(Closed) Pro life or pro choice, tell me what you think about this idea…

posted 6 years ago in The Lounge
  • poll: What do you think about artificial wombs?

    I am pro-choice and I like this idea

    I am pro-choice and I don't like this idea

    I am pro-life and I like this idea

    I am pro-life and I dpm

  • Post # 46
    Member
    9134 posts
    Buzzing Beekeeper
    • Wedding: November 2013 - St. Augustine Beach, FL

    I think it’s an interesting idea but the psychologist and anthropologist in me screams out that an artificial womb cannot mimick the environment of a real life womb (even with an artifical heartbeat and recorded sounds of a parent’s voice) and there will be dangerous longterm consequences for babies gestated in this fashion.

    Post # 47
    Member
    1723 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: March 1998

    I am “pro-choice” predominantly in the sense that there are SOME women who need abortions for medical or other reasons. While I find the reasons that many women (statistically speaking) get abortions reprehensible (and not getting pregnant in the first place for many of them preventable), it is a right that should be available. We all know what happened with back alley abortions. We all know what happens when government tries to legislate decisions that should best be left to the medical arena. I find abortion a sad thing; I find it a very preventable thing.

    I do wish the pro-life movement spent more of its money polling women about the reasons that they get abortions. Concerns about family approval (and wider community approval, for many unmarried women in religious communities), wanting to get a better job, fears about how it will impact education, an unsupportive/abusive partner and concerns about money often top the list of reasons that women get abortions. Solutions need to be tailored to those concerns, rather than putting up billboards attempting to shame or coerce people into adopting.

    Artificial wombs are a promising idea — and they could be helpful for those who have fertility problems, women who face recurrent miscarriages, etc. But they are unlikely to ever be an alternative to abortions. What happens after they’re given away in these circumstances? A mother may not like the idea of an untied knot in her history — will she someday have to pay child support? Will someone come knocking at her door, bringing about news of the pregnancy she wanted to keep hidden? It could be a solution for women who want to keep their pregnancies from their families, but for many, it would still probably be a concern. Still, this is far from the craziest idea I’ve ever heard.

    I am far more behind the idea, though, in terms of solving other fertility problems.

    But back to the pro-life issue:

    There are many crisis pregnancy centers in my community, but the tactics I often hear about them are shameful. We should not be lying to women, telling them they’re 10 weeks further in their pregnancies, showing them ultrasounds of a baby that isn’t theirs. These centers should inform women more thoroughly about the process of adoption. They should outsource women to counselors who may be able to support them through telling their families, or therapists who can help them navigate getting out of — or getting help for — a relationship that could pose a threat. They should be connected with community and welfare programs that could give them the money, job training and education support necessary to become mothers. These girls should be connected to shelters where they can recollect themselves if danger — from family, boyfriends, whoever — are an immediate threat. But, it’s easier just to say, “Don’t get pregnant. Don’t abort your baby.”

    We should be handing out birth control supplies almost like candy. There’s no reason that vending machines in high schools, hell, even in middle schools, can’t carry condoms and spermicide (at least where I reside, anyone can purchase these in stores, too). And, if many of the major American medical associations finally push through, maybe we will one day see birth control supplies being sold similarly — with only blood pressure and medical history being taken by a pharmacist before people can be out the door.

    Hell, even when I went to Planned Parenthood — on a sliding fee scale, and I was toward the higher end of “low-income” at the time — it was $80 just to walk through the door (I think my first visit was $40). It was another $20 or so for the annual pelvic/pap for that women. While I could originally buy my birth control pills through PP — for about $15 a month — they ended up changing their policy so that only women approved for state-funded insurance could do so. I ended up buying my pills from Canada for about $20 a month, because they were $40 – $50 a month here. Fortunately, I had the money for those visits. But, a woman looking for even a three months supply would be looking to spend nearly $300.

    The switch away from having to get a prescription from a doctor would make them far cheaper and more affordable for women of all ages. I know that in my case, I was living with my now-husband, but I was still on my parents’ insurance. No matter the reason, I knew they would flip their crap if I dared use our insurance for anything like that (my mom, in her ever-backwards way, always liked to explain to me that I didn’t need a pap smear until I had sex. So, seeing anything like that on an insurance claim would have led her to conclusions immediately. I was 24 at the time).

    Many young women are in similar boats. My solution was to drive nearly 20 miles to the nearest Planned Parenthood for a cheaper visit. It probably would have been double that cost in a regular office. When you don’t have to worry about your parents finding out (and, frankly, mine were very emotionally abusive, so it was something I couldn’t risk), you are far more likely to get your hands on it.

