AIBU to ask how much support Pro-Life believers provide for actual children in need? Texas just banned abortion in the US.

[thecranberries]

AIBU to ask what Pro Life 'supporters' do to actually help living children in need? Sparked by Rachel Maddow Show Podcast on MSNBC - which gives a brilliant coverage on what's going on.

PL seems to want to stop a woman's right to choose, even in instances of rape or incest. That's in Texas, US, but as we know, many of the 'trends' that start in the US migrate over here. And as we know, there are lots of Pro-Life (read anti abortion, anti women) believers over here.

So, my AIBU is to ask - what do these PL do to actually support actual living children in need in this country or the world? How much do they give to UNICEF/Save the Children etc charities? How much do they donate time, money and resources to actual children living in poverty, bad housing, experiencing harm or bad schooling to ensure that these actual living children get the best life possible?

Do these PL, who cite religious grounds, actually enable women to obtain proper contraception when they need it? And speaking about religion, how many religious PL turn a blind eye to religious organisations history of child abuse?

I don't understand anyone, especially men, who does not accept a woman's right to chose what happens to her own body.

So, AIBU to ask Pro Life supporters to tell me in detail what they do - as actively as supporting their 'cause' - when it comes to helping living children in need?

Can you explain to me a situation where it's okay to 'abort' a baby that could be born and survive on its own? Are you seriously saying you think someone should be able to do that?

So you clearly didn't take any time to think about situations where a woman might even be thinking about an 8 month abortion?

I can barely imagine what kind of horrific situation a woman might be in to be thinking about that, but I imagine it may involve severe mental health issues, severe abuse, severe medical complications, severe vulnerability.

Or do you think that if abortion were legal up to birth women all over the place would be be taking themselves up to the hospital willy nilly to get the foetus they are pregnant with aborted before labouring and giving birth to an almost full term dead baby?

Anyway, I kind of feel like the 'you think it's OK to abort full term babies' thing is moot on this thread - we are actually discussing a state that has made it illegal to abort after 6 fucking weeks. So let's stick to that.

@Jaysmith71

First step is you inject the fetus with poison to stop its heart.

In which country is this legal? Certainly not in the UK, where second-trimester terminations are suction methods, D&C or D&E, that may involve the use of a general aneasthetic on the mother.

The idea of sticking a needle full of lethal 'poison' into a pregnant woman seems inherently implausible on so many grounds.

The injection is into the fetus, not the mother. It is widely used since the 1990s. After all, the E part of a D&E abortion procedure would be barbaric if the fetus were still alive. Here are some scientific papers on its use:

Ensuring a stillborn: the ethics of fetal lethal injection in late abortion
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8605389/

Digoxin to facilitate late second-trimester abortion: a randomized, masked, placebo-controlled trial
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11239659/

Intra-fetal Compared With Intra-amniotic Digoxin Before Dilation and Evacuation: A Randomized Controlled Trial
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27741192/

Intra-amniotic digoxin for feticide between 21 and 30 weeks of gestation: a prospective study
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30703286/

Feasibility of intra-amniotic digoxin administration by obstetrics and gynecology trainees to induce fetal demise prior to medical abortion beyond 20 weeks
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32241827/

There are many more....

@Jaysmith71

First step is you inject the fetus with poison to stop its heart.

In which country is this legal? Certainly not in the UK, where second-trimester terminations are suction methods, D&C or D&E, that may involve the use of a general aneasthetic on the mother.

The idea of sticking a needle full of lethal 'poison' into a pregnant woman seems inherently implausible on so many grounds.

Agree.

This is the rubbish PL's, like PlanDeRaccordement, peddle to anyone who is gulible / vulnerable enough to believe it. Really unpleasant side of PL's.

And the PL's seem to have come on to this thread without answering my AIBU to ask what PL's do to actually help real children who are in need.

@thecranberries

Back on pg 1 of the thread I answered your AIBU as follows. I also voted YANBU for the record.

