House considers bill that would outlaw abortions after just six or seven weeks

[Lampo]

Link

 

[Santi2]

From the article:

“I think it kind of hits you in the forehead about what is going on in the woman’s womb,” said Rep. Lynn R. Wachtmann, a Napoleon Republican and the sponsor of House Bill 125.

“It’s an eye-opener,” he said.

And, one continues to pray that he’d have the opportunity to watch a film showing the complex process of conception which leads to that heartbeat. THAT will be the eye-opener.

 

[Augusta_Sans]

From the article:

“The bill would essentially outlaw abortions in Ohio because they would be banned before a woman even knows she is pregnant,” said Kellie Copeland, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio.

This sentence confused me. Are most women really that naive about how their bodies work? I missed my period and knew I was pregnant 12 days after conception, and the heartbeat can be heard as early as 6 weeks (28 days after conception). Under this bill, I would have had 16 days of “decision time.”

 

[Santi2]

I have just finished watching a video of the Heartbeat Conference and realised that I made a mistake about Rep. L Wacthmann because he said that this Heartbill Bill can only move us closer to conception stage.

youtube.com/user/faith2action#p/u/5/xeCk3-b0aq8

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

From the article:

This sentence confused me. Are most women really that naive about how their bodies work? I missed my period and knew I was pregnant 12 days after conception, and the heartbeat can be heard as early as 6 weeks (28 days after conception). Under this bill, I would have had 16 days of “decision time.”

First of all, congratulations!

In answer to your confusion though, it depends on a lot of things.

Many women really are that unaware of their bodies, their cycles and how they work. Many are aware of how things work in theory, but do not keep a calendar and therefore may not notice for weeks when they miss. They just realize it has been awhile and begin to wonder.

Some women have spotting during their pregnancies. I have a friend who did, and it was enough to confuse her. Her baby was fine, but she did not know she was pregnant until quite late because she did not miss a period.

Some women are simply too scared to acknowledge the symptoms until they become undeniable.

It is very common for young women to have completely irregular cycles. It is less common as you get older, but still possible. Mine varied from between two weeks to two months when I was a teen and into my twenties.

If they are on birth control, or have been on birth control, their cycles are completely screwy. I know the Church opposes birth control as well, but it is another issue. If there is not period to miss, they are dependent on other symptoms. And we all know birth control fails.

None of this justifies abortion. It is just to say that in fact at six weeks, many women do not know they are pregnant yet. Furthermore, the ones least likely to know they are pregnant are the ones most likely for it to be a problem (they are on BC, they are young, they are disorganized, they are scared etc…). It is possible, though I do not know it for a fact, that most of the women who go for abortions do not know they are pregnant until after six weeks.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Many women really are that unaware of their bodies, their cycles and how they work.

It’s their responsibility to figure that out, and to obtain information from reliable medical sources (not rumor or folk/superstition resources). This has become increasingly relevant in the realm of healthcare and in particular health insurance. The patient/receiver has an obligation to notice symptoms, to report symptoms or conditions, and to do so promptly. This is reflected in the fact that reduced rates and other incentives are often being provided to those covered based on the concept of “well” care.

The obligation is also in keeping with the responsibility of a person residing in a free society. (Rights imply responsibilities to that society, which would include to one’s own body and any life growing within it.)

Many are aware of how things work in theory, but do not keep a calendar and therefore may not notice for weeks when they miss. They just realize it has been awhile and begin to wonder.

Again, it is the responsibility of anyone in an unprotected financial and legal status (unmarried, poor, underage, illegal immigration status, or any other compromised, vulnerable status) to protect themselves in other ways, such as not engaging in unprotected intercourse as an unmarried individual. It should not be the government’s responsibility to rescue, in secrecy, such ignorance and irresponsibility.

Some women have spotting during their pregnancies. I have a friend who did, and it was enough to confuse her. Her baby was fine, but she did not know she was pregnant until quite late because she did not miss a period.

That’s why we have doctors. I used home pregnancy kits three times – for my pregnancy which ended in miscarriage, and my two pregnancies which did not. I never assumed accuracy or inaccuracy. What it did was bring me to my ob-gyn immediately to confirm that in fact I was pregnant.

