"study links abortion to distress"uhg. I hate studies like these. in the first place, having an unexpected/unwanted pregnancy is distressing, and then not to mention that at least in the US women are bombarded with anti-abortion, guilt inducing media
(
Read more... )
I honestly think that blaming the media is a fairly trite reason for why women feel guilt after abortions. That may be part of it, but to say that a woman has an abortion and it's completely emotionless procedure for her as a mole removal is just ludicrous.
The guilt from an abortion and the distress would most likely come from the choice aspect of it. You don't choose a miscarriage to happen, so you feel grief from it but not guilt because it was out of your hands. If someone has an abortion but then years later looks back and realizes that they made the wrong decision, due to life changes or clouded judgement, then the response is "oh no, *I* made a mistake." If it's a miscarriage, then the response is, "I wish it would have happened differently but it was out of my control."
I've never been pregnant, so I can't know what it's like, but I think the emotions felt by a woman when she's pregnant (whether she wanted the pregnancy or not) are much more complicated than even this study makes it out to be.
Anyway, just my two cents...not looking for a debate.
Reply
Implying that abortion is always a very difficult decision and one that will likely be regretted is a common rhetorical weapon amoung anti-choicers, and frankly, I don't pay it any mind.
Reply
There is a huge difference between removing moles and removing fetuses. For one, taking off a mole is removing something unattractive that is most likely going to develop into something dangerous and/or painful.
Having an abortion is putting an end to something that isn't going to develop into something at all similar. If left alone, it's going to develop into a human life (regardless of at which point one thinks life begins, you leave a fetus long enough, it will turn into a baby LOL). The emotional connection a woman has to a child is universes different than how she feels about a mole or a tumor, so THAT is an argument to which I pay no mind. And if I remember correctly, the study didn't deny what you said. Didn't it say that only 80% have these feelings? That leaves a sizeable chunk that don't. So what's the problem?
As I said, I've never been pregnant, so I can't even begin to imagine the emotional state of a pregnant woman. But I've known numerous people whose pregnancies I've seen start to finish, I known some who have had miscarriages, and I know some who have had abortions.
My point is, I think it cheapens the female experience to say that pregnancies can happen and end without emotional impact. And if a person chooses to be pro-choice, admitting that has no actual effect on your cause other than show that it's a serious decision and perhaps encourage men and women to take the necessary precautions to PREVENT pregnancies so they don't need to be ended.
Reply
The emotional connection a woman has to a child is universes different than how she feels about a mole or a tumor.
No, it wasn't. Because it wasn't a child, it was a collection of cells.
My point is, I think it cheapens the female experience to say that pregnancies can happen and end without emotional impact.
Yes, it did. And I don't feel that my "female experience" has been cheapened in any way.
I don't care to continue this conversation.
Reply
Hence the reason in my original post I said I wasn't looking for a debate.
Reply
*shrug*
Ok, no debate here...
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment