Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom would:

Routinely throw full glasses or plates of food at me at meal times and then scream at/hit me until I cleaned up her mess.
Go on Joan Crawford-style rampages and destroy my room - drawers emptied on to the floor, my things broken, smashed, etc.
Give me a small suitcase and tell me to pack b/c she was kicking me out - this started when I was around 4 - and then lock me out of the house.
Hit, scratch, pull my hair, lie, gaslight, drive exceedingly recklessly... all to intimidate and frighten me into her control.
Ruin nearly every personal milestone of mine by throwing tantrums and making it all about her.

I could go on and on...

I can relate to so many of the posts, but the bolded really rings true for me, too. And the more important the milestone (ivy league law school graduation, birth of first child, etc.), the more she made it all about her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are now reports that Missouri doctors are forcing women with ectopic pregnancy to wait until the tube ruptures to do anything. So waiting until they are actively bleeding to death. Makes it much, much more likely they'll die and for a pregnancy that will never ever be viable, ever. Ectopic pregnancy has a 100% fatality rate if untreated. The chance of a baby being born is 0%.

This frankly is just senseless murder.

This is, unfortunately, not an exaggeration. I have a family member who is a nurse in L&D in Missouri and she's horrified by what she's seen this week. They are waiting until a woman's health is in a critical stage before treating them. Women are going to die or become infertile because of this. I don't know how anyone could possibly think this is ok.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you OP.

My abortion story is this:

I was 37. Married with two kids, age 11 and 8, using birth control. Got pregnant, decided I didn’t want to be pregnant, terminated the pregnancy.

My family is perfect as-is, and another one was not right for us. And I had kids young so that my middle aged years wouldn’t be spent caring for littles.

I personally do not believe a fetus (or an embryo) is a human being. I have a human right to make those choices for my life.

And this is why we can't have nice things.

Stories likes these hurt the cause and are exactly why conservatives push for restrictions. I feel so badly for the women who are at risk because of reasons like the above.

Anonymous wrote:For all the talk about why women have abortions, we haven’t talked about why women have babies. Let me share a family story. My grandma had 12 children, her siblings and friends also had tons. It’s a story that played out all over the “pro life” 1950s and continues in fringe Catholic and evangelical circles today.

Their children were brought into the world because their husband came home drunk or high on his one supply, rolled on top of them for 45 seconds, and knocked them up. The children from these pathetic liaisons aren’t particularly wanted, aren’t really loved, and are barely cared for by the older siblings and anyone who might take an interest, such as a pervert priest. Their children aren’t a blessing but a thing to be endured while on this earth in the hope that something better follows.

These women were and are miserable and suffering, and their kids were and are miserable and neglected - a misery that often gets passed own through generations. This is who is voting to end your choice- miserable people who made miserable decisions and want you to be miserable too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had a medical abortion. The embryo heart stopped but because of other issues my body would not miscarry. I’m ever thankful that my doctor was kind and performed it before sepsis set in. People posting here know very little about the dangers of pregnancy.
I have had 3 friends with later MC who nearly bled to death. MC can be fatal.
Up until recently the main cause of death among women under 50 was childbirth or pregnancy complications of which there are many.
But nothing will change the pro choice attitude.

Yes this. It broke my heart to see abortion listed on my medical paperwork for a much wanted and desired pregnancy. But nothing was right with the pregnancy from the very first scans. I waited an agonizing 5 weeks for the heartbeat to stop. We all knew it would, it was just a matter of when. I was 11 weeks. Then my body would not give up the fetal tissue. I waited another two weeks to miscarry naturally and it would not happen. So I had a D&C. Traumatizing and the nurses didn’t help. I’d never had a general in my life and I woke up sobbing, to hear a nurse say “we’ve got a a weeper.”

What would have happened if I couldn’t get that D&C, even with a no longer viable pregnancy that had already lingered for weeks?

I
I am unaware of any state law that outlaws abortion for a non-viable pregnancy or one that is to protect the health of the mother.

Well, until Friday it was unconstitutional for such a law to exist.

