Metsfanmax wrote:jimboston wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:Just for the record, I don't live in China and I do think that post-birth infanticide can be morally justified in at least some cases.
Please provide examples where you feel this is so.
I think that abortion can pretty easily be justified in the case of genetic disorders that would heavily impair quality of life, like Down syndrome (but also other things like severe forms of autism), etc.,
Down's syndrome is no longer debilitating. Kids can be educated, grow up to live productive, happy lives. They may not be doing nuclear science, but they can work in a variety of places and generally add to society in many ways.
Autism is generally not diagnosed until a child is, at a minimum, several months old, but more often 2-3 years old.Most highly debilitating diseases actually can be screened out prior to birth, but the tests are not mandatory and may not always be covered by insurance, IF you even have insurance. I get what you are trying to say, but I think your examples are pretty poor, and rather emblematic of the lack of information on this topic. You, at least, seem to acknowledge that lack and are just offering an opinion for debate, not really putting out a strong didactic position.
My grandmother, a nurse from the 1930's-50's, said they were taught "no monsters". There was always a bucket nearby, they were to be quick, not let the child even cry. It was considered much more merciful for the child and the family. Things like autism and the like were not even on the radar then, it was things like having extra arms or other obvious deformities, most of which were not survivable given the medicine of the day, though the unaided death would not have been so quick. I shudder at that thought now, but then, I have been brought up in the luxury of highly advanced medical science. When I had my kids, the doctor talked of much more serious possibilities, things like children developed without the lining that separates organs, other issues that don't kill a child before birth, but that, even with our advanced medicine make it very unlikely the child will survive much past birth. He also spoke of other issues that are barely survivable, but with a quality of life that most would consider something close to torture, not really life. (I am talking pain, not just lack of abilities). (some of the more serious bifidas, for example.. though not all by any means).
This is where the timing of late pregnancy abortions tend to come into play. While many things are detectable,they often are not detectable early on in pregnancies. Some things can only really bee seen in a sonogram. In other cases, medical issues develop which require some sort of intervention. In many cases the mother wants the child, may ask that everything possible be done. I cam close to facing such an issue, my son seemed to show some kidney malfunction. Further testing showed nothing was actually wrong (though I did warrant further close monitoring by the high risk doctor). I faced the possibility of an issue that would almost certainly mean death to my child before birth, or a highly debilitated life, if he survived. Again,thankfully it all resolved itself, wound up being basically an anomaly. Having gone through multiple miscarriage prior, the idea of an abortion was horrific to me, (though according to official records, one was an abortion because I had a D & C; according to nurse attitudes, every time I had to get a postpartum injection without a baby present, I had "obviously" had an abortion). However, the idea of watching my child slowly die was worse.
That last is the biggest issue in the debate. See, to way too many people on the "no abortions" side, women who chose to have abortions, most particularly later term operations, are just uncaring or very misguided individuals who are being duped. When pressed, they acknowledge that there are "a few exceptions", but that's it. The real truth is that while the "uncaring/etc" label might be applied to a fair number in the first trimester the numbers that fall into that category are highly exaggerated by the right,
particularly when talking about later stages of pregnancy.
Post birth? In some cultures it is or was considered acceptable to do away with female infants, one of a set of twins, and certainly those who showed physical deformities. In the days when we did not have advanced medicine, infanticide was the only really safe option for most societies. today, we have grown past that. Today, we try to make these decisions, when necessary, prior to birth. Admittedly, this is in large part due to the legal distinction between taking a child pre-birth, pre-viability and post those points. However, that distinction is also based on the idea (many say supported by the old Testament Bible) that a child is not truly "alive" until born. The big change today is that we know children do begin to think, feel, hear, before birth. They are "fully human" prior to their actual birth, though when that actually happens is still a point of heavy debate, and a debate not based solely on science. It is a debate science will, perhaps, never truly decide alone, because issues of "spirit" and such are not truly definable by science.. not yet and likely never. Today, aborting a child in, say, the last trimester, is roughly (though not exactly) akin to killing an infant at or near birth. It is something that should never be done lightly, is never truly welcome, but is sometimes necessary.
Except... the thing is people don't like discussing all those "what ifs" when it comes to birthing children. They don't really want to talk about all the many things that can go wrong in a pregnancy. Yet, without talking, too many still feel they are "fully informed" and have the "right" to make these decisions for others.
For me, I recognize fully that people have a wide range of ideas and values. My
issue is not with people who have differing ideas, even ones I consider abhorrent. My
issue is with people who have opinions based on utterly or mostly false information. I actually have that same issue on basically all topics. Sadly, when it comes to abortion, one of the most difficult and serious decisions most women face... far too many people have strong opinions based not on fact, not even truly on belief, but on misconceived and misunderstood ideas.
This thread is actually fairly representative. On the one had, there are a couple of people saying things like abortion is a money making industry that encourages women to have abortions for profit. On the other hand, you have someone suggesting that there is no difference between aborting a 4 month fetus and a 20 year old. The first is misinformed, the second calculated to aggravate and distort.
In amongst this are a few genuinely trying to discuss this issue.