Some women are simply too scared to acknowledge the symptoms until they become undeniable.

That may be true, but then that should scare them even more against having unprotected sex as an unmarried individual. There may even some mothers “afraid” to introduce solid food to their children while they are still breastfeeding. But you can count on that mother being prosecuted for child endangerment if she fails to nourish sufficiently her demanding infant.

It is very common for young women to have completely irregular cycles. It is less common as you get older, but still possible. Mine varied from between two weeks to two months when I was a teen and into my twenties.

So did mine (vary). That argues for even greater responsibility on the part of the female, not less responsibility, based on the thin excuse of “fear” or ignorance.

None of this justifies abortion. It is just to say that in fact at six weeks, many women do not know they are pregnant yet. Furthermore, the ones least likely to know they are pregnant are the ones most likely for it to be a problem (they are on BC, they are young, they are disorganized, they are scared etc…). It is possible, though I do not know it for a fact, that most of the women who go for abortions do not know they are pregnant until after six weeks.

Which, again, argues for greater legal responsibility being put on both the male and the female engaging in out-of-wedlock sex.

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

I am not sure why you are arguing with me. All I said was that women often do not know when they are pregnant, and there are many valid reasons. I pregnant with my second child. I did not know about either pregnancy until after six weeks. (Seven weeks for the first, eight weeks for the second.)

As far as I am concerned, any bill which is likely to greatly reduce abortions should get support from pro-lifers.

The person I responded to did not understand why the lady from NARAL was claiming that such a bill would make the issue moot for most women, because most women would not yet know they are pregnant. She overstated, of course. But there is a large percentage of women who do not find out right away. You can blame them, blame society, blame education, blame whomever you like, but it is a fact.

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

Also, I am not sure that I like that your gut impulse is to blame the woman.

It’s their responsibility to figure that out, and to obtain information from reliable medical sources (not rumor or folk/superstition resources). This has become increasingly relevant in the realm of healthcare and in particular health insurance. The patient/receiver has an obligation to notice symptoms, to report symptoms or conditions, and to do so promptly.

There are not always obvious symptoms. Like I said, my friend had none. She had what she thought was her regular period- but was just spotting. No sickness. Nothing. She was a little more tired than usual, which is what ultimately brought her to the doctor.

Again, it is the responsibility of anyone in an unprotected financial and legal status (unmarried, poor, underage, illegal immigration status, or any other compromised, vulnerable status) to protect themselves in other ways, such as not engaging in unprotected intercourse as an unmarried individual. It should not be the government’s responsibility to rescue, in secrecy, such ignorance and irresponsibility.

“unprotected intercourse” really? You are advocating using “protection” as responsibility on a Catholic board?

That’s why we have doctors. I used home pregnancy kits three times – for my pregnancy which ended in miscarriage, and my two pregnancies which did not. I never assumed accuracy or inaccuracy. What it did was bring me to my ob-gyn immediately to confirm that in fact I was pregnant.

Good for you. You had symptoms, I presume, which prompted you to use a pregnancy test in the first place? My friend had none. I had none.

That may be true, but then that should scare them even more against having unprotected sex as an unmarried individual.

Unprotected sex again- you do know that protection does not always work and that its use is condemned by the Church, right? This post worries me more than the others. It is this attitude, that women no matter their circumstance, upbringing, situation etc., are undoubtedly to blame for their unintended pregnancy. That if they are afraid, well, they should have thought of that before they opened their legs. This attitude kills babies because women in these situations fear judgement and do not get help. They expect to be attacked at Church and a pregnancy centers- because they often are!

So did mine (vary). That argues for even greater responsibility on the part of the female, not less responsibility, based on the thin excuse of “fear” or ignorance.

Though you may not like it, fear and ignorance are both real. Not all women have mothers who taught them about their bodies. It is easy to say that they should know, but they don’t. The solution is obviously not abortion, but neither is it to shake our collective disapproving finger at those less fortunate in circumstance.

Which, again, argues for greater legal responsibility being put on both the male and the female engaging in out-of-wedlock sex.

