If you believe this, do you also believe that people who, by having sex, get an STD should accept their consequences and not seek treatment? Now, note that I am not saying a child is a disease, but as is characterized by the post I am quoting, getting pregnant is a risk, as is getting an STD. One may use protection, which may sometimes fail, and suffer the consequences of the risks they have taken. Yet, I never see anyone claiming that people should suffer through gonorrhea or crabs because they deserve it, having taken a risk they knew full well could lead to this consequence.

Similarly, there is the oft-quoted car accident analogy. Knowing that driving will often lead to accidents, you are only getting what you deserve, or taking on a consequence you knew was inherent in driving (or even riding in) a car, therefore you should not seek treatment. The point being that people will and should still drive, trying their damned best to avoid the consequences. All of life is about measured risk taking for rewards. Should we all quit doing anything at all risky because we may have an undesired consequence?

Also, what about those people who don't want to have children ever? What would you say to them? That it is not their right to choose whether or not to reproduce? That they should go through life as virgins? Keeping in mind that any ethical medical practictioner pretty much makes it policy that women that have never borne a child shall not qualify for sterilization and that men younger than 35 or so with no children still have a hard time getting sterilized, it would seem that there is no realistic solution to this problem. People will have sex. It's a natural part of a relationship, and in primates, is NOT just for reproducing. People, IMHO, should have the ability to choose whether or not they will bear children. There are many of us out there that practice safe sex and have been monogomous for about a decade, don't want children but no doctor will sterilize us. If I get pregnant, having done MY very best to avoid it, I don't think I should be punished.

There are many of us out there that practice safe sex and have been monogomous for about a decade, don't want children but no doctor will sterilize us.

It's called a vasectomy and a tubal ligation.
Last I heard, you can have it done just about anywhere-except a Catholic hospital perhaps.

Actually you can do it at home with an Ginzu knife, a mirror, some glue, thread and a bit of scotch. :)

And it's called sterilization if you are speaking about either sex interchangeably. Last I was told by 2 physicians in separate practice, the guidelines I posted above are SOP. Did you hear it from a more credible source perchance?

Oh my.

In spite of your disclaimer that you are not saying a child is a disease, you are equating becoming pregnant with a disease. Yes, both are risk. And yes, I believe that you should receive treatment for STDs. There are still consequences to suffer - you run the risk of sterliziation, having something that you can spread to others and never be rid of yourself, etc. I believe this also is a risk you accept when you choose to have sex, because NOTHING is 100% guaranteed.

I am saying that if you are willing to engage in the activity, you are willing to accept the consequences. I've been in 3 car accidents. (One was my fault for those wondering.) Do I stop drinving? No, but I understand that I may one day be in another accident and that is a risk I accept because I need to drive to work, school, etc.

I believe children are a gift. There are those that do not want to have children, and I understand that as well. I do not agree with doctors that refuse to perform a vasectomy or tubal ligation.
I believe there is a difference in performing one of these surgeries than in an abortion - they take place prior to conception and an abortion takes place after.

I am willing to suffer the consequences of unplanned pregnancy. Thats one of the things that abortion is, an option.

Credible source!?! HA! LOL!

Do you need your parents signature or what? Either you aren't looking, or you don't know where to look? Or did you just pose that as a possibility?

They are out there, but just as some physicians would NEVER perform an abortion, others would NEVER do sterilization techniques-especially if they feel the individual is too young to comprehend the consequences.

Picture it: A 25 year old woman. She does not, does NOT, DOES NOT want children! (did I say she didn't want to have children in any way shape or form?) :D She has known this for ages. She wants to get the baby shop closed. Many doctors will NOT do it because "she might change her mind". I personally have known friends who tried to get the factory closed but because they have not had kids and are under 40, no doctor will do it

MTSUgirl, I see your point. (I don't agree w/ your stance, btw.) Your driving analogy was excellent. However, there are many people on this board who either are, know, or made "condom babies" (children born despite use of contraceptives). If you read the little inserts in any box of birth control, they list the statistics for conception rates per year of average use. Even tubal ligation has a possibility, however slight, of conceiving. Should married (or unmarried, for that matter) people be forced to live in celibacy simply because they don't want kids? Newsflash: people don't have sex simply for procreation. There's a reason it feels good.
Yes children are a gift. But for some these gifts can pose serious emotional or physical problems. I don't advocate serial abortions, nor do I have much sympathy for people who take no precaution whatsoever (yet want no children). However, let individuals make those decisions. Otherwise we'll revert to the years of back alley abortions and tragic consequences.

Co-sign! I did the March for Women's Lives on Washington in 1992. Had I been living in or near DC in 2004, you bet your ass I woulda marched this past April.