Texas, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Louisiana have no exceptions for health of the mother, for rape or incest, or for a fetus with conditions incompatible with life. I am not sure what you mean by non-viable pregnancy - doesn't matter in the above states unless the mother's life is in danger.

So now you are aware.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/24/abortion-laws-by-state-roe-v-wade-00037695

You appear to be contradicting yourself—see bolded above.

Exceptions for the life of the mother mean nothing when there is no doctor in your state who will perform the abortion .

Life of the mother exceptions also do not cover those fetuses who are incompatible with life (t-18 or heart defects, for example) because technically the mothers life isn’t in danger. The impact on NICUs and the trauma that will place on families who have to deliver a baby just to watch it die will be significant. Also, what happens to prenatal care like NIPT tests, amnio, or CVS if you don’t have a choice to terminate for medical reasons?

In many cases, NO ONE, even the doctor knows for sure that the baby isn’t compatible with life. Not every condition, or diagnosis made is automatically a death sentence. Down’s syndrome isn’t incompatible with life. Think of all the babies born with special needs and no one knows until they are born.

Yes, having a baby with special needs takes a lot of selflessness and so parents might choose to abort instead.

Even if a baby is likely to only live hours, many people choose to carry to term out of dignity for the baby because they do believe that baby is a life. And maybe they can hold that baby for a few hours or even a few days. But that’s a very courageous that not many can make.

I'm going to take issue with the bolded. Choosing not to carry a pregnancy to term because the child has special needs isn't selfish. It's all about knowing you and your family. I have a close friend whose second child has spina bifida. They chose to have that child. They even tried to get into a clinical trial where he would be operated on while still in utero to try to help him. They are lucky that they have great healthcare and are financially able to provide him with everything he needs and then some. He's a smart kid, but has learning disabilities and is on the autism spectrum, and has depression. He also can't walk, use the bathroom, etc. He has had to have major surgeries almost every summer he has been alive and spends weeks recovering. He is wheelchair bound.

She got pregnant with a third child and it turned out that baby had an even worse case of spina bifida. They chose to terminate, not because they weren't "selfless" enough, but because they could not see themselves knowingly bringing another child into the world with the challenges he would face, likely more than his brother, and they were also worried about the effect that would have on the two older children since they understood the time, attention, and care this child would need. Her husband's parents are no help with the kids in general (her MIL told her she should terminate the second pregnancy) and her own mother has the beginnings of dementia.

There's really a full spectrum of disability out there and the current trotting out of happy, functional children with Down Syndrome doesn't reflect reality for many, many families.

Such an important point. I work with children with severe disabilities. Some really suffer daily even with the best medical help and social support. Sometimes, only complex medical intervention made their survival possible. Families live in fear of how their loved one will be cared for after they pass away. Some students have severe autism which isn’t diagnosable in pre-natal tests. All parents take the risk of having a special needs child. It’s a profound privilege and joy to work with students who need so much care. But knowingly brining a child into the world with severe lifelong needs and poor quality of life isn’t something I would choose.

+1 It's so easy to sit back and wax poetic about SN kids when you don't have any experience raising one, especially one with really serious needs that require 24/7 care. I find it to be the most disingenuous part of the anti-abortion movement, especially because most people who are anti-abortion are also against increasing state funding to help parents and caretakers with SN kids

Um I have a special needs kid and am friends with many sn parents and this is completely untrue. Many of us chose to have a baby

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“We had an amnio because we didn’t want to bring a child into the world who couldn’t take care of itself.”

We had an amnio too. Our children were both 3 at the time.

Can you elaborate as to why you found this offensive? Does your child have an issue that could’ve been (was?) found with an amnio?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know what % of abortion are because of "Rape" or something bad that happens?

What's your definition of "bad"?

Rape - bad
Incest - bad
Abusive partner - bad
Birth control pills were tampered or did not work - bad
Condom broke - bad
Ectopic pregnancy - bad
Miscarriage - bad
Fetal abnormalities not consistent with life - bad

You're probably looking at 70%+ of abortions covered by that list of "bad" scenarios. This is why trying to legislate a list of carve-outs is a dumb idea. You can't possibly cover every scenario.

