Should pregnant women be allowed total control over their bodies? Where do the unborn child's rights come into it?

[Bumperliouzzzzzz]

Just wondering. I've never read anything theoretical on the matter and am not completely sure where I stand. However I was talking to a colleague today (am 18 weeks pg) and was mentioning wine (I've actually only had 2 glasses so far this pg) and she said 'Oh I thought you weren't allowed to drink when pg?' and I started on a rant (well actually we had a discussion) about woman's rights during pregnancy. I was saying that it is my body and I can do what I like with it, though obviously I don't.

What say should/does a father have in the matter? If I do drink when pg DH gets a bit twitchy, and he won't let me dig in our allotment. Now I am happy to have the excuse not to really but I resent being told what to do. I take heed of my DH because I care about him and believe that he should have some say and he is just worried, but I don't want to be nagged about what I should/shouldn't be doing.

Should the unborn child's rights come first or is it a case of my body, my choice? I think I am mostly resentful of the fact that it is a bunch of men (usually) politicians, DP's who tell us what to do when they have no idea of the effects of being pregnant.

What are your thoughts?

I had a very similar discussion to this with some guys at work. They were banging on about the rights of the (unborn) baby starting at the point where it could survive without the mother. It was perhaps a little unreasonable of me to argue the point that as my 18 month old was still pretty much incapable of surviving without me ensuring he did so and therefore presumably still had no rights but I was pissed off. I do stand by my final point that it will be a cold day in hell before I conceed that any woman should at any point be forced to moderate her behaviour because of the impact it might have on her own body, even if she is pregnant (or breastfeeding).

On the subject of fathers' rights, presmably this is for individual negoiation between partners and based on a compromise. My DH and I struck a bargin that he would drastically cut his alcohol intake, stop his occasional social smoking, pay attention to his diet, take apropriate vits and exercise sensibly (rather than his usual "like a nutter" style) etc for 6 months before we started trying until I was pregnant for the sperm quality issues discussed (he is older and this does become a risk factor for problems) and I would then do all those things whilst pregnant. If he had not been willing to strike this deal I would certainly have told him where to stick any views on my behaiour whilst pregnant...

IMO it's my body and until it comes out it has about as much right to anything as a man's sperm.

Plus I am pro abortion as well I notice most anti-abortionists are men who no doubt have killed thousands of there sperm down the years and don't think twice about shouting "murder" at women going into abortion clinics when they have no idea what the reason is behind the decision.

Risk is a personal choice, I'm 39 weeks gone and have been avoiding all risk factors but then I avoid the latest cancer causing food and went vegan during BSE, because thats the way I am.

I wouldn't tell anyone else what to do with there own body or be critical of them, god knows they get enough info about risks of this that and the other, if a mother wants to drink excessively (I'm sure one or two does no harm) or smoke it's there choice and the last thing they need is anyone moaning I told you so if something bad happens be it due to what they where doing or not, they will still be beating themselves up over it.

And English law anyway allows an abortion at 39 weeks for disabilities so it's hardly as if we respect unborn children (unless they're perfect of course)

"And English law anyway allows an abortion at 39 weeks for disabilities so it's hardly as if we respect unborn children (unless they're perfect of course)"

omg is that really true? I think I'm a bit mortified at that. I'm not particularly anti-abortionist (I don't think they're nice and wouldn't want to go through one myself) but my dd was born at 38 weeks and she was massive. I can only imagine something severe would have to be wrong for a mother to feel the need to do that.

Back to the topic, I haven't read every single post but I do agree with the seeming majority that it's your body you shouldn't be told what to do. I would just hope the mother to be did what was best for baby as well. I did stop drinking at the point I found out I was pregnant with ds but it was more an overall lifestyle change, up until then I'd been clubbing and living a rather hectic lifestyle.

This argument always brings to mind however those occasions where there is a problem with pregnancy and it's a case of the baby's life or the mother's. I hope never ever to be in this position but when discussing it with a few friends a while ago we came to the conclusion that the mother would always say "save the baby" wheras most fathers would say "save my wife/partner". Not sure how statistically true this is however. But it was always at the back of my mind when I was pregnant (too much tv tbh )

Speaking of abortion I don't like the down syndrome test, they gave me funny looks when I refused the test.

only reason people take the test is so they can get an abortion if it has it, but why would you want to?.

theres nothing awful about downs syndrome, alot of them hold down jobs perfectly fine, I live near a centre for them and often see them out on trips.

(We have a ludicrous abortion law in the UK which is a typical british fudge but it seems to work okay for most people - in effect it's abortion on demand up to I think 28 weeks although two doctors are supposed to say you'll be mentallly if you dont' abort but in practice it means on demand but doesn't so which is the first ridiculous part; the second silly bit for many is if the child is disabled suddenly it's right to life changes from 28 weeks to up to 40 week and I suppose 41 weeks if you're still pregnant then which presumably is our society's utilitarian view of children with disabilities).

