Abortion messaging needs to change

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty.

Altogether: “women aren’t people in the GOP.”

Women are pro life too. You just disagree with them.

Pro-life? The people saying quick get an abortion at 14 weeks even if a second opinion two weeks later at 16 weeks could show a perfectly healthy baby, those are the pro life people?

[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:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty.

Altogether: “women aren’t people in the GOP.”

Women are pro life too. You just disagree with them.

Pro-life? The people saying quick get an abortion at 14 weeks even if a second opinion two weeks later at 16 weeks could show a perfectly healthy baby, those are the pro life people?

If I choose to abort two weeks would make no difference because I would have scheduled an abortion and the day after I missed my period.

[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:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty.

Altogether: “women aren’t people in the GOP.”

Women are pro life too. You just disagree with them.

Pro-life? The people saying quick get an abortion at 14 weeks even if a second opinion two weeks later at 16 weeks could show a perfectly healthy baby, those are the pro life people?

If I choose to abort two weeks would make no difference because I would have scheduled an abortion and the day after I missed my period.

I didn't miss my period and yet was still pregnant.

That happens ALL the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly wish the democrats would stop talking about abortion. Anyone who is open to understanding how disastrous the GOP is for women’s rights, health, and safety has already turned. the women who are left in the GOP will never see any gray area when it comes to abortion. They see it as the baby’s right to life in all circumstances. This is a deeply rooted, religious belief, and no policy or politician will change it. As a Christian Democrat, I don’t entirely disagree with them, but only when it comes to abortion based solely on lifestyle choice. I wish we could find a way to separate abortion as a lifestyle choice from the rest of it (health of mom and baby, rape and incest, family planning, procedures like D&Cs). But we lump it all together. D’s messaging really stinks when it comes to women’s rights. They let the GOP ramble on about 3rd trimester and post-birth abortions without even attempting to shut that down. I am in the legal, safe, and rare camp. Many Christians are. The message needs to be that the decision is made by women with input from their chosen support group, which could include partner, family, doctor, clergy. Yes, women need to be told by democrats that they support them leaning on clergy instead of politicians.

What distinction are you drawing between "family planning" and "lifestyle choice"? Because "I just don't want a baby right now, it's not in my family life plan at this point in time" seems an awful lot like "lifestyle choice" to me.

Simple. Op and her supporters believe women who have sex with men who aren't their husbands and her pregnant once or perhaps more than once shouldn't get to have abortions and if they do they should be shamed for the bad girls they are.

Wrong. It’s not about you, it’s about the baby.

It’s ok to not be ok with the attitude of “I wanna have sex and if a baby has to die, then a baby has to die.”

Not wrong at all. you confirmed what pp wrote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty.

Altogether: “women aren’t people in the GOP.”

Women are pro life too. You just disagree with them.

Forced birth or pro choice, women aren’t people in the GOP. They are being slowly ground out of the party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly wish the democrats would stop talking about abortion. Anyone who is open to understanding how disastrous the GOP is for women’s rights, health, and safety has already turned. the women who are left in the GOP will never see any gray area when it comes to abortion. They see it as the baby’s right to life in all circumstances. This is a deeply rooted, religious belief, and no policy or politician will change it. As a Christian Democrat, I don’t entirely disagree with them, but only when it comes to abortion based solely on lifestyle choice. I wish we could find a way to separate abortion as a lifestyle choice from the rest of it (health of mom and baby, rape and incest, family planning, procedures like D&Cs). But we lump it all together. D’s messaging really stinks when it comes to women’s rights. They let the GOP ramble on about 3rd trimester and post-birth abortions without even attempting to shut that down. I am in the legal, safe, and rare camp. Many Christians are. The message needs to be that the decision is made by women with input from their chosen support group, which could include partner, family, doctor, clergy. Yes, women need to be told by democrats that they support them leaning on clergy instead of politicians.

What distinction are you drawing between "family planning" and "lifestyle choice"? Because "I just don't want a baby right now, it's not in my family life plan at this point in time" seems an awful lot like "lifestyle choice" to me.

Simple. Op and her supporters believe women who have sex with men who aren't their husbands and her pregnant once or perhaps more than once shouldn't get to have abortions and if they do they should be shamed for the bad girls they are.

Wrong. It’s not about you, it’s about the baby.

It’s ok to not be ok with the attitude of “I wanna have sex and if a baby has to die, then a baby has to die.”

Not wrong at all. you confirmed what pp wrote.

I will do what I what when I want with my body.

End of story.

