When should abortion be allowed?

Abortion should be legal and available...

  • whenever a pregnant woman chooses it.

    Votes: 13 44.8%

  • if the physical health of the mother is threatened by the pregnancy.

    Votes: 13 44.8%

  • if the mental health of the mother is threatened by the pregnancy.

    Votes: 11 37.9%

  • generally, in the first trimester (1-3 months) of pregnancy.

    Votes: 12 41.4%

  • generally, in the second trimester (4-6 months) of pregnancy.

    Votes: 7 24.1%

  • generally, in the third trimester (7-9 months) of pregnancy.

    Votes: 4 13.8%

  • if the pregancy resulted from rape.

    Votes: 10 34.5%

  • only if two expert doctors agree that it is appropriate in the particular case.

    Votes: 1 3.4%

  • generally in first two trimesters, and in 3rd only if the mother's physical health is threatened.

    Votes: 7 24.1%

  • if the baby has a deformity or genetic abnormality that would lead to health difficulties in life.

    Votes: 10 34.5%

  • only prior to the time that the baby could viably live by itself outside the womb

    Votes: 3 10.3%

  • only prior to the time where the baby could be kept alive outside the womb using technology.

    Votes: 2 6.9%

  • if the mother is under age (say less than 16).

    Votes: 8 27.6%

  • only if the father agrees.

    Votes: 2 6.9%

  • as a "morning-after" pill.

    Votes: 7 24.1%

  • if the mother is financially unable to support a child.

    Votes: 8 27.6%

  • if the mother does not want a child at the present time.

    Votes: 8 27.6%

  • because some women will endanger their own lives with "backyard" abortions if it is not available.

    Votes: 7 24.1%

  • because women should have a right to control their own reproduction.

    Votes: 8 27.6%

  • because women should have a right to control their own bodies.

    Votes: 8 27.6%

  • never, because women should know sex might lead to pregnancy.

    Votes: 2 6.9%

  • never, because all babies are precious human beings, from the moment of conception.

    Votes: 2 6.9%

  • never, because all life is sacred.

    Votes: 2 6.9%

  • never, because my religious view is that abortion is wrong.

    Votes: 2 6.9%

  • never, because women should be held responsible for getting themselves pregnant.

    Votes: 1 3.4%

  • never, because it is God's will that the baby should be born.

    Votes: 3 10.3%

  • never, because a baby has an absolute right to life, regardless of what the mother wants.

    Votes: 3 10.3%

  • never, for reasons specified in the thread.

    Votes: 1 3.4%

  • Other (specified in the thread).

    Votes: 5 17.2%

  • No opinion /don't want to answer / just show me the results

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • Total voters
    29
James R

James R

Just this guy, you know?
Staff member
Most often, people are asked the question "Are you pro-life or pro-choice?" or "Are you in favour or against legalising abortion?" This tends to produce black-and-white answers.

However, if you start asking about specific situations, you get a wider diversity of views, showing that views on abortion fall along a continuum.

I am interested to hear the opinions of sciforum members.

Please answer the poll.
 
Inquiries regarding the poll

Might I ask for a bit of clarification here? I might get away with checking relatively few boxes, as one might cover pretty much the rest of the circumstances while the others make specific points; or, I might check a box for every applicable circumstance despite an option that could fairly be described as an umbrella.

How detailed an analysis are you seeking, or would certain answers seem to contradict one another?

To wit:

• I might just check the first box and be done with it.
• I might check the under-16 box in order to reaffirm my opinion that a female's status as a pregnant woman should not be denigrated for the fact of her age.
• I might check boxes for the first and second trimester; while I am dubious about late-term abortions, I have been unable through years of political arguments and consideration to devise a sensible, concise policy that sufficiently accounts for diverse, unplanned, and unknown (e.g., to me) circumstances.
• I might check the box for pregnancies conceived by rape ....
• (&c., &c.)​

On another note entirely—more or less serious according to your inclination, and observing you have the authority to make the change if you should so choose—I would mention that you may not be fairly representing certain political outlooks. The poll seems to be lacking a pro-choice option:

Full-term, while in labor, because she's pissed at the father. (See #1735861/234)​

I was hoping that the member who proposed that notion could cite some statistics or admit it was pure fancy, but, as I cannot, in perusing that older discussion, find the response that includes those statistics or that admission, I would hate to see it left out, since that would be unfair to a certain human and political outlook.

It's your poll, and thus up to you. While I, personally, consider such propositions absurd, and even suggestive of insincerity, I recognize that this is merely my opinion.
 
Personally speaking, I feel that once the baby is able to survive outside of the womb, then unless there is a medical reason to do so, I don't think a woman should just decide to abort it.. say at 27 weeks for example.. she changes her mind. If the child can survive outside of the womb and has no severe medical problems that would cause its death whether inside or out of the uterus, then the woman can give birth to it and put it up for adoption. There needs to be some cut off point in my opinion. I ticked for the second semester because I think an abortion should be available after 12 weeks.. usually when the pregnancy ticks off into the second trimester. I don't think it should be legal as a change of mind in the later end of the second trimester or in the third trimester, in that a woman waits until the 30th week (as one example) before she decides whether she wants to keep it or not.

