Home - List All Discussions

Forced Abortion part 2

for Forced Abortion fans cm and rosalie

by: ChristianLott2

So which is it? Either way she will be forced to do one or the other based on her parents decision. Both are forced.
You and killer claim forced birth and forced abortion are wrong but in this circumstance you've already taken the 'choice' out of the young girls hands and given it to the parents.
The child is not allowed to make the decision. What do you think should happen?

reply from: carolemarie

How did I give the choice to the parents?
Do you believe that a 5th grade girl can raise a baby on her own without help from her parents? Do you expect her to drive to the DR. office for her prenatal care? Pay the Dr bill? Buy a crib and baby clothes?
Do you really think that she gets to make a decision based on her own preferences? That she even has enough information and life experience to make a decision like this?
And after she has this baby, are the parents going to take it home and raise it? Are they required to support that baby? Or do we have the 5th grader drop out of school and get a job?
Do the parents get to place the baby for adoption if the girl wants to keep her baby? Do you not know that having your child taken away from you is horrible?
Answer these questions CL, since you know what is best....

reply from: nancyu

No one has the right to kill an innocent person. Even if it is very, very, very inconvenient not to.

reply from: scopia19822

"Do you believe that a 5th grade girl can raise a baby on her own without help from her parents? Do you expect her to drive to the DR. office for her prenatal care? Pay the Dr bill? Buy a crib and baby clothes?"
Of course the parents will have to help, we even have women my age (26) who need help from mom and dad raising the child. If it were my daughter I would drive her to the doctor, I would help pay her doctor bills or see what help there was out there for them. I would buy her baby cloths and throw her a shower if she wants to keep the baby. I
"Do you really think that she gets to make a decision based on her own preferences? That she even has enough information and life experience to make a decision like this?"
I would ask her if she wants to try parenting or adopting the child out. That would be left up to her, but abortion will not be an option will not be brought into the equation. I would prefer that I would raise the child, I couldnt bear the thought of my grandchild being raised by strangers, but in the end that would be up to her.
"And after she has this baby, are the parents going to take it home and raise it? Are they required to support that baby? Or do we have the 5th grader drop out of school and get a job?"
That girl whether shes 10 or 17 will stay in school . It would be my moral obligation to help her raise the child or raise the child myself. I would support the child myself. Once shes old enough to work and wants to earn pocket money like any other teen she will go to work. Her and the childs basic needs would be provided by me and my husband regardless.
"Do the parents get to place the baby for adoption if the girl wants to keep her baby? Do you not know that having your child taken away from you is horrible?"
That is the choice that I would give her to make does she want to keep the baby or adopt the child out. But she will not over my dead body get an abortion.

reply from: ChristianLott2

you seem to think they know what'sn best. You seem to endorse this line of reasoning. Your following questions admit to it.
I expect the child to be born and taken care of, not murdered. There are numerous ways to achieve this, none of which require much imagination.
You are one sick sob, killer. You really believe a dead baby is better than a live one.
That's the whole story here.

reply from: faithman

you seem to think they know what'sn best. You seem to endorse this line of reasoning. Your following questions admit to it.
I expect the child to be born and taken care of, not murdered. There are numerous ways to achieve this, none of which require much imagination.
You are one sick sob, killer. You really believe a dead baby is better than a live one.
That's the whole story here.
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j214/yodavater/IamaPerson2.jpg

reply from: ChristianLott2

notice how 'knight in shining armor could give a flying ***** about this thread??

reply from: faithman

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j214/yodavater/IamaPerson2.jpg
notice how 'knight in shining armor could give a flying ***** about this thread??

reply from: Faramir

So which is it? Either way she will be forced to do one or the other based on her parents decision. Both are forced.
You and killer claim forced birth and forced abortion are wrong but in this circumstance you've already taken the 'choice' out of the young girls hands and given it to the parents.
The child is not allowed to make the decision. What do you think should happen?
I don't understand you premise, and I don't understand if you are referring to now, or when/if abortion is illegal.

reply from: yoda

So this would be one of those instances where you think it might be "best" to either force or allow the girl to abort a healthy baby then?
Is this what you were talking about when you said "it might be best" for her to have an abortion?

reply from: yoda

Come on Weenie, step up to the plate! It doesn't matter whether it's legal or not! We're talking about the MORALITY of a healthy mother killing a healthy baby....... STOP DODGING!!
Tell us that YOU don't think a healthy young girl ought to ever abort a healthy baby that she is capable of gestating........????
Tell us that you don't understand why a "prolifer" would ever say such a thing?

reply from: micah

To think she almost became 2nd most powerful person in America. Gee, I want her representing America to foreign countries.

reply from: Rosalie

So which is it? Either way she will be forced to do one or the other based on her parents decision. Both are forced.
You and killer claim forced birth and forced abortion are wrong but in this circumstance you've already taken the 'choice' out of the young girls hands and given it to the parents.
The child is not allowed to make the decision. What do you think should happen?
I agreed with Carole because this is what she said in the other thread:
This is what she said. I interpreted it as believing that to force EITHER abortion OR the continuation on pregnancy on the little girl is wrong and evil, that the girl should get all the support she needs by her parents and by a doctor and then she should make a choice. It will always be a horrible choice because there's not a good choice in such scenario, but it will be her choice, made while she is being supported by those who should love her the most in the world and a doctor.
That's at least how I understood her post, she is naturally free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Forced abortion is just as horrible an inexcusable as forced gestation (aka what 'pro-lifers' promote).
I don't know how I should make it any clearer to you.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Come on Weenie, step up to the plate! It doesn't matter whether it's legal or not! We're talking about the MORALITY of a healthy mother killing a healthy baby....... STOP DODGING!!
The killer he defends supports the current legality of parents forcing an abortion on a young girl. Is this something you also support, faramir?
Just because she's had several abortions doesn't make her ABOVE MORALITY.
Why don't you tell her that?

reply from: Rosalie

This is just so horrible. I don't think I can comprehend this level of evil and such lack of empathy, especially in a parent.
It's disgusting when fetuses mean more to you than the health and well-being of your own born children.
And to think that YOU had the guts to try to insult me as a parent (again, you failed, you only showed what a vile and horrible person you are) - and then you say something like that.

reply from: faithman

So which is it? Either way she will be forced to do one or the other based on her parents decision. Both are forced.
You and killer claim forced birth and forced abortion are wrong but in this circumstance you've already taken the 'choice' out of the young girls hands and given it to the parents.
The child is not allowed to make the decision. What do you think should happen?
I agreed with Carole because this is what she said in the other thread:
This is what she said. I interpreted it as believing that to force EITHER abortion OR the continuation on pregnancy on the little girl is wrong and evil, that the girl should get all the support she needs by her parents and by a doctor and then she should make a choice. It will always be a horrible choice because there's not a good choice in such scenario, but it will be her choice, made while she is being supported by those who should love her the most in the world and a doctor.
That's at least how I understood her post, she is naturally free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Forced abortion is just as horrible an inexcusable as forced gestation (aka what 'pro-lifers' promote).
I don't know how I should make it any clearer to you.
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j214/yodavater/IamaPerson2.jpg

reply from: ChristianLott2

To think she almost became 2nd most powerful person in America. Gee, I want her representing America to foreign countries.
So spinny and micah also support FORCED ABORTION.
You're ashamed to admit you are pro forced abortion so you want to change the topic.
Because that's what this thread is about, the morality of forcing an abortion on a young girl by her parents - hence the title. Talking about 'forced birth' is simply dodging the question.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Well, that's clear now but that's not what cm is implying.
Now tell us clearly cm, who is making the decision?
More importantly, who do YOU think should be making the decision?

reply from: ChristianLott2

Come on Weenie, step up to the plate! It doesn't matter whether it's legal or not! We're talking about the MORALITY of a healthy mother killing a healthy baby....... STOP DODGING!!
The killer he defends supports the current legality of parents forcing an abortion on a young girl. Is this something you also support, faramir?
Just because she's had several abortions doesn't make her ABOVE MORALITY.
Why don't you tell her that?
Why don't you tell her that?

reply from: faithman

http://www.armyofgod.com/Baby12.html

reply from: ChristianLott2

She's already had three abortions fman, no need to REMINDER her how awful abortion is. She knows.
That's why she will 'counsel' parents to force an abortion on their young daughter.

reply from: carolemarie

THat is exactly what I said CL, if you were not so busy trying to find something to hate me for you might have been able to read it.
The only one who should get to make a choice is the kid!

reply from: yoda

Now it's back to the "kid" again? Make up your mind....
Oh, btw, that means you would support a kid's decision to abort her healthy baby, even if she was physically capable of gestating it, right?
That's what I thought.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Oh, I get it now. You think I'm in favor of letting a kid who can't even legally make a decision to have sex supposedly make a decision to murder her own child.
You're off the hook now.
Wow, first it was the parents, then you said it was the 'family', now it's just the kid..
So you're like micah - you WANT the kid to have an abortion, but to not sound like a control freak say you give the choice to the kid. After strong pro abortion counseling of course:
What a choice. Make her feel too guilty to keep the kid even if she wanted to, then act like it's all in her court so she feels the guilt and can never blame you for pressuring her into it. After all, she was pressured into sex and they called it rape - pressure into an abortion and you will call it 'choice'.
Then in the last sentence you even want her to feel like abortion is better than adoption.
"It's better to murder your baby than give it away."
That's what I'm talking about, cm.
I wonder how many faux lifers want to come to your rescue on this one.

