a person.

Why didn't she consider adoption?

Yeah. I am the 12:02 poster. Why DIDN'T she consider adoption? Why don't MORE women in this situation consider adoption? I am an adoptive mom of one, waiting on #2, and wonder this CONSTANTLY!!!!

She didn't consider adoption because there is a huge difference between abandoning a live infant you have carried and loved for 9 months and ending a 5 week pregnancy. She has always wanted children and continues to want children, but the circumstances made it impossible for her to give that child the stable life it deserved. Just because she accidentally got pregnant doesn't mean she has to carry a baby to term and give it away to someone like you.

It would be a sacrifice indeed, but it is a shame that in fact she didn't even consider it. How sad. Such a momentous decision.

Sorry, how do you know she didn't consider it? It's not possible to get an abortion in this country without learning about the option of adoption. It's not possible to go through sixth grade without learning about adoption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disgusting. I would not support the murder of a baby.

We sit silently while innocent children are slaughtered and then wonder why people have no respect for human life when someone beats up an old person or runs over a child and keeps driving.

Stop patting yourself on the back OP. You are a terrible friend and a sorry excuse for a human being.

When I see a post like this, I feel many emotions. Mostly I'm just thankful I'm not so stupid and closed minded. Good luck with your future, weirdo child-like person who thinks life is black and white.

Yes, I am closed-minded to the idea of killing babies.

A society that has no respect for the most innocent of lives is a very dangerous society.

+1000

So do you also condemn those who do IVF?

Pro-life poster, why do you keep avoiding this question? Did you yourself murder babies as part of the cost of getting the family you thought you deserved?

I'm pro life and don't consider that abortion. I guess we all have our own comfort level. Personally, I'm ok with the day/week after pill too.

So 0-7 days of life is fine. But 8 days? No, that's sacred. Seriously?

The decision to become a parent is HUGE. Would you ever want to be *forced* into adopting an unwanted baby?

12:02 again. No one forces anyone to adopt so I'm not sure where you are coming from with this. If anything, parents who wish to adopt wait a LONG time b/c there are, seemingly, not enough! And I did adopt one with special needs and our next one will have special needs too, and we are still waiting a LONG time, so don't tell me I just wasn't open to kids with special needs or some such thing.

It sounds as though you are ready to adopt unconditionally - you will accept and love the baby no matter what. FES, genetic issues, HIV infected, drug addicted...you will love and raise that child regardless.

In all fairness, do you think that all adoptive parents would accept such challenges? Or would the pool of such adoptive parents be fairly small and maybe not even available for some special needs babies..

Thank you. But you are in fact giving me more credit than is due. When you are adopting, you are allowed -- ENCOURAGED -- to consider which special needs you are open to and which you are not. For example, the special need our child has -- we said, "Yeah, we could do that. It's expensive, it'll take years (prob up to 18 or so) to work on, but we personally can do it." There were other SNs, however, we said, "You know what, we really couldn't." For example, we live in a townhouse with a lot of steps. So, we said, "You know what, we really couldn't realistically have a child who is in a wheelchair. NO harm no foul, but that just wouldn' work that well." SO, you can "pick and choose" (for lack of a better term) after a good deal of reflection, which would work for your family. It probably is different for everyone. Some people's medical insurance may cover this but it may not cover that. Some people say, "RAD is no big deal but I could never do cerebral palsy.:" Some people say, "I can do cerebral palsy but RAD scares the heck out of me." ETC.

So, in a long-winded answer to your question: adoptive parents (us included) do not have to be saints to accept blindly whatever comes along. But, yes, I must admit, I do think that my DH and I WERE more open to certain things, and hey, when you are biologically having a child, you have to be open to some sort of unexpected news anyway, so that is how we always looked at it.

Then in all fairness it is not as simple as the pregnant mom choosing an adoptive family for her baby. Her baby also has to be a good fit for the adoptive family, too.

Yes, and they are the ones who get to make this decision. It is entirely free and up to them. So, they can search for a family that fits with their background, morals, values, whatever is important to them. They think it would be cool for baby to have two dads? They can select the gay parents. They want a family who is church-going and Baptist? They can choose that family. Etc. They can ensure that the baby is brought up in a way that is consistent with the way they would want their child to be brought up.