“all PlanDeRaccordement Thu 02-Sep-21 13:03:31
It’s a good question. No idea if any prolife organisations do support children.

Went to Prolife Action League website and zero mention of helping the women or babies forced to be born.

Went to Human Coalition, and their website says they have a “continuum of care” program where they provide “financial, job training, maternity housing and healthcare, etc.” Support to the women and children.

So evidently some do and some don’t?”

I’m prochoice, not prolife. Just because I am being civil to all posters doesn’t make me prolife. And what I posted about late term abortion is 100% accurate and I’ve posted a sample of studies regarding the procedure. It’s not my fault if you have no idea as to what is actually done in a late term abortion.

Digoxin is a heart medicine used by the NHS, "not thought to be harmful during pregnancy:"

www.nhs.uk/medicines/digoxin/

@DameFanny

Just seen what else *@PlanDeRaccordement* is posting. It's a fever dream of whatabouttery and let's pretend pro-choicers can be extremists. What a waste of breath.

I agree

[quote Jaysmith71]Digoxin is a heart medicine used by the NHS, "not thought to be harmful during pregnancy:"

www.nhs.uk/medicines/digoxin/[/quote]
Yes but when you inject it in a high enough dose into a fetus, it kills it.

From one of the studies
Intra-amniotic injection of digoxin is a well-known method for feticide before inducing a termination of pregnancy (TOP) at 17-24 weeks of gestation. Information on its effectiveness when administered after 24 weeks of gestation is limited. This study evaluated the efficacy of intra-amniotic digoxin injection for inducing fetal demise within 18-24 hours, at 21-30 weeks of gestation, and its safety.

Intra-amniotic digoxin for feticide between 21 and 30 weeks of gestation: a prospective study
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30703286/

But other countries seem to manage second-trimester terminations without this, just like they manage without operating a death penalty by lethal injection or any other method.

Idk why people are arguing with Plan. Viable foetuses have to be dead before birth otherwise this would no longer be a late stage abortion but a live birth.

Lidocaine and KCL are also used. There’s even a study on which is better at feticide.

Drugs used to induce fetal demise prior to abortion: a systematic review
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33294839/

Clinicians have used feticidal agents prior to second trimester abortion for many years. Despite the widespread use of various agents to induce fetal demise, a comprehensive or systematic review of the evidence is lacking on the safety, effectiveness, and most effective routes of administration.

Evidence from included cohort studies demonstrates that digoxin, KCL, and lidocaine are all effective in inducing fetal demise. Intra-fetal administration of digoxin is superior to intra-amniotic digoxin administration. Administration of feticide using intracardiac KCL may shorten the abortion experience. Limited data from observational studies also supports an increase in maternal side effects and/or complications related to the administration of digoxin.

[quote PlanDeRaccordement]@thecranberries

Back on pg 1 of the thread I answered your AIBU as follows. I also voted YANBU for the record.

“all PlanDeRaccordement Thu 02-Sep-21 13:03:31
It’s a good question. No idea if any prolife organisations do support children.

Went to Prolife Action League website and zero mention of helping the women or babies forced to be born.

Went to Human Coalition, and their website says they have a “continuum of care” program where they provide “financial, job training, maternity housing and healthcare, etc.” Support to the women and children.

So evidently some do and some don’t?”[/quote]
I apologise. Responses delay on my device.

Also, just to add, late abortions are extremely rare and there must have been some horrendous implication for mum or foetus's health. So no real reason to bring late abortions in to this issue, surely?

@Jaysmith71

But other countries seem to manage second-trimester terminations without this, just like they manage without operating a death penalty by lethal injection or any other method.

Not really. It is world-wide. Do you seriously believe a late term abortion involves the birth of a live fetus?

@thecranberries

Late term abortion discussion arose because we were talking about the line between fetus and baby. And how that line is drawn in different places by prolife Vs prochoice. One poster was fixated on whether a 8mo fetus is a baby or not.