reply from: scopia19822

"This is just so horrible. I don't think I can comprehend this level of evil and such lack of empathy, especially in a parent."
Pot calling the kettle black, If anyone is "evil" and lacks empathy/compassion its yourself
"It's disgusting when fetuses mean more to you than the health and well-being of your own born children."
Where did I say the baby has presedence over the daughter? In this case I would have the well being of 2 people to consider. My child and grandchild. Both are equal and have an equal right to live. I dont believe in playing God, deciding who should live or who should die that would be up your alley. What if it was your daugther at that age and she said she didnt want an abortion, please dont make me have one. Would you respect her choice or cart her off the abortionist and have it done anyway. I find abortion to be the most disgusting vile thing on the planet. I was forced to have an abortion and I will not subject my child to the hands of an abortionist and potentially damage her psyce and endanger (no matter how small a chance) her future fertilty. I will leave the choice to parent or adopt the child out up to her, however I will not consent to allow her to have an abortion. I live in a state that requires parental consent for a minor to obtain an abortion, I nor my husband even would sign the papers allowing it. And if anybody took her to a state without consent laws and got her an abortion I would have them charged on Federal Kidnapping which apply under the Lindbergh law. Im a Catholic, you can laugh and mock my religion all you want too I dont care, but I have a conscience and my conscience says that abortion is murder just like any other murder and I will not be a party to it.
"And to think that YOU had the guts to try to insult me as a parent (again, you failed, you only showed what a vile and horrible person you are) - and then you say something like that."
I'm vile and horrible, you're the one who thinks its ok to play "God" , that a woman should have the right to decide life or death over her unborn child. Thats whats is vile and horrible, this isnt ancient rome or sparta.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Oh, I get it now. You think I'm in favor of letting a kid who can't even legally make a decision to have sex supposedly make a decision to murder her own child.
You're off the hook now.
Wow, first it was the parents, then you said it was the 'family', now it's just the kid..
So you're like micah - you WANT the kid to have an abortion, but to not sound like a control freak say you give the choice to the kid. After strong pro abortion counseling of course:
What a choice. Make her feel too guilty to keep the kid even if she wanted to, then act like it's all in her court so she feels the guilt and can never blame you for pressuring her into it. After all, she was pressured into sex and they called it rape - pressure into an abortion and you will call it 'choice'.
Then in the last sentence you even want her to feel like abortion is better than adoption.
"It's better to murder your baby than give it away."
That's what I'm talking about, cm.
I wonder how many faux lifers want to come to your rescue on this one.
I wonder how many faux lifers want to come to your rescue on this one.
none obviously.

reply from: carolemarie

That is the whole problem! She isn't free to do what she wants. No 11 year old is.
Pregnancy by rape is a whole complicated mess. That little girl is a victim and the trauma of rape is hard enough for grown women, but rather overwhelming for a 5th grader. She and her family need COUNSELING and they need to know the facts and options, and abortion is an option. There are all kinds of ramifications of any choice.
This is precisly why the individuals need to make the choices. Rape and incest are rare and unique situtations where the victims needs get priority...
What if the parents are prolife and want the baby and the girl doesn't? You feel they should get the make her have the baby? That is just as evil and getting an abortion.

reply from: faithman

http://www.armyofgod.com/Baby12.html

reply from: ChristianLott2

yeah, thanks for clearing that up.

reply from: faithman

yeah, thanks for clearing that up.
And to think that well meaning people defend this blatant baby killer. But they don't have a lick of problem with attacking those who would stand up and tell the truth. YEAH!!!! Abortion is an option is SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO pro-life. If that is true then count me out.

reply from: ChristianLott2

They aren't really that 'well meaning' then, are they?

reply from: faithman

They aren't really that 'well meaning' then, are they?
You may have a point.

reply from: scopia19822

"This is precisly why the individuals need to make the choices. Rape and incest are rare and unique situtations where the victims needs get priority..."
"
You are wrong on this CM, so very wrong. A baby deserves the right to life no matter the circumstances of their conception. Is a child any less human because its father was a rapist? It makes my blood boil when I hear people say that abortion should be allowed under these circumstances. These are human beings you are talking about, not "exceptions".

reply from: ChristianLott2

Of course she's wrong. Shouldn't she stop lying and telling people she's pro life?
Why don't you tell her that?

reply from: scopia19822

"Of course she's wrong. Shouldn't she stop lying and telling people she's pro life?
Why don't you tell her that?"
She believes shes prolife since she opposes 98% of abortions. I disagree with her on these exceptions, she knows that however she does more to save babies than many of the so called real prolifers. She doesnt deserve the treatment shes recieved.

reply from: carolemarie

I support exceptions because I don't want to sacrfice one child to save another.

reply from: ChristianLott2

See scopia. That's just a downright lie and an intentional deception!
Why do you condone this???

reply from: scopia19822

"I support exceptions because I don't want to sacrfice one child to save another."
That is exactly what would be happening by supporting exceptions.

reply from: carolemarie

It makes me ANGRY to hear anyone say too bad raped 5th grader, you are going to be forced to have a baby no matter what you want. As long as that baby is born, who cares what happens to you...your just a womb to us (we are REAL prolifers)

reply from: ChristianLott2

What makes me MORE angry is that you want to redefine pro life to mean pro choice. Why don't you just admit you are pro choice and stop lying to everyone?

reply from: faithman

It makes me ANGRY to hear anyone say too bad raped 5th grader, you are going to be forced to have a baby no matter what you want. As long as that baby is born, who cares what happens to you...your just a womb to us (we are REAL prolifers)
Like we really care if a baby killer gets angry.....

reply from: carolemarie

I don't care at all what you all think on this. The profetus peoples want all babies born, and don't care a lick about the women.
The prochoicers tend to only care about the women
I am prolife, so I care about both. And the rights of each is a balancing act. In the case of rape, incest and life of the mother, the balance has to be made by those in the situtation, not those who are merely imagining what they would do....
that child is as important as the fetus. I think that any woman who would abort to perserve her life isn't doing anything wrong, same with anyone who has been raped or a victim of incest, they have the right to either choose to continue the pregnancy or terminate it. All other abortions have no claim to being ethical.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Pregnancy is a temporary condition. Murder is permanent.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Abortion hurts women and murders their children. You are the one who doesn't care about the woman OR the child.
That you can believe pro choicers care about women is proof that you are pro choice.
Yet you want the baby to die. You are a hypocrite and deceiver.
You don't want balance, you want a dead baby. Liar.
then you explain to us that it's the baby who will be murdered. in your opinion the baby doesn't matter at all.
and we do? since when?
their lives are not in danger. you've made no comparison at all.
you don't have a clue about ethics, murderer.

reply from: carolemarie

???
You think that is all there is to it? She has the baby, and goes back to 6th grade, no harm no foul?
You are pathetic

reply from: faithman

One who has murdered 3 and still advocates killing womb children calls someone pathetic? That is really rich!!!

reply from: ChristianLott2

Yeah, no murdered baby. Thank God.
Why, because I don't want a dead baby? Sure killer.

reply from: scopia19822

" As long as that baby is born, who cares what happens to you...your just a womb to us (we are REAL prolifers)"
That is not true and Im sorry you think that I think that. I would have a the lives/welfare of 2 people to consider. If it was my child I would not permit her to get an abortion, I nor my husband would sign the papers. Im a Catholic and abortion is murder and I will not be a party to it. I have been in the TLC of an abortionist and will not subject my daughter to that, possibly endangering her mental health even further or her future fertilty. I will see to it that she gets threapy, I will see to it that she gets prenatal care and I will help her decide on parenting or adoption. If she doesnt want to parent either the baby will be surrendered to strangers for adoption or will be raised by us. She can go back to school and be a kid and get on with her life. Do decide if a unborn child should live or die is playing God and I will not do that.

reply from: sk1bianca

i'm a peaceful person and i've been staying out of this... "debate"... for a while but... i have to say this:
one of my brothers was aborted because he was conceived by rape. my mother was told that this would be the best "choice" for her. it wasn't. they lied to her.
I DARE YOU SAY TO MY FACE THAT MY BROTHER DESERVED TO BE DISMEMBERED AND THROWN IN THE TRASH!

reply from: faithman

Truely sorry for your loss. I join you in your grief, and pray for an end to the insanity.

reply from: carolemarie

I never said any baby conceived by rape deserves to die. I said that it is the choice for the victim to make.
Did your mother want to have the baby? If so, she shouldn't have had the abortion. It is suppose to be about what is the best choice for her, based on her needs. Nobody has said that you should be required to have an abortion if you are raped. But you have the right to defend your life.
Do you think women should have to have a baby if it would kill them? Because if you do, that is an exception as well. The baby hasn't changed, your perception of the situtation has changed.
These situtations are horrible and there is not a universal best all around solution that can cover everything. That is why we leave it to those involved.

reply from: faithman

I never said any baby conceived by rape deserves to die. I said that it is the choice for the victim to make.
Did your mother want to have the baby? If so, she shouldn't have had the abortion. It is suppose to be about what is the best choice for her, based on her needs. Nobody has said that you should be required to have an abortion if you are raped. But you have the right to defend your life.
Do you think women should have to have a baby if it would kill them? Because if you do, that is an exception as well. The baby hasn't changed, your perception of the situtation has changed.
These situtations are horrible and there is not a universal best all around solution that can cover everything. That is why we leave it to those involved.
For one who claims to know God, you sure left Him pout of the equasion!!! the true pro-life position is to save both lives. But we must never give a doctor the power to purposely kill. Did you have the right to purposly kill 3? If not, then why should we give the same "right" to those who claim to be a healer?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_RnBM5o00I&feature=PlayList&p=04EF336B4C325FF1&index=2&playnext=3&playnext_from=PL Cheap grace is not the gospel.

reply from: carolemarie

why would I watch a piece on BC? What does that have to do with anything...

reply from: faithman

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOny71OfD0Q&feature=PlayList&p=04EF336B4C325FF1&index=4&playnext=5&playnext_from=PL

reply from: carolemarie

I watched it. Very sad, as it was written to be. But completely full of bad theology.
Being in God's presence is WONDERFUL and no matter what pain you felt on earth, in His arms you have perfect peace, you are perfectly comforted.
A baby who was aborted wouldn't even know what happen, it isn't cognitive or self aware yet.
The little video is what women who have abortions tell themselves....
that what they did was so terrible even God can't make it right.
That isn't true.
This just is caculated to make you feel outrage and to condemn those who made the mistake of abortion

reply from: sk1bianca

abortion shouldn't be viewed as "the best solution" in the case of rape. actually, it isn't a solution at all. it doesn't make the rape go away, it doesn't make the woman feel better. it just turns the woman into a killer. it might sound surprinsing, but many rape victims find abortion repulsive, simply because it's another act of violence.
in the case where the pregnancy threatens the mother's life, she should be the one to decide. not the doctor, not the family, not the "counselor".
and i say this because there are women who would rather die in childbirth than have an abortion. there really are such women out there... ya know...
and since you mentioned God... do you think that for Him rape would be enough to justify killing an innocent child?