All this talk of responsibility makes me wonder what you think that entails. Obviously, providing abortions does not solve anything. Education might help, but in what context? And what should be taught? Do you think that by changing the laws about when a person can get an abortion, suddenly these irresponsible women will start making more responsible choices? Actually, come to think of it, I guess I wonder what you think the problem is?

 

[Elizabeth502]

Also, I am not sure that I like that your gut impulse is to blame the woman.

And I don’t like your gut impulse to excuse the woman and not even mention half of the DNA and the sole sperm donor.

I blame both the man and the woman, or the (probably unmarried) boy and (probably unmarried) girl for engaging in reckless behavior. And in the latter case I blame the parents also for not knowing where the heck their kids are (in most cases). “Unwanted” pregnancies by minors should impact their parents as well. Let them be the third, fourth parites to step up to the plate. I knew exactly where my children were at all times when they were minors. That’s actually the law, by the way. The idea of minors going off somewhere in unsupervised locales is absurd, unless they have declared economic Emancipation, which I doubt is occurring often in teenage pregnancies, anyway. I don’t know why as a society we should be enabling unmarried persons to simply have intercourse and then --when a likely pregnancy results – tell them it’s their “right” to terminate the pregnancy. Encouraging – or the same thing, enabling, looking the other way, at fornication – is the surest way to make an abortion possible. The single most effective prevention of abortion is not having sex when you’re not married.

“unprotected intercourse” really? You are advocating using “protection” as responsibility on a Catholic board?

You’ll actually need to do a search of my previous posts on this question before registering inappropriate alarm. Or, you’ll have to PM me about this, because it is not fair to the other posters to require me to repaste all my posts on this issue. Again, the best method of protection is abstinence. There is no reason that an ignorant person or a poor person or a person whose parents have essentially abandoned their responsibilities toward her to be engaging voluntarily in such a high-risk behavior as unmarried sex. The vast majority of abortions occur to unmarried women.

Good for you. You had symptoms, I presume, which prompted you to use a pregnancy test in the first place? My friend had none. I had none.

You still don’t get it. I was married. Therefore I was legitimately In A Family Way. Therefore I was pretty regularly suspecting – with or without symptoms – that I might, could, hopefully be, pregnant because my hubby and I were actively trying. I’m not sure why you need this spelled out so graphically. And I didn’t always “have symptoms,” no.

It is this attitude, that women no matter their circumstance, upbringing, situation etc., are undoubtedly to blame for their unintended pregnancy.

Yes, ma’am. If they have not been raped and are not a victim of incest, you’d better believe that whatever age they are, they are half responsible for an unintended pregnancy. The other half of the responsibility belongs to the male who provided his sperm. If they are teenagers living at home, they are maybe one-third or one-fourth responsible, as I said: Where the heck were their parents to let them know that maybe when you have sex you conceive?

Though you may not like it, fear and ignorance are both real. Not all women have mothers who taught them about their bodies. It is easy to say that they should know, but they don’t.

The majority of abortions which occur in the United States of America occur to unmarried women aged 20-29. Most of those do know at least the rudimentary aspects of their bodies. (I believe the second highest group of abortions is age 25-29, first highest 20-24; “only” the third highest under 20.)

The solution is obviously not abortion, but neither is it to shake our collective disapproving finger at those less fortunate in circumstance.

You can choose to exaggerate my position if you want, and to mischaracterize it & dramatize it, but the reason this situation has become so out of hand is that none of the human causes of unintended, unwed pregnancies has been held to account by any agency or law in this country. When you make something very difficult and uncomfortable for all the contributing parties, you introduce disincentives for even going there.

All this talk of responsibility makes me wonder what you think that entails. Obviously, providing abortions does not solve anything.

And obviously waiting until unmarried women are pregnant, and hoping to convince them then that really it will be OK (that they’re poor, they’re uneducated, they’re unskilled, they’re single, they will have difficult caring for a child in those circumstances) to carry the child to term, is way less realistic, i.m.o., than any other approach. And that approach has proven to have an extremely low success rate to date.

Education might help, but in what context? And what should be taught? Do you think that by changing the laws about when a person can get an abortion, suddenly these irresponsible women will start making more responsible choices? Actually, come to think of it, I guess I wonder what you think the problem is?

Then you should do a search of my posting history. That will answer your questions.