Ryoko, I took the DS test to find out so that if I was carrying a baby with DS, I could inform myself about the disorder and make plans for our family accordingly.

how small minded of you to express that there is only one reason to take the test.

Ryoko: I'm a bit amazed you'd think people only get the DS test because they'd abort a child with DS.

Medical care is very, very expensive where we live. People go bankrupt because of medical bills all the time.

We took the test because if we were likely to have a child with Down's Syndrome we'd have a 6 month headstart on moving our child back to the UK, so we could use the NHS, where my cousin with a disabled child loves the care she gets. I've no beef with anyone who decides to abort for any reason, but really, your assumption is a bit much.

"only reason people take the test is so they can get an abortion if it has it"

Like foxytocin and blackcurrants I don't think so, I always took it because I think it is important to know. Then you can plan for the day when your baby arrives with the help and information you may need.

I must say you're view though is not bizarre. It's something I've heard said many times. Even family members. I have had family members not take any tests at all or have any scans throughout their entire pregnancy as they are convinced the only reason you are given them is in order to convince you to have an abortion if the test comes back unexpected.

When I was pg for the 1st time a few years ago my GP ENCOURAGED me to have an occasional glass of wine to reduce stress.

IMO stress harms babies more than alcohol.

Most women who dont 'look after themselves' when pg do so out of ignorance and not because they are TRYING to harm their babies . Education is what is needed not punishment.

Well, I had amniocenteses during both pregnancies with the full intention to abort if it turned out the fetus had any of the genetic problems it could detect, not only Down's Syndrome.

I don't see a problem with this, because (need I say this?) a fetus is not a baby. It will develop into a baby if pregnancy continues. It won't if it doesn't.

Strangely, I live in a Catholic country where abortion is illegal but blood tests are routinely offered and hospital had no problem performing the amnios. If results came back positive, I suppose they would have sent me to Nice for the abortion, about a 20 min drive away.

But the test is risky and can cause miscarriage why would you risk it just to know early if it has it or not when you want to keep it no matter what?.

I wouldn't which is why I didn't, best to avoid any risk of miscarriage no matter how small if you can help it IMO.

"If they cared about the affect on the foetus of parental lifestyle, they'd also be trying to control men who were having sex with fertile women, so they'd have the best sperm possible.

This is just about controlling women, bottom line."

So true, Dittany. Lots of factors affect sperm quality, even taking a hot bath or jacuzzi. ALso, as men age, their sperm quality declines, so perhaps we should put an age limit on men who want to reproduce- about the same age as the menopause, lest their dodgy, ageing sperm enters the gene pool.

Actually, the points raised here about pregnancy should be connected to childbirth too.
The amount of unneccessary torture birthing women have had to put up with over the years in hospitals: from drips, to being tied to the bed with fetal monitoring, to episiotomy, to pubic-shaving, from being told she has to "hurry up" or she'll have to have a c-section, just to be told if she complained that "it's the baby that counts" makes me so .
Of course a healthy baby is important, no-one is disputing that, least of all the mother. But a safe, female-oriented birthing environment where the woman is treated like a human being whose wishes are listened to is also important. If not more important.

I had two home births because just the thought of being under the thumb of patriarchy while I was birthing my babies made me feel queasy. Give me the pain any day over that.

Very interesting thread, so many little suject that give food for thoughts.

WRT to drinking during pregnancy I view it the same way as smoking (with or without pregnancy.) If you ask someone to plese not smoke near your child for example, you do not expect them to say "it is my body I do what I want", you expect them to maybe go outside and smoke or to refrain smocking for a bit because the smoke could "damage" or exacerbate an existing condition (asthma...) Or maybe you can go outside yourself. In the case of a pregancy, the baby cannot "go outside" when daddy is smoking in the same room or mummy is having a glass of Chardonnay so I do think it is up to the parents (both of them) to make sure the unborn baby's environnement is healthy and adequate.

I cannot comment much on abortion other than I would not be able to go through one but would not allow myself to make judgement. though at the 39 weeks abortion Xenia, I did not know that, in which circumstances do they allow it?

Reading the thread I think I was pretty lucky in all my pregnancies because I have refused the Dawn syndrome test each and every time and was never made to feel bad about it.

Also only gave birth with realy nice midwies arround (to the exeption of one but I think we misunderstood each other a lot, due to may lack of knowledge of the language at the time).

For DS3 I was preped for emergency cesarian in the middle of it (did not need one eventually) and I admit I did not question it because at the time and in the heat of things, the only thing that mattered to me was my baby, not the fact that I had not wanted one ideally.