reply from: carolemarie

I don't believe that abortion is the best solution.
I think it may be a solution for some people
I don't think rape victims are killers, they are protecting their lives and it is unfair to call them that. They are victims who need compassion and healing, not judgmental attitudes.
If you want to die in childbirth, go ahead. That is your choice. I am sure there are some who would opt for that. But the choice is theirs, I agree with you!
I don't know for sure if it would be okay with God, I think it might be, because we are allowed to defend ourselves

reply from: faithman

SSSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO full of pro-death lingo and excuses.

reply from: faithman

Every effort should be taken to save both. Abortion is not a legitimate effort. It is purposly killing a womb child.

reply from: carolemarie

YOu think a baby would not be able to be comforted by God himself!!!
That is total crap

reply from: faithman

Every effort should be taken to save both. Abortion is not a legitimate effort. It is purposly killing a womb child.

reply from: sk1bianca

so a pregnancy resulting from rape should always be considered as a threat to the woman's LIFE? than how can we explain that many women choose to keep the baby?
abortion is not like self defense. the child is not attacking his mother. he shouldn't be punished.
you are right, victims need compassion and healing. but abortion has NOTHING to do with these. it is not compassionate towards the woman (who ends up having some medical instruments stuck between her legs by some stranger), certainly not towards the child (i guess i don't need to say why...), and it's not healing the trauma cause by rape (it's more likely to make the victim feel like it's happening all over again).
you're not sure if God would be ok with it? ask Him.

reply from: carolemarie

i can't imagine being in that situtation....
Let me ask you this, do you think a woman has a right to use lethal force to stop a rapist?

reply from: sk1bianca

yes. rape is an act of pure violence and the rapist is commiting it with the intent of satisfying his sick desires or to humiliate the woman. such individuals are a threat and that's why they are removed from society (sent to jail).
i hope you're not trying to compare an unborn child to a rapist...

reply from: carolemarie

No!
I was thinking if what was done was so horrible that killing to stop it from happening is okay, then it would be understandable that a woman would want to not deal with a pregnancy that resulted from the rape...and she is defending herself against this further assualt.
It has nothing to do with the baby, just her need to get her life back.

reply from: faithman

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO killing a womb child has nothing to do with them?

reply from: carolemarie

as in fault or blame on the part of the baby.

reply from: yoda

I could understand this statement coming from Rosalie or some other rabid proabort, but from someone who says they are a dedicated prolife activist?
Allowing a baby to live is just as evil as killing it?

reply from: yoda

And yet..... that is exactly what you are supporting......

reply from: carolemarie

I could understand this statement coming from Rosalie or some other rabid proabort, but from someone who says they are a dedicated prolife activist?
Allowing a baby to live is just as evil as killing it?
IT HAS TO BE THE CHOICE OF THE PERSON WHO WAS RAPED, that is my point.

reply from: yoda

Let's see.......... by your scenario, she has the abortion, goes back to 6th grade, no harm (except to the baby's life and the mother's conscience for the rest of her life) no foul?
That's your "prolife solution"? Kill the baby and forget about it?
With prolifers like you, the proaborts don't need any other friends.......

reply from: faithman

I could understand this statement coming from Rosalie or some other rabid proabort, but from someone who says they are a dedicated prolife activist?
Allowing a baby to live is just as evil as killing it?
IT HAS TO BE THE CHOICE OF THE PERSON WHO WAS RAPED, that is my point.
Point made baby killer.

reply from: yoda

"Life" is the universal best all around solution that covers everything.
Ever hear of it?

reply from: yoda

If they kill their baby, then they ARE KILLERS.
LYING DOES NOT CHANGE ANYTHING!!

reply from: yoda

You're claiming that is an excuse to kill a baby?
Would YOU be comforted that way if someone killed YOU?

reply from: carolemarie

No, rape and incest are different than elective abortions.

reply from: faithman

Not really. You are "electing" to kill a womb child [ fetus to baby killers] just because you don't like his/her daddy.

reply from: sk1bianca

being pregnant after a rape is not like being continuously raped. this might be the way she sees it, but it's not a real situation, it's an image created by the trauma. the child is not assaulting her.
the woman should be explained this (that's what counseling is for), not encouraged to kill someone who had nothing to do with the rape. she should be put in contact with the reality in order to get her life back, not left alone with her distorted feelings.

reply from: yoda

Incredible..... where is Weenie NOW????
Having an abortion IS "dealing with a pregnancy", haven't you been listening to the proaborts?
And an innocent person's life is NOT a "further assault"!! Good grief, what kind of "values" do you have????
At the cost of the baby's life?
How would it take away her life to let her baby live???????????

reply from: yoda

With each post, you sound more and more like a proabort..... they always say "it's the woman's choice, not yours".
They totally ignore the issue of whether it is a MORAL choice to kill an innocent person electively..... they just want each woman to have the POWER TO KILL that baby.
And that's exactly what YOU are saying!!
WAKE UP!!

reply from: carolemarie

Reality is what you percieve. Counseling would be a good idea, I have said that i think rape victims may be more likely to choose life with counseling, but they can't be forced to give birth. They need to choose it to get on with healing.
And healing after rape is not easy, you can't just tell someome to get over it, your lack of empathy for the girl is sad...

reply from: faithman

Reality is what you percieve. Counseling would be a good idea, I have said that i think rape victims may be more likely to choose life with counseling, but they can't be forced to give birth. They need to choose it to get on with healing.
And healing after rape is not easy, you can't just tell someome to get over it, your lack of empathy for the girl is sad...
Your lack of empathy for the womb child is criminal, and classic bortheadism.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Moral relativism.
You mean like this:

reply from: yoda

And you would "heal" her by allowing her to kill her baby, and become a baby killer.
Do you feel that your abortions "healed" you?

reply from: sk1bianca

reality is what a normal person perceives. not someone who has been metally damaged by rape. that's why they all get counseling in the first place. do you think such a person should be allowed to make a choice which could lead to the death of other human beings.
please stop using the "forced birth" expression. you sound more like rosalie...
that's exactly what happens to rape victims after they choose abortion: "it's all over, now get over it."

reply from: carolemarie

And you would "heal" her by allowing her to kill her baby, and become a baby killer.
Do you feel that your abortions "healed" you?
I would rather she has the baby. I am just not on board with forcing her to do it

reply from: carolemarie

Reality is what you percieve. Counseling would be a good idea, I have said that i think rape victims may be more likely to choose life with counseling, but they can't be forced to give birth. They need to choose it to get on with healing.
And healing after rape is not easy, you can't just tell someome to get over it, your lack of empathy for the girl is sad...
Your lack of empathy for the womb child is criminal, and classic bortheadism.
I feel bad for BOTH of them and my main concern is with the traumatized girl. She needs help and counseling so she will want to choose life, but we can't force her

reply from: yoda

I know this is redundant, but you seem not to be able to read it when I post it.......
SHE ALREADY HAS "THE BABY"..........
Her only choice is whether to KILL IT or not.
You can't turn back the clock by killing a baby!!

reply from: faithman

And you would "heal" her by allowing her to kill her baby, and become a baby killer.
Do you feel that your abortions "healed" you?
I would rather she has the baby. I am just not on board with forcing her to do it
But you are all for forcing death On a helpless womb child [fetus to killers].

reply from: yoda

A parent no only can force a child to NOT kill an innocent human being, it's their MORAL DUTY to do so.

reply from: carolemarie

That happens to all rape victims PEople don't want to deal with it so they shut her up....not just those who have abortions....

reply from: carolemarie

And you would "heal" her by allowing her to kill her baby, and become a baby killer.
Do you feel that your abortions "healed" you?
I would rather she has the baby. I am just not on board with forcing her to do it
But you are all for forcing death On a helpless womb child [fetus to killers].
That is why the whole thing is so hard....and why I don't want to choose for someone else.

reply from: yoda

What are you talking about now?

reply from: yoda

You don't want to choose LIFE but you're okay with choosing DEATH..... is that right?

reply from: carolemarie

You don't want to choose LIFE but you're okay with choosing DEATH..... is that right?
I don't want to FORCE someone in a rape situtation to do what I want. I want them to choose life....

reply from: ChristianLott2

A parent not only can force a child to NOT kill an innocent human being, it's their MORAL DUTY to do so.
In cm speak this is:

reply from: yoda

WHO CARES WHAT "YOU WANT"???
WHAT ABOUT WHAT THE BABY WANTS???????????????????

reply from: carolemarie

WHO CARES WHAT "YOU WANT"???
WHAT ABOUT WHAT THE BABY WANTS???????????????????
The reason we have the exception is in these very rare and horrible situtations. The girls needs override the babies. It is a bad situtation and there is no winner here. If the girl can get counseling she may choose life....and that would be the best situtation. But she gets to make the call.

reply from: yoda

"OVERRIDE"?????
Hell, I thought that the openly proabort posters were the masters of euphemisms and propaganda, but you've them beaten hands down!
What the heck does "OVERRIDE" MEAN????
Does that mean ANY of her "needs" are more important than the very life of her innocent baby?
Are you really justifying the slaughter of that baby on the vague term "her needs"?
Gee whiz...... you sound just exactly, precisely like a rabid proabort!!

reply from: faithman

OOOOOOOOHHHHH BOO HOOO HOOO. that poor little armed rober. SNIFF SNIFF. She just pick axed 2 to death because she just needed that drug money to meet her needs.BOO HOO SNIFF SNIFF. If we just gave her free druggs. WWWWWAAAAAAAA. If we had just given her free room and board WWWWHHHHIMPERRRR. WY it is our fault she killed them folks in their sleep BBBBBOOOOOO HHHHHOOOOO HHHHOOOO. May be if the couple would have left tea and chocolate out for her, she wouldn't have had to make that terrible choice SSSSSNNNNIFFFFFF. How dare the state put a woman in prison WWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAA. She did all those good christian works in prison, how dare the state put her to death. BBBBOOOO HOOO. Didn't they know her little Jesus prayer gives her a free walk?WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. Cheap grace makes everything right and punishment for crimes against the innocent is SSSSSSOOOOO mean, judgmental, and hatful. WWWWWWWWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAA. To heck with protecting the innocent, we must let evil doers off scott free!!!!!!!!!BBBOOOO HOOOO HOOOO HOOOO

reply from: carolemarie

I don't believe that Carla Faye Tucker should have been put to death, but I think she should have stayed in prision.
I am against the death penalty

reply from: faithman

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH SSOO that woman stays in jail, but a "mom" who pays to have a child or 3 murderede walks scott free? OH but wait your hatred of women gets even better. The mother of the murdered born goes to jail, but the mother who kills the womb child gets a free walk? Why do you hate the women who kill their born children SSSSSSOOOO much? Shouldn't you exstend the same "love" to the killer of the born person? WY just one mumbled jesus prayer, and killers walk free right? But only for killers of the pre-born right?