     

    Post # 48
    Member
    2511 posts
    Sugar bee
    • Wedding: December 2009

    View original reply
    FutureMrsHallam:  “Also, there would be thousands upon thousands of mothers who would be forced into contact with their children as they grow up, which is obviously NOT what they want..

    If I am being totally honest I don’t think there is any need for this. Why do you want to keep every possible baby alive to be brought into an overpopulated and crowded world where no one wants them? This is just going to multiply an already bad situation re: overpopulation of the planet.”

    How would there be thousands of mothers forced into contact with their children as they grow up?! Will they be visiting them at their foster or adoptive homes? Unless they KNOW the adoptive parents, know what their child looks like as they get older & happen to run into them in the same town, I don’t see how they would have contact. I’m curious, not trying to be mean, this just stood out to me & I don’t understand the comment. I know children can search out their birth mothers years down the road, but there’s no guarantee they’ll find them, even if they try. Once a parent gives up their legal right to a child, it’s pretty much over. Unless for some reason they decide they want the child back, which then turns into a heartbreaking nightmare for the adoptive parents, & ends up on national news. Also, yes the planet might be overpopulated, but should we extinguish the innocent in an attempt to control the situation? If you want to kill people as a method of population control, why don’t we begin with death row inmates who are allowed to suck up millions of resources & taxpayer money, not to mention years of appeals processes, in hopes to save themselves from their ultimate fate & the horrible crimes they committed?

    To answer OP’s question, while the idea is super sci-fi to me, I think it’s a better alternative than abortion any day. That being said, I do believe money & effort should be focused on birth control, accessibility, prevention & awareness, which would dramatically reduce the need for abortion. I’m pro-life, but I have given this a lot of thought lately. I believe that life begins at conception, & that a life is a life no matter what “stage” of the development process, BUT I believe that for women who POSITIVELY KNOW they are going to have an abortion no matter WHAT, that they should have access to clean facilities so that they (or the unborn baby) don’t have to suffer disease, dismemberment, or a slow death from an unsanitary, back-alley procedure. Artificial wombs though… Totally weird, but I’m sure they would have said the same thing about cell phones, TV, etc 100 years ago..

    • This reply was modified 6 years, 1 month ago by  okqueenbee.
    Post # 49
    Member
    1161 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: October 2014

    View original reply
    okqueenbee:  I would like to point out a few things, one being that I am certainly not the only bee who brought the overcrowing up. Regardless of what you think you have not brought in any debateable argument, what is YOUR solution if mine is so abhorrent? Prevention is always preferable, but it is simply not a solution right now, be it by lack of accessibility, lack of education or a range of other factors.

    I agree with points others make, in that this is just one more step in preserving throngs of possible human life when we are too vast already. Don’t go all “you want to kill people as a method of population control” on me, that’s stupid and not what we are talking about. I don’t happen to be on the bandwagon that life begins at conception and abortions are not spitting murder. We don’t have death row over here, so take those arguments elsewhere, thankyou.

    “I don’t see how they would have contact” Then you don’t see how many adopted/orphan children later track down their, sometimes anonymous, birth mothers? Think of this multiplied by millions, that’s what we’re talking about here. Someone pulled up a figure of 1.6 million abortions, in america alone, and that does not take into account other methods at hand that could be affected such as standing adoptions and unhappy new mothers who didn’t want either abrotion or adoption. Once you add these babies, as well as the many others from developed nations, in you are reaching millions of people, and you don’t think there could be more than 0.1% of orphans eager to find their birth mothers? That’s not a big percentage, but by millions of orphans it turns into thousands.

    Just because we want these things to be anonymous doesn’t mean they are, and for a procedure like this the information would have to be gathered and kept in detail.

     

    Anyway, these are just two of many many compelling arguments that have been made against this technology, and I cannot see it ever getting the chance to go ahead with all of these very valid points.

    Post # 50
    Member
    7501 posts
    Bumble Beekeeper
    • Wedding: October 2014

    Why can we not just fund proper sex education, contraceptives, and fertility treatments for those who want those things, and make surrogacy more socially acceptable and financially rewarding? This sounds like the most ridiculously over-engineered solution to what really is a fairly easy problem to solve. If you want to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies that end in abortion, then make people more aware of how babies are made and make birth control 10000% more accessible. If you want to help infertile couples then require insurance companies to pay for fertility treatments, ivf, etc. 

    Why dream up all this Star Trek stuff when some education and medicines will solve the majority of the problems?