I have never had an abortion myself (never been pregnant). I am an advocate of "use protection or keep your legs closed"

I have issues with late term abortions and dumbasses that use abortion for birth control. But it is a woman's body and a woman's choice and I will fight to the death for the right to choose. No way in hell I want to go back to the back alley procedures or only the rich being able to get them.

My favorite sticker: Against Abortion? Then Don't Have One!

On the same token, there should be more education about protecting one's self from STDs and making birth control more available! I mean how many people can afford $37 a month for birth control pills? (yup if you are not insured or don't know the connections to get BC at reduced prices or free, that is how much they cost).

It kills me that SOME (notice I mentioned SOME) pro life folx don't want birth control to be readily available....HELLO you can't have it both ways!

BTW-I am for capital punishment.

To make things weirder, I am married to a pro life atheist! :eek:

I agree. Although I do believe abstinence is the best route, I know people will have sex and therefore need to be educated in ways to protect themselves. I also agree that sterilization should be available for those that do not want children at all.

As I said - I'm a birthcontrol/condom baby. My mother used both, and hello here I am.

I don't think that this is an issue that will ever be cut and dry, nor do I think that abortion will ever be made illegal. I will be satisfied when women are educated about the fact that it isn't their only option, and when they understand every possible option. (Some are, some aren't.)

I believe that the psychotic protestors are on the WAY wrong path. The way that I live my belief that abortion is wrong is to tell others of my experiences, I only go to doctors that do not perform abortions, (yes I ask) and I volunteer at the crisis pregnancy center. If a woman has gone through counseling and still wants to have an abortion, I go with her and hold her hand so at least she isn't alone, and to be there for her if she changes her mind.

- I am pro choice. I don't think that we should be making choices for others.

-Even sterilization is not 100% effective. I know of at least one woman who got pregant while nursing her 2 month old, 2 months after her husband's vasectomy. (She didn't abort, but I wouldn't blame her if she had! The woman had 3 kids in 3 years!)

-It is completely unrealistic to expect married couples who don't want (more) children to not have sex. Abstinence might be a good answer for college students, but not for all women in all situations.

-One of the most disturbed kids I ever worked with in child psych was a 7 year old who was the product of a gang rape ... he knew it. Even if a child who is the product of rape is adopted out, by forcing that woman to complete that pregnancy, changing her entire lifestyle, forcing her to go through the pain and trauma of labor, dealing with people asking questions about her pregnancy or passing judgment on her for being pregnant, making her to re-live that rape every day until that child is born is cruel punishment to a victim. Then she also gets to worry that this child will find her someday, after she has worked so hard to get through the emotional trauma of the whole situation, she might have to then explain it to her husband and kids. Isn't it enough that she has to deal with the original trauma?

-Although I've had two kids, my primary care doctor still refuses to authorize a tubal ligation for me, because I'm divorced and might get married again and want a baby with my new husband. This, in spite of the fact that I'm on some really scary medications for Crohn's which state that I must prove I'm on birth control before a doc can prescribe them! Get a new primary care doc is the standard answer.. this is next to impossible when you need referrals for things every two weeks. I'm stuck with her until I don't need a specialist's care so frequently (which is quite possibly, never!)

- I left one Catholic church where the priest was organizing some of these psychotic protests at the local WomanCare. That clinic happened to be the place where all the college women went for their routine gynecological visits because it was only $4 a visit. Not everybody going into one of these establishments is going there for an abortion. Some are going for birth control, some are just going for pap smears. Those protesters make me sick.

That's it for now, I think!

Dee

My earlier response was a little harsh and I am sorry about that.

Insurance will not cover unnecessary prcedures-you will have to pay for it out of your pocket.

The chances are slim that the vas won't take. So, if you would have an abortion ANYway, what's the problem? It's a means to avoid it isn't it? NO medical procedure comes with a 100% guarantee.

There are so many incidents where a "couple" decides they never want children. Then tragedy hits and one dies. The person remaining moves on and finds another love who DOES want children...

I am unsure if any legal ramifications exist for a Doctor who performs such operations without psychological evaluation. They may be vulnerable somehow. (Where are the legal eagles?)

This is one of those issues that people may never find common ground.

That's why, although a vasectomy is easier than a tubal, I'd probably get fixed instead of Mr. valkyrie -- I know that I never, ever, ever want children no matter what, but maybe he would someday if we weren't together and he was with someone who desperately wanted them.

I'd get a tubal tomorrow if I had health insurance that covered it or the money. Unfortunately, I have neither health insurance nor money right now, so it's not going to happen. I don't know about the legal ramifications for doctors -- personally, I don't think there should be any legal risks for a doctor who performs a sterilization on someone who requests it. I know I'd have a hard time finding someone to do the operation since I haven't had kids -- from all I've heard, it's much more difficult for a woman without kids to get sterilized than for a man. Lovely.

Now I don't know this for a fact, but I am assuming it's because a vasectomy is more easily reversible.