You will not enslave me like you tried to enslave my mother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly wish the democrats would stop talking about abortion. Anyone who is open to understanding how disastrous the GOP is for women’s rights, health, and safety has already turned. the women who are left in the GOP will never see any gray area when it comes to abortion. They see it as the baby’s right to life in all circumstances. This is a deeply rooted, religious belief, and no policy or politician will change it. As a Christian Democrat, I don’t entirely disagree with them, but only when it comes to abortion based solely on lifestyle choice. I wish we could find a way to separate abortion as a lifestyle choice from the rest of it (health of mom and baby, rape and incest, family planning, procedures like D&Cs). But we lump it all together. D’s messaging really stinks when it comes to women’s rights. They let the GOP ramble on about 3rd trimester and post-birth abortions without even attempting to shut that down. I am in the legal, safe, and rare camp. Many Christians are. The message needs to be that the decision is made by women with input from their chosen support group, which could include partner, family, doctor, clergy. Yes, women need to be told by democrats that they support them leaning on clergy instead of politicians.

What distinction are you drawing between "family planning" and "lifestyle choice"? Because "I just don't want a baby right now, it's not in my family life plan at this point in time" seems an awful lot like "lifestyle choice" to me.

Simple. Op and her supporters believe women who have sex with men who aren't their husbands and her pregnant once or perhaps more than once shouldn't get to have abortions and if they do they should be shamed for the bad girls they are.

Wrong. It’s not about you, it’s about the baby.

It’s ok to not be ok with the attitude of “I wanna have sex and if a baby has to die, then a baby has to die.”

Not wrong at all. you confirmed what pp wrote.

I will do what I what when I want with my body.

End of story.

You will not enslave me like you tried to enslave my mother.

Bless your heart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciated your point, OP, and I believe what you say.
I’m one who is pro abortion, not a Christian, and there are many of us too, but the ostracism of talking about that in America?!
I can’t even fathom the right’s stance and therefore, have a hard time even glancing in that direction to start a conversation.
I wish the dems had a better message about it as well.

I am not "pro-abortion." I'm completely against abortion. I would never have an abortion.

But I'm not going to tell other women what they can do with their bodies.

There are many cases where abortion is warranted and necessary:

If a woman needs an abortion for medical reasons, that's a decision she and her doctor need to make.

If a child is raped, that child should not be forced to carry a child. That child should have access to abortion.

If a woman is raped, that woman should not be forced to carry her rapist's child.

Abortion should not be used as a means of birth control, but birth control should be 100% better--completely safe and 100% foolproof.

Accidental, unwanted pregnancies happen, and when that happens, women should not be forced to give birth to a child they do not want.

Abortion is a terrible thing, but it's necessary at times. I am not going to judge other women who need to have an abortion, nor will I stop them, and I don't think the SCOTUS and the mostly male-controlled state legislatures should stop them either.

+1

[Anonymous]

Think of it as women's mental health issue and then it's ALWAYS a health issue.

Mental health is as serious as physical health.

I agreed with you until I had a child and realized the toll it takes on you for the rest of your life -- physically, mentally, emotionally, career -- in a way that a man will never understand.

Someone who doesn't want the baby will be mentally distraught with being forced to have a full size living being come out them -- whether it's abdominal surgery or stretching out a part of them so a head can emerge.

That said, I really hate the example of rape -- it is OKAY to want to keep your baby even if that miracle was a result of a really awful abuse in your life. Giving these exceptions make it sound like the woman is writing who doesn't want to have a baby then.

No, the right answer to anyone who truly cares about life is that it must always be the woman's choice -- ALWAYS.

[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:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty.

Altogether: “women aren’t people in the GOP.”

Women are pro life too. You just disagree with them.

Pro-life? The people saying quick get an abortion at 14 weeks even if a second opinion two weeks later at 16 weeks could show a perfectly healthy baby, those are the pro life people?

If I choose to abort two weeks would make no difference because I would have scheduled an abortion and the day after I missed my period.

That’s because you didn’t want to be pregnant.

If you wanted to be pregnant but at 14 weeks received devastating news of potential catastrophic anomalies in the fetus. And you wanted more tests or a second opinion to confirm before getting abortion. But knew if you did that you’d be over the 14 week ban and would be forced to carry a failing pregnancy for another 26 weeks and be forced to give birth to a dying baby that suffered - so would you just abort even without the second test that confirmed the diagnosis? Because that’s what republicans are saying is your “choice”‘ if there is a 14 week ban with no exceptions afterwards.

[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:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty.

Altogether: “women aren’t people in the GOP.”

Women are pro life too. You just disagree with them.