reply from: yoda

Careful FMan, you're giving her the perfect opportunity to change the subject here....

reply from: ChristianLott2

"OVERRIDE"?????
ew. good one.

reply from: nancyu

I could understand this statement coming from Rosalie or some other rabid proabort, but from someone who says they are a dedicated prolife activist?
Allowing a baby to live is just as evil as killing it?
IT HAS TO BE THE CHOICE OF THE PERSON WHO WAS RAPED, that is my point.
AND THAT IS A PRO CHOICE POINT! YOU ARE PRO CHOICE. YOU WILL BE BETTER OF IF YOU JUST ADMIT THAT--EVEN IF ONLY TO YOURSELF!
IF A RAPE VICTIM HAS THAT CHOICE THEN EVERYONE MUST BE GIVEN THAT CHOICE AND YOU KNOW THAT.

reply from: yoda

And everyone else knows it, too.

reply from: faithman

Hell !!! She is going to anyway. I may as well indulge a rant or 2. Me thinks she is gathering straw for another man as we speak. Look for foriegn words in your mouth just anytime now!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply from: Rosalie

I can honestly say that I do nont care what someone like YOU thinks about me. I think you are a very disturbed person with warped morals.
They are NOT equal and they do NOT have equal rights. You know, you claim to be so insulted by pro-choicers and abortion - you should know that I am insulted by this just as much as you claim to be insulted by pro-choicers.
If you were actually listening to ANYTHING I have said here over the past few months, you would know that I would respect her choice and I would not withdraw my support from her, not even for second, and nothing in the world could ever change how much I love her.
But that would require letting to off the propaganda you so fanatically believe and therefore it's something you cannot do.
I don't believe in or care about your god.
I find the so-called 'pro-life' attitude to be the most disgusting and vile thing on the planet. So I guess we're square. All the intended abuse and blatant anti-women attitutudes 'pro-lifer' support are astounding and unacceptable.
Thankfully,I cannot and will never be able to comprehend this level of evil. I'll never understand how a parent can promote abuse of their own child just because of their own fanatical beliefs.
I repeat, I don't care about your 'god'. I have every right to decide who will live inside and off my body.

reply from: Rosalie

False. This is exactly what you'd be doing by forcing her to remain pregnant against her will, by brainwashing her into remaining pregnancy no matter what horrible effects it could have on her health and life in every meaning of this world.
All of that is okay with you because the fetus takes precedence. Because your beliefs are more important than your already born children.
Quite frankly, people who think like you make me sick. I just cannot comprehend putting fanaticism before my child's well-being, ever. Funny that you should claim that kids are your #1 priority - well, it's clear that you're not talking about your BORN kids, those who are already there, those who love you and trust you - you're okay with inflicting horrible things on them no matter what they want or how it will affect them because of your beliefs. Nah, anything goes, as long as the fetus is born. You are deplorable.

reply from: faithman

What the bortheads, and the false pro-lifers do not understand, is that there is more to life than this physical world, and our physical bodies. Our bodies are merely the containers of the precious substance Called life. Life has to have that container to express itself in the natural world. Even if the container is flawed, it still makes it possible for the miracle of life to be expressed. Our common value is not found in the container, but what is contained. The life of a womb child is equal to the life contained in all of us. The only legitimate breaking of this container, is if it has the compunction to smash other containers without cause. When you take way the ability to express life, you loose the great privilege to express your own. Evil aggression must be subdued, or no container can have any security from unjust breakage. To take away the possibility of this wonderful spark of life to be expressed, makes this world a darker place, and the rest of us containers a little more impoverished, and alone. Though the womb child is a small container, it does not lessen the value of the life it contains. If fellow containers do not value the life of the womb child container, then they have placed their personhood container in great jeopardy. Anyone who does not see that womb children are fellow human containers, containing life of equal value to their own, is a self destructive fool, drunk on the power to kill, and must be stopped for the sake of the rest of us life containers. It is the life in us that makes us equal, not our degree of ability to express it.

reply from: scopia19822

"Quite frankly, people who think like you make me sick. I just cannot comprehend putting fanaticism before my child's well-being, ever. Funny that you should claim that kids are your #1 priority - well, it's clear that you're not talking about your BORN kids, those who are already there, those who love you and trust you - you're okay with inflicting horrible things on them no matter what they want or how it will affect them because of your beliefs. Nah, anything goes, as long as the fetus is born. You are deplorable."
That "fetus" as you call it would be my child whos already a member of my family. That child is just as important to me as my son is and BTW I have only one living child. The other is dead thanks to a forced abortion at the hands of an abortionist. I would die to save any of my children no matter the circumstances. Can you say that you sacrifice your life to save your daughter?

reply from: sk1bianca

rosalie wouldn't sacrifice a toenail to save someone else. SHE is the only one that matters just because she made it out of her mother's womb, so right now it's all about HER, what SHE wants.
and women who want to abort but change their minds are being "brainwashed" and they will by traumatised for the rest of their lives...
also, she is accusing us of considering unborn children more important than born children, when, in fact, she says exactly the opposite: that unborn children are less important than the others, because of their location and because they are less developed (younger). they're not really "here", ya know...
and if you are trying to save the life of an unborn child, you are "evil" and "fanatic".

reply from: yoda

That sort of thing used to bother me, but then I realized: How can one be rational and defend baby killing at the same time. Irrationality is the only way to do it.

reply from: faithman

What the bortheads, and the false pro-lifers do not understand, is that there is more to life than this physical world, and our physical bodies. Our bodies are merely the containers of the precious substance Called life. Life has to have that container to express itself in the natural world. Even if the container is flawed, it still makes it possible for the miracle of life to be expressed. Our common value is not found in the container, but what is contained. The life of a womb child is equal to the life contained in all of us. The only legitimate breaking of this container, is if it has the compunction to smash other containers without cause. When you take way the ability to express life, you loose the great privilege to express your own. Evil aggression must be subdued, or no container can have any security from unjust breakage. To take away the possibility of this wonderful spark of life to be expressed, makes this world a darker place, and the rest of us containers a little more impoverished, and alone. Though the womb child is a small container, it does not lessen the value of the life it contains. If fellow containers do not value the life of the womb child container, then they have placed their personhood container in great jeopardy. Anyone who does not see that womb children are fellow human containers, containing life of equal value to their own, is a self destructive fool, drunk on the power to kill, and must be stopped for the sake of the rest of us life containers. It is the life in us that makes us equal, not our degree of ability to express it.

reply from: scopia19822

"also, she is accusing us of considering unborn children more important than born children, when, in fact, she says exactly the opposite: that unborn children are less important than the others, because of their location and because they are less developed (younger). they're not really "here", ya know... "
It sounds to me like RoRo and the other choicers think that a woman is her "life is endanger" are morally obligated to abort that pregnancy. To refuse to sacrifice their childs life is selfish and unloving because their born children are more important than that child. Both IMHO are eqaully important and I would lay down my life for my either of my children.

reply from: Yuuki

Which RoRo? Rosalie? This is partially why I changed my username; "RoRo" was being used for both me and Rosalie and I didn't like the connection.
It's not the woman's obligation to do EITHER choice; it's simply her decision if her life is in danger.
Look, this is how I feel about this. First, let's clear the air about names.
Abortion: On this forum, it ONLY means suction/curette/saline/partial birth/etc. Any procedure in which the child is purposely killed before being removed OR is killed in the process of the removal. The child is also often torn apart/dismembered/disfigured - On purpose, as part of the process. Its death is the primary intent of the procedure.
Premature delivery: A process in which the child is born via induced premature labor. The child may or may not die during or after the delivery depending on its state of development, but its death is not directly caused by the doctor/mother, even if it is known that it will happen. The procedure may still kill the child, but it's not the primary intent of the procedure.
Ectopic removal: The removal of the unborn from a woman's fallopian tube and/or the tube itself. The child always dies due to this procedure, but it's not directly killed by the doctor/mother, nor is its death the intent of the procedure.
I cannot think of a situation where an actual abortion would be NECESSARY to save a woman's life. However, just because I can't think of one doesn't mean one doesn't exist. I am not an OB-GYN. It is likely that no such situation exists normally. But, if for some reason, that situation arose, I would NOT condemn the woman to death; I would let her abort.
Now obviously in normal situations a live premature delivery is possible, whether vaginally or via c-section. It's also possible to safely carry to term. Either way, if both can be saved without placing the woman's life at serious pre-known risk, then they should both be saved. I do not approve of abortion in those cases.

reply from: carolemarie

There are all kinds of problems with premature delivery, such as the baby having severe health problems and dying from them. I don't really consider that much of an option

reply from: scopia19822

"There are all kinds of problems with premature delivery, such as the baby having severe health problems and dying from them. I don't really consider that much of an option"
The goal would be to get them as close to term as possible. I would rather take the chance with inducing labor early and putting the child on life support than just by aborting them. I would rather try and give them a chance at life, than to write them off completly. If the child does pass it would not be by me directly having them killed.

reply from: faithman

As opposed to what?
Tearing them into little pieces. So much for divine providence.......

reply from: scopia19822

"As opposed to what?"
At least the child would be given a chance, even a slim one with premature delievery.

reply from: yoda

And so much for premature celebrations about her "change of mind".

reply from: scopia19822

"And so much for premature celebrations about her "change of mind"."
Its a gradual process Yoda. She has already decided that rape/incest isnt a valid reason to abort. Give her time on the other and be patient, hopefully she will come around.

reply from: yoda

Really? I've been asking her over and over, and she won't say that outright.