What if the pregnant mom chooses the perfect family for her baby, all goes well during the pregnancy, tests come back normal and - bam, something goes terribly wrong during the birth and the baby is left blind, maybe in a wheelchair, brain damaged? Or something like FES is evident at birth (maybe the mom drank during the first trimester) or some other unsuspected abnormality crops up?

Seriously, I really don't know what happens in a situation like that. Hopefully it is very rare when it does happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disgusting. I would not support the murder of a baby.

We sit silently while innocent children are slaughtered and then wonder why people have no respect for human life when someone beats up an old person or runs over a child and keeps driving.

Stop patting yourself on the back OP. You are a terrible friend and a sorry excuse for a human being.

When I see a post like this, I feel many emotions. Mostly I'm just thankful I'm not so stupid and closed minded. Good luck with your future, weirdo child-like person who thinks life is black and white.

Yes, I am closed-minded to the idea of killing babies.

A society that has no respect for the most innocent of lives is a very dangerous society.

+1000

So do you also condemn those who do IVF?

Pro-life poster, why do you keep avoiding this question? Did you yourself murder babies as part of the cost of getting the family you thought you deserved?

I'm pro life and don't consider that abortion. I guess we all have our own comfort level. Personally, I'm ok with the day/week after pill too.

So 0-7 days of life is fine. But 8 days? No, that's sacred. Seriously?

The decision to become a parent is HUGE. Would you ever want to be *forced* into adopting an unwanted baby?

12:02 again. No one forces anyone to adopt so I'm not sure where you are coming from with this. If anything, parents who wish to adopt wait a LONG time b/c there are, seemingly, not enough! And I did adopt one with special needs and our next one will have special needs too, and we are still waiting a LONG time, so don't tell me I just wasn't open to kids with special needs or some such thing.

It sounds as though you are ready to adopt unconditionally - you will accept and love the baby no matter what. FES, genetic issues, HIV infected, drug addicted...you will love and raise that child regardless.

In all fairness, do you think that all adoptive parents would accept such challenges? Or would the pool of such adoptive parents be fairly small and maybe not even available for some special needs babies..

Thank you. But you are in fact giving me more credit than is due. When you are adopting, you are allowed -- ENCOURAGED -- to consider which special needs you are open to and which you are not. For example, the special need our child has -- we said, "Yeah, we could do that. It's expensive, it'll take years (prob up to 18 or so) to work on, but we personally can do it." There were other SNs, however, we said, "You know what, we really couldn't." For example, we live in a townhouse with a lot of steps. So, we said, "You know what, we really couldn't realistically have a child who is in a wheelchair. NO harm no foul, but that just wouldn' work that well." SO, you can "pick and choose" (for lack of a better term) after a good deal of reflection, which would work for your family. It probably is different for everyone. Some people's medical insurance may cover this but it may not cover that. Some people say, "RAD is no big deal but I could never do cerebral palsy.:" Some people say, "I can do cerebral palsy but RAD scares the heck out of me." ETC.

So, in a long-winded answer to your question: adoptive parents (us included) do not have to be saints to accept blindly whatever comes along. But, yes, I must admit, I do think that my DH and I WERE more open to certain things, and hey, when you are biologically having a child, you have to be open to some sort of unexpected news anyway, so that is how we always looked at it.

Then in all fairness it is not as simple as the pregnant mom choosing an adoptive family for her baby. Her baby also has to be a good fit for the adoptive family, too.

Yes, and they are the ones who get to make this decision. It is entirely free and up to them. So, they can search for a family that fits with their background, morals, values, whatever is important to them. They think it would be cool for baby to have two dads? They can select the gay parents. They want a family who is church-going and Baptist? They can choose that family. Etc. They can ensure that the baby is brought up in a way that is consistent with the way they would want their child to be brought up.

Right, lots of choices here. Adoptive families can choose what kind of kids they are "open to," women who are giving up their kids for adoption can choose what kinds of parents they are open to, and other women are choosing to terminate their pregnancies. Everyone should make their own decisions about their families.