    Post # 51
    Member
    1088 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: May 2013

    And who exactly is going to fund this Project? There is simply no need for it. There are already plenty of children out there who need to be adopted, a shortage of homeless children is not an issue, hence this would never work.

    Post # 53
    Member
    2511 posts
    Sugar bee
    • Wedding: December 2009

    View original reply
    FutureMrsHallam:  Um, Ok.. I was just asking a question, thank YOU very much lol! No need to go ape crap crazy on me. I wasn’t singling you out to “pick on”, as I stated. You referred to my comments as “stupid” but you feel victimized?

    Yikes. 

    Oh & By The Way, I don’t know where “over here” is. My comment regarding inmates was primarily regarding AMERICAN prisons, since we seem to be the ones who let convicts eat up our tax dollars for decades while they wait on the appeals process.

    Prevention is MOST DEFINATELY a solution in regards to people who are choosing to engage sexually. (That obviously doesn’t apply in cases of rape, but thankfully most children are not conceived out of rape.) Prevention begins with education & BC accessibility, but both of those mean nothing if responsibility & consequences are not also taught. All the free pills & condoms in the world won’t mean a thing to a hormonal teenager who just wants to get their jollies off because it feels good, & if no one has ever taught them otherwise, who is to blame? Parents & teachers need to recognize the moral responsibility they have to their children & students. I firmly believe the emphasis on these things is severely lacking nowadays.

    Post # 54
    Member
    5220 posts
    Bee Keeper

    View original reply
    Horseradish:  + 1,000,000

    Why can’t we put money into preventing unwanted pregnancies???? I’d love to know how much of my tax dollars in the US are going to this kind of thing instead of subsidized women’s healthcare programs. Instead of preventing unwanted pregnancies, we are trying to figure out how to create more……………

     

    Post # 55
    Member
    3075 posts
    Sugar bee
    • Wedding: April 2013 - A court...

    Pro choice & I think it’s a good idea, like pp mentioned, not for everyone if a few women that wanted to get an abortion did that instead it’d be a wiN win. 

    Post # 56
    Member
    1161 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: October 2014

     

    View original reply
    okqueenbee:  I don’t see how you can flip that, read your reply to me, it comes off as very much attacking my point of view. I apologise if that is not so, but I replied to what I could to explain my perspecive. Of yourse, WB no longer shows you where I am I live in Australia, and I cannot comment on killing death row inmates because we simply don’t have death row, so I am not well versed on the topic or how they are treated, but I do believe we should (everywhere) reduce their privilages. Why do inmates who have comitted crimes live better than uni students, disadvantaged children and families, or even low income earners? It makes me furious, but really that isn’t something any of us can change in a day… or probably ever, really…

    Prevention is what we (mostly) all agree on, I just can’t get my head around why so many people spend so much time and effort on focussing on fixing the outcome, rather than tackling the precursors. This, I feel, is just aiming to spend millions of dollars in an attempt to “fix” the outcome (unwanted babies) when really that money would be better spent preventing unwanted babies in the first place through outlets including much more education.

    Post # 57
    Member
    10451 posts
    Sugar Beekeeper
    • Wedding: February 2014

    I think it’s a good idea, in the case of women wanting a biological child but not wanting to mess up their bodies being pregnant. I think it’s dumb to transfer unwanted otherwise aborted babies into one though. 

    Post # 58
    Member
    2511 posts
    Sugar bee
    • Wedding: December 2009

    View original reply
    FutureMrsHallam:  I’m sorry. I did read it again & it does sound kind of aggressive. It’s no excuse, but I guess the bad day I had yesterday translated into my response to you. I always try to have polite, intelligent conversations with people whether I agree with them or not. Thank you for making me more aware of my tone 🙂

    Post # 59
    Member
    9916 posts
    Buzzing Beekeeper
    • Wedding: June 2013

    Sure…but not as an alternative to abortion.  As an alternative to women who cannot maintain a pregnancy for whatever reason, or for people who want surrogates for other reasons…that would be great.  Not to force women to ensure a pregnancy comes to term when they’ve decided they don’t want it, though. I’d use a surrogate in a heartbeat.  

    • This reply was modified 6 years, 1 month ago by  peachacid.
    • This reply was modified 6 years, 1 month ago by  peachacid.
    Post # 60
    Member
    9916 posts
    Buzzing Beekeeper
    • Wedding: June 2013

    (The edited feature is really obnoxious.)

    The topic ‘Pro life or pro choice, tell me what you think about this idea…’ is closed to new replies.

    Find Amazing Vendors