So, I was saying that late term abortion is the ethical minefield where both sides meet in the middle where the drawing of line between fetus and baby becomes most difficult. And given that abortions do sometimes fail, when does feticide become infanticide?

This is what we need to talk about to have real discussion on abortion. This thread way before me turned into a general discussion on abortion.

Perhaps more emphasis should be placed on contraception so that these pregnancies don't happen in the first places (with the exception of those resulting from rape and other exceptions, obviously)

'in the first place' I meant

Idk why people are arguing with Plan. Viable foetuses have to be dead before birth otherwise this would no longer be a late stage abortion but a live birth.

To be fair Plan can argue in an empty room.

I don't agree with the Texas abortion law but that's what happens when US presidents are allowed to appoint justices and stack the courts. On the healthcare debate-I've worked minimum wage jobs as a teen and early 20s a long time ago and I had healthcare plans available-I think we should have universal healthcare-I'm a moderate Democrat in my political beliefs and the Covid pandemic and majority of Republican attitudes have converted me to fully Democratic political persuasion. Right now it's a employee job market and stiff competition for the workforce and I hope more people can take advantage of the college tuition payment programs like Amazon and Walmart are offering now. Education really is the gateway to future success and opportunity.

@Petardos

I love that you call me judgemental or rude, and come out with tripe like this. Please educate yourself before judging me. I'd rather be rude than stupid. grin

I think you are both rude and stupid and probably never been in America.

You're the one who is claiming that women who have had several abortions shouldn't be allowed them. Your theory then can be expanded to no cancer treatment for smokers or people who didn't use sun cream, no treatment for people who caused a car accident, no treatment for an obese person who ate too much etc. Where do you stop on that kind of thinking?

And I wouldn't want to go to America, too many idiots there quite clearly since they've voted for this stupidity. The stupid are now the majority.

@mustlovegin

Perhaps more emphasis should be placed on contraception so that these pregnancies don't happen in the first places (with the exception of those resulting from rape and other exceptions, obviously)

rates of abortion in the US have been falling for years and are at an all time low. Ditto birth rates and teen birth rates. Access to contraception is doing its job.

Abortion will still be needed for some women.

Apologies of this has already been covered - I did read through but might have missed it. Would women in Texas who travel out of state either for an abortion or to discuss their options also be at risk of prosecution? I'm thinking of the women from Ireland who would travel to London/other parts of England to have abortions when abortion was not available legally there.

@HarrietsChariot

A solution of sorts would be to permit a woman to have an abortion, but only if she is sterilised as part of the procedure. This would make people think very hard about whether an abortion is right for them, knowing that they will then no longer to be able to have children in the future. It satisfies the pro-choice argument that a woman should have the ability to decide whether to proceed or not, and from the pro-life point of view there will be no more repeat aborters.

As someone who is very much pro-abortion this would satisfy any qualms over the so-called morality of the decision.

(Personally I'm of the Bill Hicks school of thought, that not only should abortion be legal but in many cases should be mandatory!)

And what if that first pregnancy was the result of rape, for example? Your "solution" is a load of crap.

As early as possible, as late as necessary.

Its taken 13 hours after these barbaric laws for the first woman in texas to die after attempting her own abortion.

Pro life my arse.

@bananapumpkin

Anti abortion is not anti women. It's clear that many people are both, but many others are pro-life partly because abortion is such a damaging experience for many women.

While it's laudable to help children in need, it's irrelevant to the PL/PC argument - unless you seriously believe that it's better to be dead than living in poverty.

No anti abortion is anti women, anti abortion is anti womans choice and cannot be anything but anti women

@PlanDeRaccordement

Texas has banned abortion

Sorry but they haven’t. They’ve restricted abortion, not banned it. A ban is when something is illegal no matter the circumstances.

oh go away - how many women actually know they are pregnant by 6 weeks which is the cut off date!