+1, and let's be realistic - these are the choices birth moms of white, non-SN kids get to make. If you have a SN kid, you're lucky if you can find an adoptive family at all - you're not getting to pick the family with your ideal religious background.

[Anonymous]

Choice is a good thing, except if I get to choose between your life and death. No? Even if you're still in your mother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-life troll, please answer. Do you feel the same way about the baby killing bitches doing IVF?

NP. And please tell us how you feel about the baby-killing bitches like me who have terminated ectopic pregnancies.

Another pro-life poster. Aborting an ectopic pregnancy is nothing like aborting a normal healthy pregnancy. Do you honestly believe that pro-lifers would view it the same way?

I'm the poster to whom you responded. Do I believe most would view it the same way? No. A few? Yes. Specifically, those who believe there are no circumstances under which abortion is acceptable, or there are no situations in which pregnancy endangers the mother's life.

Really, though, my post was intended to point out a specific, clear-cut example of when abortion is 100% necessary, and there are not any other options. It is a situation in which there should be zero debate, none, as it is incompatible with life for the fetus, and can be life-threatening for the mother.

However, there are other scenarios that are incompatible with life for the fetus, or are life-threatening for the mother, or in which there are huge mental/emotional health issues at play, about which there IS substantial resistance by many who are pro-life, and I cannot understand it. Anencephaly is but one example. To me, it seems that the "but it's a life, and it's murder to take that life!" refrain blinds a lot of people to the actual realities of many situations, and places an enormous additional emotional burden on women who in many cases are already facing an unimaginably heartbreaking situation and choice. A woman with whom I interacted on a pregnancy forum chose to carry her baby with anencephaly to term, and then committed suicide a few weeks later. There is tremendous anguish in some of these situations for these women.

Who should get to decide the situations in which abortion is permissible, and those in which it's not, for all women, couples, and families? Who should get to determine how much danger to the mother is acceptable, or what the cut-off is for a baby who would die shortly after birth (minutes? Hours? Days? A month?), or whether a 13/17/32 year old who has been raped by her uncle/boyfriend/a stranger should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term? You? Me? The government???

My answer is that those decisions should be made by a woman and her doctor. Period.

[Anonymous]

I'm a mom who had to consider termination (surprise pregnancy, laid off from job, boyfriend walked out because he didn't want to be a dad.) I ended up having the baby and keeping it, but if anything, I have become more pro-choice since having a baby. But ideally, every conceived baby would be a wanted baby and a healthy one and nobody would ever need to terminate. But we live in the real world, not an ideal one.

I know a number of people who have had abortions and went on to have healthy babies when the time was right. None of them have ever expressed to me "excruciating, crippling" guilt or remorse. (and I've stayed in touch with all of them and we're close - so I'd probably know.) On the other hand, the woman I know who gave up her baby for adoption at 16 is still, at 42, extremely upset about doing so, though she went on to have more children. It's f'ed her up pretty badly. She has a relationship with her firstborn (the adopted one) now, but frankly, I think she might have been better off terminating than being pressured to give up the baby for adoption, which was typical for pregnant 16-year-olds in 1988. Nobody will ever convince her that the adoptive parents gave him a better life than she could have. (her mom also got pregnant young, out of wedlock, as did her sister, hence the pressure. they were very poor.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today my friend who had an abortion says she wished her "support" person had made some effort to talk her out of it. There were other options.

She and a lot of people. Her voice won't drown out the extreme voices on either side. These women suffer silently and when she talks about it, it will be taboo. Her pro life friends will drown her with crap about Jesus and her pro choice friends will trivialize her feelings. Those with good professional experience like some OBs can understand. The pain is immense and she will never stop thinking about her child, her little friend, who only she knew.
The extreme views make it hard for any logic to come into this. In the end there are women who are being hurt by a system that refuses to be intellectually honest. There IS post abortion stress, no different than PTSD. And for some women, that is not worth it, they would have rather struggled with the child than live through that. And these are NOT religious people, they are just humans with normal emotions.

