Abortion - What Do You Think?

I, like Boghos, think that while both man and woman have to discuss the issue together and try to come to a decision together, in case the woman decides to terminate the pregnancy, the man has no right to insist on the contrary. After all, it is the woman's body, health and life at risk, if something goes wrong.

I also agree that the type of decision that we - men have to submit to, may be pshchologically very burdensome for us too.

Many Campuses Won't Offer Abortion Pill
Tuesday, October 24, 2000 By Kris Osborn
In the weeks before the newly approved abortion pill hits the shelves, a growing list of colleges and universities are announcing that their health centers will not prescribe the drug.

Largely citing logistical reasons, such as the lack of the medical facilities required by the FDA to administer the pill, Emory University, The University of Georgia at Athens, Boston University, and the entire Florida public university system say they will not offer the drug at their campus health centers.

And although most universities do not perform abortions, many other schools are wrestling with the issue of whether a university should prescribe the pill commonly known as RU-486 but to be sold as Mifeprex.

In some instances, universities have not based their decision solely on the availability of sufficient medical equipment. Florida Atlantic University health chief Cathie Wallace said the school's choice not to offer the "abortion pill" is because the drug is "abortion...not contraception."

But regardless of the reasons given by university administrators, the decision to keep the drug off so many campuses has prompted strong reactions from both sides of the abortion debate.

Mary-Ellen Mitchell, a counselor at the Feminist Women's Health Center in Atlanta, said she is an ardent supporter of RU-486. Universities have a responsibility to women to offer the pill, she said.

"An unplanned pregnancy is something that very much affects college campuses, and universities need to be in a position to deal with that," Mitchell said.

Georgia Right to Life director Gen Wilson rejects that idea.

"I'm so strong on my stance on RU-486, I don't care if it's a state-run school or private one, they don't have any business handing it out," she said.

Any use of the abortion pill is likely to numb young women to the severity of what's actually taking place in their bodies, Wilson said. And what is taking place inside them amounts to murder, she said.

"You have a living human being. You go to the doctor, you take a pill. You go back and take another pill, you no longer have a living being inside of you," she said.

Food and Drug Administration guidelines specify that any use of the drug must involve doctors with specialized training in gynecology and obstetrics, and any facility offering it must be able to provide surgical back-up in the event of complications.

In some cases, this ability to provide surgical back-up could be satisfied if a college health center is close enough to a hospital or surgical facility. Still, experts in the field point out that risks associated with RU-486 are nothing to dismiss lightly.

"Nausea, headaches, and serious bleeding" can happen when a woman takes the abortion pill, certified nurse-practitioner Diann Kayah said. Any use of RU-486 requires a minimum of three clinic or hospital visits.

As colleges and universities forge the policies that will govern the use of the abortion pill on campus, opposing political sides have seized the issue as an occasion to renew the arguments at the heart of the abortion debate.

Pro-choice activists argue that RU-486 should be made widely accessible, because that would afford college-age women the option of a more private, non-invasive abortion.

The Feminist Health Center's Janelle Yamarick wants the use of the drug to be supported by universities, calling it "a better medical option for some women."

Pro-life activists like Wilson say drug-induced abortion has serious health and safety risks for women, so offering RU-486 to young women sends them the wrong message.

"If we communicate to young women that this is a quick, easy solution, then it makes them more vulnerable," Wilson said.

I'm with you two on this. Women go through everything in a pregnancy, while men just spectate. And once a child is born, 99 times out of 100, the woman is the primary (and maybe sole) care giver.

I think on Day 1 it is not murder and on Day 270 it is murder. This is right in line with MJ's comments regarding the "embryonic period". If science cannot determine at one point it goes from one to the other, religious institutions should not try to impose their views.

I knew once the religion thread was started this one was going to follow.



[This message has been edited by Pilafhead (edited October 25, 2000).]

Mike,

I somewhat disagree with you on the subject of the length of the embryonic period.

I think scientifically speaking, if the fetus can survive on its own, in lab conditions for example, which is not unheard of after the 6th month of pregnancy, it is not an embryo, but a person.

Being somewhat lax on the issue of abortions in general, I think the late-term abortions are some of the most hideous practices.

