Comments on: What health issues does a women face that requires the abortion of a baby?

By: madame

madame — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:04:16 +0000

Its none of your business, and no one has to justify their decision with to people like you.

YOU are wrong.

By: Alda

Alda — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 12:01:56 +0000

There, to me, is not a reason…I would lay my life on the line for my child…I had a hard time giving birth to both of my children…I would not trade anything for it….Health wise, I figure that if God gave me the child then He already knew the end result…my opinion, and I will forever stand by it.

By: hmasson28

hmasson28 — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 13:17:10 +0000

I had a kidney transplant a year and a half ago and right now I’m still taking a lot of anti-rejection medications, steroids, and other medications. Being pregnant would put stress on my body, especially since I’ve already had so many surgeries in my abdominal area. My new kidney is right by my uterus, so I don’t know what effect that would have on me or the growing fetus. Neprologists and transplant surgeons have told me that they only recommend that a woman who has had a kidney transplant only have one child, and even then it is an extremely high risk pregnancy. Also, the medications that I’m on cause kidney damage and other problems in the fetus, so even if I did give birth, a whole new set of problems would arise. I don’t want to put a newborn through everything I went through, it’s just unfair in my mind. C-sections are still risky procedures, and if the baby might not live even if it had to be born prematurely. Also, premature babies have complications even when they’re mothers aren’t on medications.
It’s really none of your business, and I’m sure other women have completely relevant health reasons for having an abortion. Personally, I think a woman has the right to choose and is spending that much money (ie: surgery costs, medical bills for the rest of the babies life) and personal costs (the mother becoming sick or the baby becoming sick) really necessary when a woman could just reproduce in other ways that weren’t so risky (surrogate mothers)? The woman is typically already a benefit to society and can pull her own weight, while a baby is basically like a parasite that feeds off of society for a long time until it becomes self-sufficient. Thank God I don’t want kids in the first place.
Edit: I realized when I made that comment that it would probably make somebody angry, but what do you expect from a 19 year old. With all the medical problems I put my family through (and yes it’s probably weird that I view it that way because it wasn’t my fault) I do feel like a parasite. I stole my mom’s kidney! What I meant by that was that woman can usually carry viable children after an abortion/miscarriage. It’s not usually the end of fertility so I view a woman as the more valuable aspect to society. And no, I don’t think all woman are productive, that’s why I said “typically”. Not all men are productive either.
Anyway, sorry about that. Sometimes it’s difficult to communicate over the internet.

By: elizabeth b

elizabeth b — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 22:14:52 +0000

I heard recent testimonies that it is never the mothers health concerns to abort. 90 percent of abortions are purely elective. Most abortions are done on healthy mothers and babies. i think if you don’t want children you should have a hysterectomy or take precautions not to get pregnant it is not the child’s fault so it should never be taken out on it. I think anyone who has had an elective abortion should be shunned from society. Most babies can be born at 24 weeks and survive with help. My daughter was born at 29 weeks and she is fine. People that wait that long to have an abortion Should be charged with murder. They have stricter laws on animal cruelty than the do on killing babies. A fetus at that age can feel pain and experience sadness and happiness.

If you read my answer you would see that it says 90 percent are elective. I did not say all of them were. If you would read testimonies from the Dr’s that do this you would know also. Do alittle more research on the subject. Read the court documents on the abortion ban act.

By: Namaste

Namaste — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 03:44:04 +0000

Honestly it really depends. If the woman is in danger of loosing her life, she has the the decision to decide whether she wants to save the babies life or not. Now, don’t think that this is an easy desicion, by far it is not. To say that they are “full of it” is quite frankly, very rude. I know a woman who had to make the decision herself. It was a tough decision. Are you a doctor? No. Just because you get a C-section, doesn’t necissarily mean the baby will live. At times, it can, but in some situations (the woman I knew) their was no hope.

Your question is a question of morals, not a health issue.

Edit: I agree with what the woman below said, but I don’t know where you get your facts. In some situations, it is unfortunate but their are medical problems that effect the health of the mother. It’s wrong, I agree, but in some lifethreatening situations I can see why they would choose that. Once again, it is a question of morals. Not health.

By: bebekaychic

bebekaychic — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 01:20:27 +0000

Its not ur business if the doctors decide its for the best for the mother to abort then she can if she wants..Worry about YOUR life..