OP here. This is the category my friend falls into. She has always considered herself pro-choice but didn't think she could ever have an abortion personally. Then she got pregnant at a very inopportune time in an exceedingly bad relationship and health situation, and she made the choice that would spare the child a lifetime of difficulty. It was heartbreaking for her, and I doubt she will ever forget about the little life that was inside of her. There was another young woman in the waiting room who was also there to have an abortion. She started chatting with me while my friend was in the back. She was perfectly upbeat and it was pretty clear that this was just like any other doctor's appointment for her, she was just bummed that her boyfriend couldn't get off work so they could go to Five Guys after. There seems to be a huge range of feelings women have about this procedure. It doesn't do anyone any favors to diminish or hyperbolize the degree to which something like this can weigh on a person.

Why didn't she consider adoption?

Yeah. I am the 12:02 poster. Why DIDN'T she consider adoption? Why don't MORE women in this situation consider adoption? I am an adoptive mom of one, waiting on #2, and wonder this CONSTANTLY!!!!

She didn't consider adoption because [u]there is a huge difference between abandoning a live infant you have carried and loved for 9 months and ending a 5 week pregnancy. She has always wanted children and continues to want children, but the circumstances made it impossible for her to give that child the stable life it deserved. Just because she accidentally got pregnant doesn't mean she has to carry a baby to term and give it away to someone like you.

It would be a sacrifice indeed, but it is a shame that in fact she didn't even consider it. How sad. Such a momentous decision.

Sorry, how do you know she didn't consider it? It's not possible to get an abortion in this country without learning about the option of adoption. It's not possible to go through sixth grade without learning about adoption.

Well, she said right above (read the previous post): "She didn't consider adoption because. . . "

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a mom who had to consider termination (surprise pregnancy, laid off from job, boyfriend walked out because he didn't want to be a dad.) I ended up having the baby and keeping it, but if anything, I have become more pro-choice since having a baby. But ideally, every conceived baby would be a wanted baby and a healthy one and nobody would ever need to terminate. But we live in the real world, not an ideal one.

I know a number of people who have had abortions and went on to have healthy babies when the time was right. None of them have ever expressed to me "excruciating, crippling" guilt or remorse. (and I've stayed in touch with all of them and we're close - so I'd probably know.) On the other hand, the woman I know who gave up her baby for adoption at 16 is still, at 42, extremely upset about doing so, though she went on to have more children. It's f'ed her up pretty badly. She has a relationship with her firstborn (the adopted one) now, but frankly, I think she might have been better off terminating than being pressured to give up the baby for adoption, which was typical for pregnant 16-year-olds in 1988. Nobody will ever convince her that the adoptive parents gave him a better life than she could have. (her mom also got pregnant young, out of wedlock, as did her sister, hence the pressure. they were very poor.)

Well, I daresay the now 16yo child is now better off than she would have been if the mom had terminated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disgusting. I would not support the murder of a baby.

We sit silently while innocent children are slaughtered and then wonder why people have no respect for human life when someone beats up an old person or runs over a child and keeps driving.

Stop patting yourself on the back OP. You are a terrible friend and a sorry excuse for a human being.

When I see a post like this, I feel many emotions. Mostly I'm just thankful I'm not so stupid and closed minded. Good luck with your future, weirdo child-like person who thinks life is black and white.

Yes, I am closed-minded to the idea of killing babies.

A society that has no respect for the most innocent of lives is a very dangerous society.

+1000

So do you also condemn those who do IVF?

Pro-life poster, why do you keep avoiding this question? Did you yourself murder babies as part of the cost of getting the family you thought you deserved?

I'm pro life and don't consider that abortion. I guess we all have our own comfort level. Personally, I'm ok with the day/week after pill too.

So 0-7 days of life is fine. But 8 days? No, that's sacred. Seriously?

The decision to become a parent is HUGE. Would you ever want to be *forced* into adopting an unwanted baby?

12:02 again. No one forces anyone to adopt so I'm not sure where you are coming from with this. If anything, parents who wish to adopt wait a LONG time b/c there are, seemingly, not enough! And I did adopt one with special needs and our next one will have special needs too, and we are still waiting a LONG time, so don't tell me I just wasn't open to kids with special needs or some such thing.