Pro-life? The people saying quick get an abortion at 14 weeks even if a second opinion two weeks later at 16 weeks could show a perfectly healthy baby, those are the pro life people?

If I choose to abort two weeks would make no difference because I would have scheduled an abortion and the day after I missed my period.

I didn’t get positive pregnancy tests until a week and 3 days after I missed my period. And I was testing every other day.

My sister had irregular periods and when she became pregnant she was officially already 15 weeks pregnant based on when she had her last period but in fact was only 6 weeks based on when she actually ovulated.

Do these bans made up by non medically trained politicians even define the age of the fetus using any scientifically valid methods? Or are they going by the really outdated and inaccurate unrigorous method of dating by last period?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty.

Altogether: “women aren’t people in the GOP.”

Women are pro life too. You just disagree with them.

Yes women are pro-life of women and girls who want to have command of their own bodies.

You are anti-abortion. Not pro-life.

[Anonymous]

Needing an abortion in the second or third trimester is known to be due to either barriers that prevented them from getting one in an earlier trimester (clinical complexity and appointment availability, cost of procedure and/or traveling, lack of support (ability to take time off work or school, arrange childcare, travel to appointments etc).

And the limits of medical knowledge…information about the health of the mother or baby that wasn’t available earlier on. As a mother to a fetus who was diagnosed with an incurable, severe non-inherited genetic condition deemed “incompatible” with life…you better believe I wanted every test, consult and second opinion. I knew I was pregnant at 5weeks. I had my first doctor’s appointment at 10wks and had an ultrasound at 11weeks and gentetic testing done. There were red flags from the start of that ultrasound. No one pushed me into termination, but do you have any idea the cost of and time in appointments and grief I spent on the next 5 weeks waiting for results to give any glimmer of hope that there was an error in the severity of outcomes? My belief is that all people who have an abortion are doing so out of the heartfelt belief that it is not necessarily the outcome they desire, but the parenting decision that is the best for them and their family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Needing an abortion in the second or third trimester is known to be due to either barriers that prevented them from getting one in an earlier trimester (clinical complexity and appointment availability, cost of procedure and/or traveling, lack of support (ability to take time off work or school, arrange childcare, travel to appointments etc).

And the limits of medical knowledge…information about the health of the mother or baby that wasn’t available earlier on. As a mother to a fetus who was diagnosed with an incurable, severe non-inherited genetic condition deemed “incompatible” with life…you better believe I wanted every test, consult and second opinion. I knew I was pregnant at 5weeks. I had my first doctor’s appointment at 10wks and had an ultrasound at 11weeks and gentetic testing done. There were red flags from the start of that ultrasound. No one pushed me into termination, but do you have any idea the cost of and time in appointments and grief I spent on the next 5 weeks waiting for results to give any glimmer of hope that there was an error in the severity of outcomes? My belief is that all people who have an abortion are doing so out of the heartfelt belief that it is not necessarily the outcome they desire, but the parenting decision that is the best for them and their family.

🩷 Hugs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Needing an abortion in the second or third trimester is known to be due to either barriers that prevented them from getting one in an earlier trimester (clinical complexity and appointment availability, cost of procedure and/or traveling, lack of support (ability to take time off work or school, arrange childcare, travel to appointments etc).

And the limits of medical knowledge…information about the health of the mother or baby that wasn’t available earlier on. As a mother to a fetus who was diagnosed with an incurable, severe non-inherited genetic condition deemed “incompatible” with life…you better believe I wanted every test, consult and second opinion. I knew I was pregnant at 5weeks. I had my first doctor’s appointment at 10wks and had an ultrasound at 11weeks and gentetic testing done. There were red flags from the start of that ultrasound. No one pushed me into termination, but do you have any idea the cost of and time in appointments and grief I spent on the next 5 weeks waiting for results to give any glimmer of hope that there was an error in the severity of outcomes? My belief is that all people who have an abortion are doing so out of the heartfelt belief that it is not necessarily the outcome they desire, but the parenting decision that is the best for them and their family.

Also as someone who didn’t find out until 20w that there was deadly fetal anomaly and had to wait for follow ups and was pushed right to the 24wk limit hoping and against hope, I believe there should be no limit ever. DH is military and we got a lecture about “how no federal funds could be used to pay for abortion” and then they handed us a folder called “for parents facing tough choices” and wished us luck. It was my MIL who right away without hesitation said that of course this was the right choice. It was my mother who found a clinic with a fetal anomaly counselor who helped us get through it all. It was my family who rallied and supported us through one of the worst things that can happen to expecting parents. It was our choice and it was the right one.