By Ryoko Fri 23-Apr-10 18:39:25 "IMO it's my body and until it comes out it has about as much right to anything as a man's sperm."
I understand that as " I can do what I want during my pregnancy because as long as the baby is "in" it has no right"

By Ryoko Thu 29-Apr-10 13:02:17 "I wouldn't which is why I didn't, best to avoid any risk of miscarriage no matter how small if you can help it IMO."
Which maked me thing you do actually feel very respnsable for a baby you are carrying.

I find these two posts contradict each other, did I misunderstand them?

You can feel resposibility for the foetus you are carrying without thinking it should have rights.

What a lot of people forget is that a PG woman can be utterly obedient and submissive to every bit of bullying 'advice' she recieves (to the point of desperately trying to fulfill contradictory instructions) and still give birth to a baby with disabilities, or miscarry. Some pregnancies are not viable, end of, and there are many conditions which result in a greater or lesser degree of SN which are to do with genetics not behaviour.
But I don't see much support for gene-screening programmes and the exhortation for people who are carriers of haemophilia/Huntingdons/muscular dystrophy/[insert hereditary problem of your choice] to be sterilised, or even couples only being 'allowed' to get PG with donor eggs/sperm if one partner in a couple is a carrier.
THis is all about controlling women and reducing them to less-than-human status, worthless in their own right and with no purpose other than to be incubators (despite the fact that many women don't want children, some women are not fertile, and those women who do want and have children only spend a small percentage of their adult lives TTC and being PG).

I don't see any grey areas, to be honest, its an emotive subject but IMO its fairly black and white. When a foetus is attached to and inside my body, using my blood, my food, my oxygen, my everything, it is a part of me and has no rights that could possibly supercede my own. When it leaves my body, breathes on its own, consumes its own nutrients, can live without me, it is a person in its own right and has the same rights as any other person.

You can have any opinion you like about the choices I might make when pregnant, but if you try and tell me what to do........

"You can feel resposibility for the foetus you are carrying without thinking it should have rights." how? (am genuinly asking),to me the "limit" between the two is not really clear.

When I found out I was pregnant with DD1, I stopped smoking on the spot because even if my daily amount of cigarettes was not "atrocious" the thought that it might arm the baby I was carrying was far superior in importance to me than anything else so by feeling responsable for her to be healthy I sort of gave her the right to a few month in my tummy totally smoke free. Maybe it does not make sense to link "right " and "responsability" but I find it hard to dissociate the 2 myself.

""What a lot of people forget is that a PG woman can be utterly obedient and submissive to every bit of bullying 'advice' she recieves (to the point of desperately trying to fulfill contradictory instructions) and still give birth to a baby with disabilities, or miscarry. Some pregnancies are not viable, end of, and there are many conditions which result in a greater or lesser degree of SN which are to do with genetics not behaviour."

I totally agree with you, we cannot totally cut risk at all for something to go wrong in pregnancy. But I cannot help thinking that if I had given birth to a baby with problems linked to smocking in pregnancy I would feel guilty for the rest of my life but if the same problems had happened when I was not smoking I could live with it better and put it one fate rather than a consequence of something I have done but maybe it is another topic altogether.

this is my opinion and my opinion only wrt to how i feel about the two times i have been pregnant. it is not how i think others should feel about it.

i consider it my choice to become pregnant. a choice i made with my partner. in making that decision we both accepted responsibility for the well-being of the life that we chose to create. as a woman a i accept that i will be the one responsible for providing a safe and healthy existence for the first 9 months and thereafter will share the responsibilty with OH. i feel that i have a responsibilty to make balanced decisions regarding the health of my baby. it is recomended that pregnant women do not handle cat litter for example, however as OH works away i am the only person here to do it so i made the decision to do so and took extra precautions whilst pregnant to reduce the risk involved. i dont drink very often but chose not to drink at all whilst pregnant because i felt it reduced the risk to the best of my capability.

i agree that a woman should have free choice in the decisions she makes about her body, but i also believe that a baby is a joint decision between two people and that if one person has concerns then it should be discussed and not ignored as in "my body, my choice"

Booyhoo - I'm inclined to agree with you in relation to women who choose to become pregnant - but what about women who didn't choose to become pregnant (accident/rape/
whatever)? Women who are seeking abortions presumably didn't deliberately choose to become pregnant.

OK I do think it's reasonable for a couple to discuss the possible risks to a planned pregnancy and agree on how to manage them, at least up to a point - but the woman is still the one entitled to make a final decision. If, for instance, the bloke is firmly in the 'no unnecessary medication while PG' corner, that still doesn't give him the right to say that she shouldn't take medication for SPD or serious emesis or any other painful or debilitating PG related condition, it's still her body.