It sounds as though you are ready to adopt unconditionally - you will accept and love the baby no matter what. FES, genetic issues, HIV infected, drug addicted...you will love and raise that child regardless.

In all fairness, do you think that all adoptive parents would accept such challenges? Or would the pool of such adoptive parents be fairly small and maybe not even available for some special needs babies..

Thank you. But you are in fact giving me more credit than is due. When you are adopting, you are allowed -- ENCOURAGED -- to consider which special needs you are open to and which you are not. For example, the special need our child has -- we said, "Yeah, we could do that. It's expensive, it'll take years (prob up to 18 or so) to work on, but we personally can do it." There were other SNs, however, we said, "You know what, we really couldn't." For example, we live in a townhouse with a lot of steps. So, we said, "You know what, we really couldn't realistically have a child who is in a wheelchair. NO harm no foul, but that just wouldn' work that well." SO, you can "pick and choose" (for lack of a better term) after a good deal of reflection, which would work for your family. It probably is different for everyone. Some people's medical insurance may cover this but it may not cover that. Some people say, "RAD is no big deal but I could never do cerebral palsy.:" Some people say, "I can do cerebral palsy but RAD scares the heck out of me." ETC.

So, in a long-winded answer to your question: adoptive parents (us included) do not have to be saints to accept blindly whatever comes along. But, yes, I must admit, I do think that my DH and I WERE more open to certain things, and hey, when you are biologically having a child, you have to be open to some sort of unexpected news anyway, so that is how we always looked at it.

Then in all fairness it is not as simple as the pregnant mom choosing an adoptive family for her baby. Her baby also has to be a good fit for the adoptive family, too.

Yes, and they are the ones who get to make this decision. It is entirely free and up to them. So, they can search for a family that fits with their background, morals, values, whatever is important to them. They think it would be cool for baby to have two dads? They can select the gay parents. They want a family who is church-going and Baptist? They can choose that family. Etc. They can ensure that the baby is brought up in a way that is consistent with the way they would want their child to be brought up.

What if the pregnant mom chooses the perfect family for her baby, all goes well during the pregnancy, tests come back normal and - bam, something goes terribly wrong during the birth and the baby is left blind, maybe in a wheelchair, brain damaged? Or something like FES is evident at birth (maybe the mom drank during the first trimester) or some other unsuspected abnormality crops up?

Seriously, I really don't know what happens in a situation like that. Hopefully it is very rare when it does happen.

Sometimes it does happen. As I said, we are with Barker, and about a year or so ago I remember getting an email about AA boy twins who were available for adopton; born prematurely; one may have CP; not sure if there had been alcohol exposure. Adoptive parents face this decision all the time. A family in Colorado stepped forward and adopted them. You really are underestimating parents who choose to adopt these kids. They put a lot of time and reflection into it and then are happy and blessed to have them in their family. People say to my DD, "You are so lucky," as in, you are so lucky someone wanted to adopt you, you broken, not perfect kid, and it insults me a great deal and I reply with a smile and say, "Thank you, *we* are the lucky ones to have her," and then move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Choice is a good thing, except if I get to choose between your life and death. No? Even if you're still in your mother.

Absolutely. We do not give people the right to choose to take others' lives, period. That is not in the Constitution, that is not natural law, that is against all of what human nature has ever stood for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choice is a good thing, except if I get to choose between your life and death. No? Even if you're still in your mother.

Absolutely. We do not give people the right to choose to take others' lives, period. That is not in the Constitution, that is not natural law, that is against all of what human nature has ever stood for.

But we also don't force people to give up themselves for others.

Let me give you a hypothetical. Say you had a disease, and they only way you could survive was through a blood transfusion of a particular blood type. Say I was the only person who had that blood type. Would I be obligated, legally, morally, or otherwise, to donate blood to you?

That's the thing about pregnancy. A fetus can't survive outside a woman's body, so it is true that if you remove it, it will not live on it's own. But it doesn't follow that a woman has an absolute obligation to continue to be pregnant if she doesn't desire to.