reply from: nancyu

Please, Scopia, be honest with yourself. Carolemarie has supposedly been in the pro life movement for years and years. Do you really believe she hasn't already thought all of these things through?
Carolemarie is a tool of the Planned Parenthood and the entire abortion industry. Planned Parenthood likes to call ITself pro life, too.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Yeah, the "icky" part of her explanation wasn't too convincing. I think my faux lifer list is about to go back up

reply from: nancyu

As opposed to what?
Tearing them into little pieces. So much for divine providence.......
She's worried about a Dr's liability...

reply from: Yuuki

It's life or death. Preemies are far from vegetative. Many of the students in my special needs class are preemies. They have a high quality of life and enjoy life. Most preemies do. At least give the child a chance to breathe.

reply from: faithman

It's life or death. Preemies are far from vegetative. Many of the students in my special needs class are preemies. They have a high quality of life and enjoy life. Most preemies do. At least give the child a chance to breathe.
Change of icon has done ya good. You are becomming more pro-life with every post.

reply from: Yuuki

It's life or death. Preemies are far from vegetative. Many of the students in my special needs class are preemies. They have a high quality of life and enjoy life. Most preemies do. At least give the child a chance to breathe.
Change of icon has done ya good. You are becomming more pro-life with every post.
XD I felt like I needed to clear the air and actually discuss things with Yoda; and I couldn't do that with him ignoring me.

reply from: carolemarie

And nobody would deny you the right to do that. but if it would torture that child would your conscience would be clear? and dr. can

reply from: carolemarie

It's life or death. Preemies are far from vegetative. Many of the students in my special needs class are preemies. They have a high quality of life and enjoy life. Most preemies do. At least give the child a chance to breathe.
choosing to turn a healthy fetus into a special needs child isn't a good thing to do!
Most people with a medical condition want their child, and they want to live, so they will do what is the best in this situtation. IF your 7 weeks pregnant, that fetus can't survive. If you are 15 weeks, it can't survive....why torture it?

reply from: Yuuki

And nobody would deny you the right to do that. but if it would torture that child would your conscience would be clear? and dr. can
I'm pretty sure being aborted would be more tortuous to the child than being born.

reply from: Yuuki

It's life or death. Preemies are far from vegetative. Many of the students in my special needs class are preemies. They have a high quality of life and enjoy life. Most preemies do. At least give the child a chance to breathe.
choosing to turn a healthy fetus into a special needs child isn't a good thing to do!
Most people with a medical condition want their child, and they want to live, so they will do what is the best in this situtation. IF your 7 weeks pregnant, that fetus can't survive. If you are 15 weeks, it can't survive....why torture it?
These women don't HAVE a choice; it's deliver or die. Why torture it? That's what you do when you rip it apart!! If you give birth to it they can give it pain medication and ease the suffering.

reply from: ChristianLott2

c'mon lib. cm is a pro abort. take down that sig quote and get honest.

reply from: carolemarie

It's life or death. Preemies are far from vegetative. Many of the students in my special needs class are preemies. They have a high quality of life and enjoy life. Most preemies do. At least give the child a chance to breathe.
choosing to turn a healthy fetus into a special needs child isn't a good thing to do!
Most people with a medical condition want their child, and they want to live, so they will do what is the best in this situtation. IF your 7 weeks pregnant, that fetus can't survive. If you are 15 weeks, it can't survive....why torture it?
These women don't HAVE a choice; it's deliver or die. Why torture it? That's what you do when you rip it apart!! If you give birth to it they can give it pain medication and ease the suffering.
They can already give pain medication in utero. So it isn't like the baby would suffer. You are talking about a 28 week baby, I am talking about a 7 week or 12 week baby.

reply from: carolemarie

That is why each situtation is different. We are discussing two different things...The mom and the Dr would discuss the options and decide what was the best course of treatment, and since this is a wanted baby, I am sure they would do the best to save its life...

reply from: 4given

And nobody would deny you the right to do that. but if it would torture that child would your conscience would be clear? and dr. can
I am not quite sure what you are saying here Carole. My sister was born shy of 28 weeks. She survived and it was torturous to see her put through the countless heel pricks and the feeding tubes. She however may offer you a different opinion, except she doesn't remember it and is thankful that she is alive. Ask the many people in her circle.. They have all benefited from her precious life, as have I. I see you may be going at a different angle. Are you stating that a child is better off killed (D&E is quite barabaric), than given the opportunity to survive? Is that IYO the bestter option? I am confused..

reply from: 4given

So are you saying that it is best to kill either child due to potential problems? At 7 or 15 weeks? When IYO do such "conditions" arise?

reply from: Banned Member

There are not wanted and unwanted babies. There are human lives, all of which begin life at conception and have the right to be born!

reply from: carolemarie

I was thinking that we were talking about 15 week babies and early term babies.
Give them pain medication before the termination, they can't live and it would be mean to make them gasp for air and slowly die. You can't hold a 15 week baby or a 7 week baby.
We were thinking about two different things...

reply from: 4given

WHAT?! There is pain medication provided to a fetus prior to its mutilation? NO. Please clarify.

reply from: carolemarie

So are you saying that it is best to kill either child due to potential problems? At 7 or 15 weeks? When IYO do such "conditions" arise?
If you need treatment like chemo or some other treatment that will cause the child to die.. to insist that you "deliever it" rather than a simple D & C is strange idea
Or to hang on to deliver and have it spend months on life support, enduring surgeries, to end up dying. That seems barbaric too.
We can give it pain medications so their is no pain.

reply from: 4given

Why? ( were you talking about that.) Sure they can be held.. in tact actually. It is likely pretty traumatic to hold the child that one just aborted.. though I know it happens and some late term abortionists even have photos, Christening and "miscarriage certificates" available.. Istill can't tell if you were saying that it would be best if mom aborted, as opposed to miscarriage due to the treatment she received as a result of her cancer or other threatening "illness".

reply from: carolemarie

WHAT?! There is pain medication provided to a fetus prior to its mutilation? NO. Please clarify.
There was a bill introduced by Sam Brownback that would require any woman getting an abortion in the 2nd trimester be told that her baby can be given pain medication so it will not feel anything, so obviously it can be done.

reply from: 4given

Well.. there are pain meds given during surgery.. I posted an article about a baby and its mom that survived cancer due to her chemotherapy that started at 14 weeks gestation. I posted it a couple of days ago. The idea of a child dying as a result of whatever measure is taken to save her life, though sad- can not be as painful as deciding to kill the child prior to treatment or optherwise.

reply from: 4given

A "simple D&C"-- Allergic reactions to anesthesia or other medications given can occur. It is very important that you report any over-the-counter or prescription medications as well as illegal drugs so that the anesthetics can be adjusted accordingly.
- Bacterial infection can occur during the procedure when surgical tools enter the uterus, while symptoms won't occur for 2 to 3 days after the procedure. This happens most frequently when there is an underlying STD that is not diagnosed at the time of the abortion. Therefore, it is vitally important that you be tested for STDs prior to the abortion. Infection is the most common post-abortion complication.
- Hematometra (a uterine blood clot) can occur if the uterus does not contract (cramp) to expel all of the lining. There will be severe abdominal cramping and nausea if this occurs.
- Heavy bleeding can occur if the uterus fails to contract and may lead to a uterine blood clot, as mentioned above. Heavy bleeding may require medication, a repeat abortion, surgery, and/or transfusion.
- Heavy blood loss can also occur during the procedure itself, since the placenta is separated from the uterine wall too slowly during a D&C. This can require a blood transfusion.
- A cut or torn cervix can occur when the doctor grabs the cervix with the tenaculum or inserts the curette into the uterus. This may lead to a weakened cervix - making carrying a future child to term difficult.
- Cervical damage can also occur with the excessive dilating required for a D&C, also leading to a weakened cervix. The cervix needs to be dilated much less if having a vacuum aspiration.
- The uterus may be perforated (punctured) during the abortion when the doctor presses the curette against the walls of the uterus, causing heavy abdominal bleeding and/or infection. You may require surgery to repair the puncture, and rarely you may need a hysterectomy (removal of the uterus) to stop the bleeding. The risk of this happening with a D&C abortion is considerably higher than with a vacuum aspiration, since the pregnant uterus is extremely soft and easy to pierce with the sharp curette.
- Scarring of the uterus may occur, resulting in "Asherman's Syndrome." This scarring can occur as the doctor scrapes the curette against the walls of the uterus and can cause future fertility problems.
- An incomplete abortion, where the pregnancy has been terminated but the baby or other tissue does not get expelled, can occur in an additional 1% of cases, especially those done before 6 weeks since only 50-60% of the uterine wall is scraped during a D&C. This causes severe cramping and excessive bleeding that continues for over a week following the abortion.
- Emotional or psychological distress can occur after the abortion, including depression, guilt, regret, anger, and/or sleep disturbance.
- Maternal death occurs in a reported 1 out of every 100,000 abortions (this includes all types of abortion).