Rape - bad
Incest - bad
Abusive partner - should leave partner
Birth control pills were tampered or did not work - gift from god
Condom broke - gift from god

I will start this with I am fully pro-choice but I am also raising and loving a child who was conceived through rape.
If you are going to make any judgment on bad or good, you have to make it across the board for all pregnancy. A fetus (and eventual child) suddenly doesn't become "bad" because a sperm entered a vagina due to rape. It is the impact on the woman which makes it "bad" and the incredible difficulty in raising the child. This is the same as if the woman is poor or just darn chooses not to be pregnant. The logic that there is good and bad in this is flawed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know what % of abortion are because of "Rape" or something bad that happens?

What's your definition of "bad"?

Rape - bad
Incest - bad
Abusive partner - bad
Birth control pills were tampered or did not work - bad
Condom broke - bad
Ectopic pregnancy - bad
Miscarriage - bad
Fetal abnormalities not consistent with life - bad

You're probably looking at 70%+ of abortions covered by that list of "bad" scenarios. This is why trying to legislate a list of carve-outs is a dumb idea. You can't possibly cover every scenario.

Rape - bad
Incest - bad
Abusive partner - should leave partner
Birth control pills were tampered or did not work - gift from god
Condom broke - gift from god

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we are. Comfort level is different for everyone, I guess. We have a three year old and I am 38, so we don't have a lot of time left if we want a second child, but being pregnant now and feeling sick/tired from pregnancy, layered with anxiety about corona, while also juggling demanding jobs and a preschooler... all seems like too much to take on right now. We're pausing for a month or two. I know this may mean we don't have a second child. Just wanted to show there are differing approaches out there.

Anonymous wrote:I absolutely would wait. They have no idea what the effect is to the fetus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really tired of this distance learning nonsense for the younger than kindergarten kids. When we're being honest, it's just a way for the school to justify shifting the financial burden of this pandemic to the parents instead of insurance or school reserves.

Do I need the school gym teacher to send me Cosmic yoga clips for my kids to watch? No.

Yes, my children love their teachers and miss them and their friends terribly. But we all see through these You Tube story times. This may not be sustainable as unemployment numbers rise across all industries.

Exactly. Total scam. Our school is doing online meetings from 10-11 two days a week. For PreK, total crap!

Anonymous wrote:OP this is the risk you took. If the owner cancels, they refund. But they are not cancelling or telling you not to come. And they know you aren’t repeat business so there is no incentive for them to refund you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you sound like an entitled brat. You are spending $6K on a condo for a ski vacation (that you booked non-refundable) and you want special treatment because now you don't want to go?

Also, you don't seem to realize that Colorado is not Italy, Austria, etc. Have you seen what's going on in Italy? People are dying of COVID-19 and the family have to keep the dead bodies in the house because there's a lockdown.

Get some perspective, please.

OP you send extremely elitist. You jet to Colorado for a luxury ski vacation and you have friends who jetset all over Europe. Honestly the owner of the airbnb probably
needed your payment to make their mortgage for the month. Understand you booked during peak ski season in the US from an individual not a hotel chain.

AirBnB is loaded with risk on the side of those who make the reservation. I found a beautiful AirBnB in Savannah that I wanted to rent for the weekend. I stopped reserving it
when I read the cancellation policy was 45 days in advance. Instead I booked the Perry Lane Hotel which gave me a 24 hour cancellation policy.

Anonymous wrote:

MayaJ wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you sound like an entitled brat. You are spending $6K on a condo for a ski vacation (that you booked non-refundable) and you want special treatment because now you don't want to go?

Also, you don't seem to realize that Colorado is not Italy, Austria, etc. Have you seen what's going on in Italy? People are dying of COVID-19 and the family have to keep the dead bodies in the house because there's a lockdown.

Get some perspective, please.

What makes you think we won't be there in one week? Because it is possible we will be. And I'd rather be home than stranded in another state when it happens.

And if we get there, policies will likely change. But until then, it's not reasonable to expect service providers to eat everything. By all means, OP can stay home. That's not a bad idea. What we're talking about is who should bear the loss here. I don't see why the condo owner should be the one to have to bend when OP booked something non-refundable.