Personally speaking, once it becomes viable and both mother and baby are otherwise healthy, it should not be allowed to be aborted. If a severe medical issue arises in either the mother and/or the baby (eg tests show that the baby will not survive to 35 weeks and will die in utero), then an abortion should be made available to prevent further psychological damage and pain to the mother who would otherwise be made to carry on with the pregnancy knowing that she will one day stop feeling her child move, meaning it will have died inside her..

The "generally in first two trimesters, and in 3rd only if the mother's physical health is threatened" is ambiguous for me. I think the cut off point should fall half way in the second trimester.. before the child becomes viable or is able to survive outside of the womb.
 
James R, how can you possibly not mind it for 7-9 months of pregnancy? That's just short of murder if not murder.
 
James R, how can you possibly not mind it for 7-9 months of pregnancy?
Click to expand...

It's not that I want to see abortions at 7-9 months. I don't particularly want them at 4-6 months. But I can think of circumstances where an abortion at 8 months might be reasonable, so I wouldn't want to arbitrarily rule out the option for all mothers at that time.
 
I thought that's why you put "Generally" before the trimester questions. Finally deciding to play "dodge the skull crusher" at 7-9 months, should be immediately followed by a frontal lobotomy on the stupid bitch.
 
until the third trimester where the foetus becomes capable of surviving outside the womb, it should be considered solely a growth of the womans body and hers to do with it as she wishes. after that point however abortion should be restricted to situations where the mothers life is endangered by continuing with the pregnancy.
 
James R said:
It's not that I want to see abortions at 7-9 months. I don't particularly want them at 4-6 months. But I can think of circumstances where an abortion at 8 months might be reasonable, so I wouldn't want to arbitrarily rule out the option for all mothers at that time.
Click to expand...

What circumstances? "Oh woops, I don't want a baby anymore...", ya great circumstance
 
I vote "other". Abortion should be allowed at any time for any reason up to a week after the child is born.
 
James R said:
I But I can think of circumstances where an abortion at 8 months might be reasonable, so I wouldn't want to arbitrarily rule out the option for all mothers at that time.
Click to expand...

What are some reasonable circumstances? In my opinion they better all be health related and somehow causing serious consequences to the mother if she was to carry full term.
 
Other-because trying to figure out what to check and what not to check was giving me a headache. I started to check them all, then saw some were contradictory.

Here's how I see it:/puts on woman suit/

If I were pregnant. Well, first we have to consider how I got pregnant. Sex with husband/boyfriend? That leads to step 2. Consensual sex with blood-relative, still leads to step 2. Consensual sex for money? Still step 2 Raped? My option until the baby can live without me.

So. Step 2-This is assuming effective means of contraception were in use and failed or were not in use at all, and the sex was consensual, and pregnancy was not intended. Also assuming amazing ignorance of the woman involved. Yes, until the fetus is viable. Once. If this is a second abortion we go on to step 3. If this is a third abortion, the woman will be required to carry it to, at least, viability, and then will be forcibly sterilized. I'd suggest a full hysterectomy.

Step 3- This is assuming a second occurence of abortion. The woman will be allowed to have an abortion until the baby is viable if she can show a medical reason she is not able to carry the child. Autism? nope Down Syndrome? nope She needs to have her pigs all lined up for this one.

Step 4- Late term Abortion-I have a hard time with this one. If it will kill the mother to carry the child until some level of viability, OK. If it will not kill the mother, why not some form of birthing process, to include caesarian, then make the child a ward of the state, if she really really just can't have it?

All of these rules are intended to allow a woman freedom over her own body, while protecting the rights of another potential individual. While it's still an it and not a baby, then it is a piece of the mother. When it can live in the absence of the mother, it's no longer a simple choice about "her body". That's just me, of course.
 
John99 said:
Since men dont get pregnant I see no reason for men to have any input into it.
Click to expand...

Well if I were pregnant and had to abort for medical reasons or got back ultra sounds with bad results, I would want my partners input. Even though it is my body it is still the fathers baby too. I think it would be awfully selfish not to include the father in the decision. Again this depends on the circumstances in which you became pregnant.
 
Why only a week?
It should either be never, or up untill the child is about 22. That's around the time someone is actually a worthwhile human being.
Before that, there's no meaningful difference between an embryo and a teenager.
 
If either partner wants to abort, or if they are under age(under EIGHTEEN) if one of the parents families disapprove, an abortion MUST be completed.
 
Betrayer0fHope said:
If either partner wants to abort, or if they are under age(under EIGHTEEN) if one of the parents families disapprove, an abortion MUST be completed.
Click to expand...

no, if I'm pregnant and the guy wants me to abort the child, tough. He can talk to me about it, he can have his say. But the decision is mine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top