Home Your Choice Abortion Pregnancy Adoption Find Help
Dilation & Curettage
Cervical Dilators
Curette
What is it? A dilation and curettage abortion is a surgical procedure and is known more commonly as a D&C. This abortion can be done between 6 and 12 weeks from the first day of your last period, although some doctors use the procedure up to the 14th week. A D&C abortion is usually done at an abortion clinic or a hospital setting since it can require machinery and usually requires general anesthesia.
What happens? First a pregnancy test is given, a pelvic exam is performed, and an ultrasound may be done as well. Once the pregnancy has been confirmed, you disrobe and lie on an examining table with your feet in stirrups. You will most likely be given either general or twilight anesthesia. Misoprostol may be given to help the cervix dilate, and oxytocin may be given to make the uterus contract. The doctor will then insert a speculum into your vagina and clamp it open so that your cervix is in plain view. He or she will then swab your vagina with an antiseptic to prevent infection. A tenaculum (which looks somewhat like long, skinny pliers) will be used to grasp your cervix and hold it in place.
Once your cervix is open, the doctor will insert cervical dilators into the opening of your cervix. These dilators are pictured at right. This process takes 5-10 minutes and consists of the doctor inserting the smallest rod and progressively inserting larger rods until reaching the largest, which is about the width of a dime. You will most likely experience mild to strong cramping throughout dilation if you choose to be awake for the procedure. The doctor will then take measurements of your uterus to be sure that he or she uses the correct curette size. Then he or she will insert a metal instrument called a curette (one type is pictured at right). A curette is a long steel rod with a loop at the tip. This loop has sharp grooves on it, which are used to scrape away the lining of the uterus. The doctor will begin to press the tip of the curette along the surface of your uterus to dislodge the placenta and the sac that contains the baby. The lining of your uterus, the placenta, and the developing human will be removed in pieces and collected in a bowl just under your vagina. The process takes approximately 10 minutes once the curette has been inserted. If you choose to be awake for the abortion, you can expect moderate to strong cramping and abdominal pain throughout the procedure and a strong tugging sensation as the curette scrapes against the uterus. The cramping and pain will lessen once the procedure is over. You may also feel nauseated or faint, and you may break out in a sweat. The doctor will then remove the curette and examine the contents of the bowl on a tray to be sure that everything has been removed. If something is missing, he or she may continue with more curettage or may use a tube attached to a suction machine to vacuum the surface of the uterus a few times. Once the doctor has determined that everything has been removed, he or she will remove the curette or tube from your uterus and cervix and then remove the tenaculum and speculum. Your uterus will then be inspected by pelvic examination to check for firmness and size.
Once the abortion is complete, you can expect to wait approximately 1 hour before being sent home. Acetaminophen or ibuprofen will be given or recommended for use, and antibiotics may be prescribed to prevent infection from occurring. You will most likely continue to bleed or spot for the next 2 weeks off and on, as well as experience cramping for the rest of the day and possibly for 2 to 3 days following the abortion. You will be instructed to not have intercourse or use tampons for at least 1 week. You can return to normal activities the next day if you feel up to it. A follow-up exam will be scheduled for approximately 14 days after the abortion in order to confirm that the abortion has been completed and that there are no complications. An ultrasound or a pelvic examination, as well as blood work, should be done at this appointment to verify that everything was removed.
What does it cost? A D&C abortion will cost between $350-600 but can cost as much as $3000 in some hospitals. The price will depend on anesthesia used, the size of the baby, and the location of the procedure (hospital versus clinic). Some insurance policies will cover the cost of a D&C abortion.
What should I consider?
What are the risks? Side effects are common and normal, and consist of abdominal cramping, pain, nausea, sweating, and feeling faint during the procedure if not having anesthesia, cramping and pain for 2-3 days following the procedure, as well as bleeding for up to 2 weeks. True complications occur in approximately 5% of D&C abortions.
- A D&C abortion can be done safely between the 6th and 12th weeks of pregnancy. If done before the 6th week, there is a higher chance of a failed abortion, and if done after the 12th week there is a higher risk of complications.
- This method is the least-common first trimester surgical abortion procedure because it is riskier than the other procedures
You should plan on taking the remainder of the day to relax and recover after having a D&C abortion done.
A D&C abortion is successful in ending the pregnancy 98% of the time, and if it should fail, either another D&C or a vacuum aspiration will be done with your approval. If, upon hearing the abortion has failed and the baby is still developing, you do not want another abortion, contact a local pregnancy center to help you find an OB/GYN to examine you. As always, the decision to abort is up to you.
- This method is sometimes used when a medical abortion has failed, but a vacuum aspiration is preferred.
There is less bleeding with this procedure than with a medical abortion, since most of the blood is removed during the procedure.
- A D&C abortion can only be done after the 6-7th week from the first day of your last period, so if you want an abortion any earlier than that you will either have to wait or choose a different form of abortion (RU-486, methotrexate, or manual aspiration).
- As with any abortion procedure, there is a chance that you could become pregnant immediately following the abortion, so take precautions to prevent another unplanned pregnancy.
- You can request to have anesthesia for a D&C abortion, and if you choose to do so you must bring someone to the clinic to drive you home.
A D&C abortion may be offered if your physician is in a rural area, does not have up-to-date equipment and information, or is not highly experienced with abortion.
- A D&C abortion cannot be compared to D&Cs done for therapeutic reasons when referring to risks because the pregnant uterus is much softer than one being operated on for other reasons.
Copyright © 2004 Choice to Live With, Inc.
Permission to Reprint & Fair Use Notice
From Mom's perspective..

reply from: carolemarie

The baby wasn't born early?

reply from: 4given

The one that had a "simple D&C"? No.. I am pretty sure that baby died.. Were you referring to a different scenario? Sorry I was reading up on D&C again..

reply from: 4given

No.. the one in the article I posted.. sorry I was distracted. I will find it for you again..

reply from: carolemarie

Now I am confused. We are talking about a woman who is sick and will die if she remains pregnant, or needs treatment that will kill the baby.
In this case everyone seems to agree she can save her life, but she has to do it by delivering the baby and letting it die naturally. That is what I think is strange.
And I thought this was a baby that can't live, so 7 weeks or 15 weeks. I see no real difference between the abortion or the delivery abortion.

reply from: ChristianLott2

The attempt is made to keep the child alive of course, not just throw it into the dirty clothes hamper - whatever the age or likelihood of survival, the effort must be made.
That is how new and better treatments are discovered, by having actual patients to work with. If a quarter of the efforts and money were invested attempting to save these tiny babies instead of murdering them we'd be far more advanced than we are today.
Saving premature babies is cutting edge technology that keeps improving. Maybe someday we'll be able to save them all, but we'll never get there if they are pessimistically murdered without even being given a chance.

reply from: 4given

Because God is bigger than any side effect man has produced to battle cancer. It is possible, as in the article I posted the other day (still am looking for) to have a healthy baby, despite chemotherapy during pregnancy. Do you understand that an elective abortion (health or otherwise) requires a woman's consent? Suppose there was a probability of survival she was unaware of or did not believe. It is not natural IMO for any mother to not want to protect her child. Again, what kind of condition may arise during a pregnancy where abortion would be justifiable? Any specific health exceptions?

reply from: carolemarie

I don't know of any health condition , but I am not a dr. So if there is a chance, the option to save your life is needed.

reply from: carolemarie

Fman said that the video he posted was from you, how old was the baby in it? I was wondering if there are any babies who survive birth that are younger than 22 weeks....
I am just feeling cranky for being called a killer a hundred times a day...

reply from: 4given

I thought because you mentioned 7-15 weeks gestation that you had a specific scenario in mind. Abortion is never IMO the answer, regardless of whatever disheartening condition the mom or baby may have.

reply from: scopia19822

"And nobody would deny you the right to do that. but if it would torture that child would your conscience would be clear?"
torture? wouldnt dismembering the child be more of a torturous death ? At least if you deliever the child at viabilty, but early the child can be put on a respirator if need be and other lifesaving equipment. At least it would have a chance at life.

reply from: faithman

With every case medacin learns a little more. We should try and save every life, and learn from the failures as well as the successses. Abortion stops the learning process with an act of murder. The age a child can survive is getting younger all the time. "What if " we took the tax money we give to planned parenthood to purposely kill, and gave it to those who are working to actually preserve life? "What if" we ignored the abortion politics, and made insurance money availible to womb children in crisis, but are denied life saving treatment because the bortheads don't want womb children seen as persons? "what if" prenatal care was afforded to poor women, and once again is denied to them because it would attribute personhood statis to their preborn children? It is the bortheads who with hold compassion to women in crisis. They hate womb children SSSSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOO much that they are willing to sacrifice mother and child to their sacred cow of abortion. But insane actions, always stem from insane positions.

reply from: Yuuki

One survived at 21 weeks and 6 days.

reply from: Yuuki

You see no difference between a bloody dismembered body in a trashcan and a whole child lying in a warm bed... For the really early ones, no there is no physical difference between the premature birth procedure and a Medical abortion, we've established that. They use the same procedure and the same medicines. It is the intent that is different. And NO surgical abortion at all in this scenario.

reply from: Yuuki

Yes, it's so much better to turn him/her into a corpse!

reply from: Yuuki

c'mon lib. cm is a pro abort. take down that sig quote and get honest.
Right after you take me out of yours

reply from: yoda

Oh yeah, that's much more prolife..........

reply from: Yuuki

It's life or death. Preemies are far from vegetative. Many of the students in my special needs class are preemies. They have a high quality of life and enjoy life. Most preemies do. At least give the child a chance to breathe.
choosing to turn a healthy fetus into a special needs child isn't a good thing to do!
Most people with a medical condition want their child, and they want to live, so they will do what is the best in this situtation. IF your 7 weeks pregnant, that fetus can't survive. If you are 15 weeks, it can't survive....why torture it?
These women don't HAVE a choice; it's deliver or die. Why torture it? That's what you do when you rip it apart!! If you give birth to it they can give it pain medication and ease the suffering.
They can already give pain medication in utero. So it isn't like the baby would suffer. You are talking about a 28 week baby, I am talking about a 7 week or 12 week baby.
So if it's not about suffering, it's just about dignity. Isn't it more dignified to be born whole than sucked through a tube or shredded up? Yes, I realise it's going to be a bloody mess either way because of how young it is, but we need to have priorities here. Many women opt for Medical abortions at this stage anyway, and a premature delivery at this stage would be identical. But it would only be done to save the woman's life.

reply from: yoda

Why would someone care about the dignity of an unborn child when she calls it a "blob"?

reply from: faithman

c'mon lib. cm is a pro abort. take down that sig quote and get honest.
Right after you take me out of yours
Your sig is a farce. Killer carole fights against personhood, even though once established, many services would be provided to women in crisis that borthead politics denies them now. She would deny help to real women who want their children to live, in favor of compassion for those who do not!!! Personhood protects mother and child. To be against it only protects the killers. But I guess if you are one, you side with them.

reply from: Yuuki

c'mon lib. cm is a pro abort. take down that sig quote and get honest.
Right after you take me out of yours
Your sig is a farce. Killer carole fights against personhood, even though once established, many services would be provided to women in crisis that borthead politics denies them now. She would deny help to real women who want their children to live, in favor of compassion for those who do not!!! Personhood protects mother and child. To be against it only protects the killers. But I guess if you are one, you side with them.
You may not agree with the person who said it, but I believe the actual statement. I do believe that being pro-life is caring about both the woman and the child, and working to find a solution so they both can live. I do not believe a word of what YOU have said, however. Carole has helped plenty of women to choose life for their children and I have never heard her say she would refuse to help a woman who has chosen life.