I think the scientific thought does provide answer to the paradigm embryo or human in a robust manner – it is defined by the question can the fetus survive outside mother’s body?

But I also understand that there always are exceptions to any rules.




[This message has been edited by MJ (edited October 25, 2000).]

No, I'm not saying that the embryonic period is 270 days. I'm saying that on the first day of pregnancy is one extreme and on the last day is the other extreme.
That is, it gradually goes from not being a human being, to being one. I think this is the same as your views.

I got it, now

alright, gentlemen, I have to intervene

I've always found it laughable that people can sit around and calmly, logically reason about the length of the embryonic period, when the fetus becomes a baby (essentially same thing), etc, etc. More often than not, the debate about abortion is reduced to a scientific argument about the anatomy and physiology of a woman's body. But is THAT what this is all about? Come now. While I myself have been spared the necessity of making this decision (thank god!), I've come across many college age women (and even high school girls ) who do, in fact, have to decide. There's no torture worse than this one for a woman, to my mind.

I know that to me, if I were ever faced with this, debates such as the one about the length of the embryonic period would be highly irrelevant. Do you really think that it's going to matter to a woman who just lost out on a chance to bring a life into this world, to care for it, to love it, to see it grow and become a good human being....do you really think it's going to matter whether she got the abortion on day 269 or day 271???? No. It wouldn't matter at all.

Now, re: RU 486. I've stated elsewhere that I'm pro choice, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'm pro-abortion, two stances that are often mistaken for one another. On a moral level, I think abortion is wrong, plain and simple (under any circumstances, even rape, yes, even rape). However, a woman should be able to choose. A difficult choice, but nonetheless, a choice that should be made available, as it currently is under Roe vs. Wade. I shudder every time I think that with Bush's ascendancy to the Oval Office the Roe vs. Wade decision could conceivably be overturned.

RU 486 is just an extension of the abortion debate. Yes, I think it should be made available on college campuses, for a number of reasons. First, consider the demographics. Who gets abortions? More often than not, unmarried women. Where are unmarried women found in greater numbers? On college campuses. This is also the population that doesn't make a whole lot and is unlikely to have health insurance. University health centers offer a whole host of health services at no cost. Additional services not available regularly are available at a reduced cost. Also, UCLA, for example, gives the students the option of purchasing health insurance at a lesser cost. The article brings up the question about the readiness of college health centers to deal with possible complications. Most major universities have excellent facilities and exceptional doctors. Next point: the pill doesn't belong on a college campus, along with condoms, etc. What's the goal of any educational institution, pray tell? To educate. I don't see how it would harm anyone if women in this position were informed about the availability of the pill. They would still be making the decision whether or not to proceed. College age women are adults, thereby eliminating the question of minor status and parental consent.

It's an option, it should be available and accessible. College health centers make that possible

Gayane

Gayane,

Don't fight me... I don't face the danger of unwanted pregnancy I am just a speculator

Martin, what an insensitive and even cruel thing to say...if a man like you can say that, what hope is there for less worthy specimens of the species? (how's that for ambivalence?..lol)

But seriously, that's just it!! Men are just "speculators" when it comes to this issue. I know you don't want to think about this, but what if your daughters were in this situation. What then? How much of a "speculator" will you be then? (hate to use below the belt tactics, but they work)

Sorry, this was a little emotional
Gayane

Gayane,

I don't use my daughters for the sake of an argument. I will leave them out of this.(:

On a substantial level, what should I say, that abortion is immoral, is killing, etc.?

I am old enough not to make such sweeping statements?

You know by now that I am a libertarian person, and I respect everybody's personal space.

There is one thing only a person in my position can do - not to be the source of the problem, in the first place

I think that is an important part of the issue on a national basis. Since pro-lifers always bring up that it is "murder". The timing of a woman having one is crucial.


There's a difference there. You are now talking about an individual faced with the decision. Not the legality of abortion. I agree that the timing to this person is irrelevant. Day 1 is as emotionally painful as Day 270.


You are assuming I have not been in the position of dealing with the issue first hand. Faced with a embryo that was clearly not viable, my wife and I dealt with things we are discussing here. While we did not have to decide about the taking/non-taking of a life, some of the other issues above arose.




[This message has been edited by Pilafhead (edited October 25, 2000).]