reply from: faithman

c'mon lib. cm is a pro abort. take down that sig quote and get honest.
Right after you take me out of yours
Your sig is a farce. Killer carole fights against personhood, even though once established, many services would be provided to women in crisis that borthead politics denies them now. She would deny help to real women who want their children to live, in favor of compassion for those who do not!!! Personhood protects mother and child. To be against it only protects the killers. But I guess if you are one, you side with them.
You may not agree with the person who said it, but I believe the actual statement. I do believe that being pro-life is caring about both the woman and the child, and working to find a solution so they both can live. I do not believe a word of what YOU have said, however. Carole has helped plenty of women to choose life for their children and I have never heard her say she would refuse to help a woman who has chosen life.
Then you are stupid and just plain willingly ignorant. When you oppose personhood, which she has, then you oppose life saving help to women and children because they can not afford it, and the government must deny it to them because the womb child is not considered a person!!!! Now!!! AS I have said many times,
Show one post where i said I do not care about women? I simply care about women who have not betrayed their children with abortion, and do not want to protect future killers to do the same at the expence of poor women and childern now. Carole is a phony of the highest degree. If she really cared about women and their children, she would not undermine the very material [which came from us] that she claims saved many of those children from the death she forced on three of her own. Her kind of compassion is deadly to both mother and child.

reply from: lukesmom

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! What a card our little Rosalie has turned out to be! Thanks, Roz, I really needed that laugh today!

reply from: carolemarie

I like the picture of the baby. It is nice and appealing to the woman, and I am there to talk her out of making a terrible choice. They are great for that.
I don't like the gory stuff at all...We need resources now for women and born children! We already have prenatal care for women. It is after the baby is born that she needs help
I don't believe that personhood is the way to go.

reply from: yoda

Of course you don't....... it would force us to give the unborn equal treatment under the law.....
And you hate that idea with a passion, do you not?

reply from: carolemarie

I am against abortion! I oppose it. How much clear to Ihave to be?

reply from: yoda

I think you're being perfectly clear. Why do you think you're not being clear?
You oppose personhood because you don't want the unborn treated as persons.
What could be clearer than that?

reply from: lukesmom

There ARE resources for women and born children and if PP was out of the abortion business, their federal funding could actually be given to help increase these services. Lord, what my mom's organization could do with a little federal help! I have talked to countless women also who REFUSE to take "charity" and would rather kill their child. Before a woman can get help with her child, she ACTUALLY has to allow that child to live.

reply from: carolemarie

PErsonhood has no bearing on services for women and children.
I think abortion should be against the law.

reply from: yoda

But not treated the same as killing an actual "person", right?

reply from: carolemarie

I want abortion banned. Make performing an abortion against the law.

reply from: Yuuki

On yourself too?
You can't imprison someone for something that was legal at the time they did it.

reply from: Rosalie

I call it a fetus because it is a fetus. Even if you don't lik it, it is still a fetus.
Unfortunately, you and the other anti-choice monsters clearly do not have a clue what love, empathy and compassion mean. Too bad. I don't think you can be fixed. You're too far gone. I hope someone some day fixes you but I doubt it.
Of course I would. sacrifice my life to save my daughter. And if I had to choose between all fetuses of the world and my daughter, I'd always choose her. Always. There's no a circumstance that would ever make me sacrifice myself for a fetus when I have a born child here who already loves me and needs me.
It's something someone as callous as you will never understand so go on, have another of your tirades. I wouldn't expect you to understand love. That is obviously a feeling that a person like you doesn't understand. Because you are a person who doesn't care that if you sacrifice yourself for your fetus, your born child/children will be left in the world without the most important person in their lives EVER, without their mom, without their mom who should've done EVERYTHING and ANYTHING to love them, care for them and be there as long as she could possibly be - for one simple reason: because she loves them unconditionally. Every mom who loves her child unconditionally would do her *****ing best to survive for her children. For her born children. Because they need her, they need her unconditional love. There is no other love that is quite as strong as mother's love. Yet you are okay with taking everything from your born kids - your 'love', support, you being there for them because of a fetus. Because a fetus matters more to you than the lives of your kids. You are willing to ruin your born kids' lives for a fetus. THAT is monstrous to me.
You're wrong on all counts but it's really funny to watch you scream lies! I mean, that's what every good anti-choicer does! You'e making them all proud. Go on, keep on lying, that's all you can do anyway.
Another lie. I never said that nor do I think that, but again, all your lies and propaganda just point out to how truly brainwashed and stupid you are. I don't think anyone is exactly surprised by that.
Fetuses are 'less important' than born children because of many things but that's not really the point here. The point is that women are not incubators who forfeit all their rights the second a zygote comes into being in their body. No one, no human being, born on unborn, has the right to use the woman's body against their will. You support the opposite, you support abuse - but you will never get your way because if you think we are going to give up our fundamental rights, you are wrong.
Sure you are evil and fanatic. Because to 'save the life of an unborn' you have to abuse a woman. THAT is evil and unacceptable. No exceptions.
One does not set precedens for all. You know about this one because it was such an exception that it was worthy of being reported. Duh.
The fetus wouldn't feel any 'dismembering' so yeah, that'd be much better.
For example a baby with Harlequin Ichthyosis would be born only to suffer in an inhumane manner and die within hours or days. I would like to believe no person with a heart, no loving parent would ever choose that for their kid but there are such people. You are one of them. If you are comfortable with giving birth to your kid just so he or she could suffer and die, that's your choice. I'll think whatever I want about it but I'd never deny you the choice, no matter how monstrous I think it is.
What you still don't understand that it's your CHOICE. I know you don't get that word.

reply from: lukesmom

I call it a fetus because it is a fetus. Even if you don't lik it, it is still a fetus.
Unfortunately, you and the other anti-choice monsters clearly do not have a clue what love, empathy and compassion mean. Too bad. I don't think you can be fixed. You're too far gone. I hope someone some day fixes you but I doubt it.
Of course I would. sacrifice my life to save my daughter. And if I had to choose between all fetuses of the world and my daughter, I'd always choose her. Always. There's no a circumstance that would ever make me sacrifice myself for a fetus when I have a born child here who already loves me and needs me.
It's something someone as callous as you will never understand so go on, have another of your tirades. I wouldn't expect you to understand love. That is obviously a feeling that a person like you doesn't understand. Because you are a person who doesn't care that if you sacrifice yourself for your fetus, your born child/children will be left in the world without the most important person in their lives EVER, without their mom, without their mom who should've done EVERYTHING and ANYTHING to love them, care for them and be there as long as she could possibly be - for one simple reason: because she loves them unconditionally. Every mom who loves her child unconditionally would do her *****ing best to survive for her children. For her born children. Because they need her, they need her unconditional love. There is no other love that is quite as strong as mother's love. Yet you are okay with taking everything from your born kids - your 'love', support, you being there for them because of a fetus. Because a fetus matters more to you than the lives of your kids. You are willing to ruin your born kids' lives for a fetus. THAT is monstrous to me.
You're wrong on all counts but it's really funny to watch you scream lies! I mean, that's what every good anti-choicer does! You'e making them all proud. Go on, keep on lying, that's all you can do anyway.
Another lie. I never said that nor do I think that, but again, all your lies and propaganda just point out to how truly brainwashed and stupid you are. I don't think anyone is exactly surprised by that.
Fetuses are 'less important' than born children because of many things but that's not really the point here. The point is that women are not incubators who forfeit all their rights the second a zygote comes into being in their body. No one, no human being, born on unborn, has the right to use the woman's body against their will. You support the opposite, you support abuse - but you will never get your way because if you think we are going to give up our fundamental rights, you are wrong.
Sure you are evil and fanatic. Because to 'save the life of an unborn' you have to abuse a woman. THAT is evil and unacceptable. No exceptions.
One does not set precedens for all. You know about this one because it was such an exception that it was worthy of being reported. Duh.
The fetus wouldn't feel any 'dismembering' so yeah, that'd be much better.
For example a baby with Harlequin Ichthyosis would be born only to suffer in an inhumane manner and die within hours or days. I would like to believe no person with a heart, no loving parent would ever choose that for their kid but there are such people. You are one of them. If you are comfortable with giving birth to your kid just so he or she could suffer and die, that's your choice. I'll think whatever I want about it but I'd never deny you the choice, no matter how monstrous I think it is.
What you still don't understand that it's your CHOICE. I know you don't get that word.
What a rant from someone who equates love with killing innocent unborn humans. How very pathetic. Roz LOVED her unborn child right into the abortionists killing hands. Psycopath anyone?

reply from: scopia19822

"Every mom who loves her child unconditionally would do her *****ing best to survive for her children. For her born children. Because they need her, they need her unconditional love. There is no other love that is quite as strong as mother's love. Yet you are okay with taking everything from your born kids - your 'love', support, you being there for them because of a fetus. Because a fetus matters more to you than the lives of your kids. You are willing to ruin your born kids' lives for a fetus. THAT is monstrous to me. "
So are saying that women who have a potential life threatening pregnancy complication have a 'moral" obligation to have an abortion if she already has children? Is that what you are saying RoRo? My son knows that I love him and if need be would give my life for his and I would have done that if I had a life threatening complication during pregnancy with him. He has a father who loves him and a various large extended family as well. I would do everything possible to preserve both my life and the babies life, but if it came down to it, my child will get a chance to live. Im sorry you are such a sociopath that you cant grasp the concept of a mother loving her children, all of her children born or unborn, that she if need be would sacrfice her life to save theirs.

reply from: scopia19822

The fetus wouldn't feel any 'dismembering' so yeah, that'd be much better.
"For example a baby with Harlequin Ichthyosis would be born only to suffer in an inhumane manner and die within hours or days. I would like to believe no person with a heart, no loving parent would ever choose that for their kid but there are such people. You are one of them. If you are comfortable with giving birth to your kid just so he or she could suffer and die, that's your choice. I'll think whatever I want about it but I'd never deny you the choice, no matter how monstrous I think it is."
Are you not familar with pain meds Rosalie? You do what you would do with any terminally ill person near the end of life, you keep them comfortable, you hold that child and let that child in what ever way know its loved. And when that child dies you give him/her a decent burial and a funeral. Sue, this would be more your area of expertise, what do you think?

reply from: lukesmom

I carried my son to term knowing he would die. I was so afraid he would feel pain and I didn't want that, what mother would? Anyway, I wrote a birthplan and part of that plan was pain management and oxygen management so he wouldn't struggle or suffer. Birthplans are very common. I talked to the hospital staff before his birth to ensure everything I asked for would be honored. Luke never appeared to be in pain, nor did he struggle in anyway. His birth and death were very peaceful and we never had to use any artificial means to make him comfortable. I know many, many moms who had children with various different diagnosises and they all asked for the use of pain meds if needed and none of their children suffered either. Luke's life and death were both peaceful and beautiful and if I had to, I would carry to term again. I pity the women who don't allow themselves the joy of their child and kill them violently calling it "mercy". No person, whatever age, needs to suffer physical pain. Actually pain management in adults (I don't do peds) is getting to be my specialty at work too.

reply from: scopia19822

Thank you Sue, you have just validated the point I have been trying to make. The hospice care approach is a wonderful and compassionate way to treat those terminally ill people who are very near death. I would do exactly what you did if I was ever faced with that sitaution.

reply from: micah

Would you mind if I push you a little bit further? Suppose your son would be in a lot of pain if you allowed your pregnancy to continue. Would you have considered abortion then?

reply from: lukesmom

Would you mind if I push you a little bit further? Suppose your son would be in a lot of pain if you allowed your pregnancy to continue. Would you have considered abortion then?
No. One of my biggest concerns was that my baby was in pain but where does a child who is in pain go? Into it's mother's arms. My son was safe and comfortable and was where all baby's at his stage of developement should be, safe withing it's mother. If I would have consented to abortion, would he have had pain while being ripped apart? Remember, I was 16+ weeks. If I would have consented to have abortion by early delivery, his heart would have been injected with Digoxin. Would that have caused pain? Yup, he was safer and more comfortable being where he was intended to be, in the womb.

reply from: micah

I think I understand. Your ultimate goal then is to minimize pain for your child?

reply from: lukesmom

My ultimate goal was to help my child live the life he was given and die a natural death. My son was not in pain and like any mother I wanted to ensure he would die without pain also. At the time, I had no thought of "goals" other than to have this baby, same as any pregnant mom. I did know one thing, I will not ever be directly responsible for the death of one of my children.

reply from: Yuuki

Harlequin babies can live fulfilling lives!
United Kingdom
Nusrit "Nelly" Shaheen (1984) is the oldest survivor with the condition in the UK. She is one of eight children, four who also suffered from the condition and passed away as young children. Nelly lives an active lifestyle and is studying sports coaching and leadership at Hereward College. She hopes to teach the course in the future.[1][2]
A Real Families documentary broadcast on ITV1 in the United Kingdom in 2005 (and later rebroadcast in other countries) showed the lives of two pairs of sisters afflicted with the condition: Lucy and Hannah Betts (ages 18 and 15), and Dana and Lara Bowen (ages 8 and 1½). The girls all went through a daily routine of getting up early in the morning and bathing for two hours to soften the skin, scrubbing hard to remove as much of the hard extra skin as possible, and then covering their entire bodies in a thick layer of moisturiser. A second and third "creaming" as they called it had to be performed in the afternoon and at bedtime to soften the skin. Even with this treatment a thick layer of hyperkeratotic skin covered them and they were plagued with infections. Scales on the inside of the eyelids had blinded one of Lucy's eyes and left the other eye with 10% vision. Hannah Betts also suffers from cerebral palsy. Their skin was said to grow at fourteen times the normal rate. Vacuuming the carpets was necessary at least a couple of times a day to remove the shed skin.[3]. A documentary on Five in 2008 showed the same children three years later after major advances in medical technology.
The children were said to be four of just seven in the United Kingdom, Lucy being the longest surviving of any such child in the country ever. The chances of suffering from the condition were given as roughly one in a million in general. These figures would indicate that one in 500 people have the recessive allele, giving a one-in-250,000 chance of two unrelated people bringing these alleles together, and finally there being a one-in-four chance of these alleles being brought together and causing the condition.
The chance that genetically pairing a person affected by harlequin icthyosis with an unaffected person would produce a child who also suffers from the disease is approximately 1 in 2000, as long as the unaffected person carries the recessive allele.
U.S.A.
In San Diego a young man, Ryan González (born circa 1980), has this condition and has not only survived to adulthood but also thrives as a triathlete.[4] His treatment involves dosing with isotretinoin (also known as Accutane), the constant use of lotions to keep the skin supple, and use of a very high-caloric diet of at least 7,500 calories a day, including a nightly feeding tube of pure protein due to the constant shedding of his skin, which is believed to shed ten to forty times faster than unaffected skin.
wikipedia ftw

reply from: Shenanigans

Feel free to post some science to back up those lies of yours...

reply from: Rosalie

Really? I had abortions? How many, LM? Tell me, tell everyone here or admit that you are a liar.
No matter how hard you try to believe that yourself, fetuses are not born children and they never will be.
No, that's not what I'm saying, Sco Sco. Potentially dangerous is VERY different from willfully continuing a pregnancy that you KNOW will kill you and leaving your born kids behind.
Taking a risk is DIFFERENT from willfully deciding to go through with something that will mean your demise. Do you see the difference, Sco Sco? I wouldn't even be surprised if you said that you don't. Such things are often lost on you.
I'm really sorry that you think anyone in the world can replace a mother to your child. That's just horrible. And what you describe is not love. It's fanaticism. But I guess you don't even understand or feel the difference there, either.
I'm sorry to you inform you that the fact that someone rejects and despises your fanatical beliefs about abusing women does not mean that the person is a sociopath.
I guess that you are not familiar with the fact that pain meds are sometimes not enough. Not nearly enough. And even if they were, each person should do what THEY feel is right. I DEFINITELY do not think there is one universal option that is right for everyone. And I definitely do not think that only right option is carrying that baby to term and giving it a funeral.

reply from: faithman

Killers have to blur that line to justify their evil deeds. Darkness avoids light, because it is exposed for what it is in light. The borties want to cover their issue, and as the profetii killer has said herself," fight tooth and toenail" against the light of personhood for the womb child. Personhood is the light. The line drawn in the sand. The distinction between false and true. If things seem shadowy, it is no time to compromise. It is time to turn up the light of personhood until there is no more "what if" shadows. Just the simple fact of womb child personhood, and the final judgment of citizen jurist as to what punishment for those who destroy the preborn. That is the way it is for the born person, that is the way it should be with the womb child person.

reply from: lukesmom

We are all very aware that you feel dismemberment and unnatural death are the answers to every woman's "reproductive problems". I just can't wait until you are elderly and no use to anyone and unwanted by society and smear your red lipstick on your chin when you miss that, used to be puckery, mouth. Then we can see how you feel about being put out of our misery for our convenience.

reply from: Rosalie

It's one of the options.
Well, this has absolutely nothing to do with reproductive rights but with the fact that you are a hateful monster.

reply from: lukesmom

It's one of the options.
Well, this has absolutely nothing to do with reproductive rights but with the fact that you are a hateful monster.
Oh, our informative little butt nuggett, thank you from the bottom of my heart for straightening this all out for us poor monster, idiot, stupid prolifers! Too bad you are a butt nuggett and forced to hide away. Never mind, know that we love you butt nuggett proaborts here and we try really hard not to pity you in your butt nuggettness...

reply from: Rosalie

We've got ourselves another crude, loutish, vulgar spammer!
That just MUST be a 'pro-lifer'.

reply from: lukesmom

Oh, our informative little butt nuggett, thank you from the bottom of my heart for straightening this all out for us poor monster, idiot, stupid, crude, loutish, vulgar spammer prolifers! Too bad you are a butt nuggett and forced to hide away. Never mind, know that we love you butt nuggett proaborts here and we try really hard not to pity you in your butt nuggettness...

reply from: faithman

Oh, our informative little butt nuggett, thank you from the bottom of my heart for straightening this all out for us poor monster, idiot, stupid prolifers! Too bad you are a butt nuggett and forced to hide away. Never mind, know that we love you butt nuggett proaborts here and we try really hard not to pity you in your butt nuggettness...
Huray for butt nugget spam!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply from: nancyu

Doesn't that sound deLICIous!. Yum, don't you want to try some, rosalie!

reply from: scopia19822

"I'm really sorry that you think anyone in the world can replace a mother to your child."
Of course nothing can replace that. I lost my "mother" when i was 14 to leukemia. My aunt was my mom she was the one who stayed with me in the NICU when I was going through coke withdrawl , stayed up with me when I had chickenpox, bandaged my scraped knees and elbows , taught me right from wrong and meted out discipline when I misbehaved. The woman that gave birth to me isnt my "mother" she never has done anything to deserve that honor/privalage. She had that chance to be one during my teen years but she blew it. Any woman can give birth to a child, but that doesnt make her a "mother" in the sense of what a mother should be.

reply from: Rosalie

You have shared your story more than once. But you only addressed your point in the first sentence, the other part of your response was rather irrelevant to what we are discussing here.
The point is that you seem to think that you are expendable to your born child and that the fetus matters more than what your born child needs, than his love for you, your love for him; it just overrides everything.
And like I said, that is a viewpoint I can never respect, understand or support. I find it heinous.

reply from: yoda

You do understand that she said that to justify abortion in all situations where there is any health concern at all, right?

reply from: scopia19822

"You do understand that she said that to justify abortion in all situations where there is any health concern at all, right?"
Of course Yoda, I can see that very clearly and she is also saying that a woman in those situations have a moral obligation to abort their unborn child so there born children can have a mom. She claims she would respect my choice, yet calls it henious. I dont know about her, but I couldnt live with myself if I delibertalty sacrificed my child to save me. How could I look at my son and say that I love him so much that I would give my life for him if I failed to do the same for his brother/sister? My children are my children from the moment I find out Im carrying them, my responsibilty to my son started way before he was born. I had the obligation to not smoke, drink or do drugs so that he would be born healthy. I had the responsibilty to him to get prenatal care and to take care of myself.

reply from: scopia19822

"The point is that you seem to think that you are expendable to your born child and that the fetus matters more than what your born child needs, than his love for you, your love for him; it just overrides everything. +"
The fetus is just as much my child as my son. I have equal responsibilty for their welfare and lives. I would give my life so that either of them could live regardless of their location or the circumstances. You may be able to live with the fact that you think your unborn child is expendable, I cant. None of my children are expendable. So once again you are saying that the only moral choice is to abort.


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics