do gooders! or good doers?

  • Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!

    Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.

Spirit said:
The difference is a 7 week old baby can think, feel and understand, where as a feotus (below a certain age) can do none of those things.
Click to expand...

Yea the magic words....below a certain age. Exceeded in this instance I believe.

Wake up Spirit. Normally you talk sense. And so does Opti (I can't believe I said that). Are either of you fathers? Do either of you have disabled relatives or friends?

Or is this just a matter of eugencs?

Would be interesting to get the view of the parent of a seriously disabled child. My daughter used to get chronic eczema as an infant. If I'd known, should she have been aborted?
 
{24}Useless said:
All I'm saying is it should be up to the parents and especially the mother. You might not agree with abortion and I don't go to one side or the other. And if everything is free will then why do religions even exist? Or maybe I dunno what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

FS why is the mother so important? Some mothers kill their babies. Others just treat them like shit for ever. The most important opinion is the only one it isn't possible to get. The one of the unborn child whether it chooses to live or die. It's right that this should be decided by committee. Not by doctors alone, or even parents alone. Or MP's or UTA forum dwellers.
 
Spirit said:
Before it develops a conciousness a foetus is purely just an extention of the mothers body, it cannot survive as an entity in any way by itself and essentially is no different to a piece of steak. It's a bunch of human cells grouped together for a specific purpose that will develop into a person in a couple of months time.
Click to expand...

Jesus, what the fuck is this? An extension of the mother? With a unique genetic identity? A different blood group? I think not.

Cannot survive as an entity? Sure it can after 24 weeks (so says the law and the medical profession).

No different to a piece of steak? Last time I eat in a Berni Inn.
 
Spirit said:
I notice no-one has answered my question about the morning after pill yet, I'm still interested to hear your views on that. Is it murder too, killing a foetus that is just one day old and essentially just a sperm and egg joined together?
Click to expand...

Nope. no problem. No central nervous system. No placental development. No concsiousness. It's just an argument taken to an extreme. The grey area is more important.
 
Penny said:
For those of you who don't know, I'm a mum to a lil boy who has some special needs/health problems. I didn't know he was going to be born this way when I was pregnant, in fact I didn't know anything was wrong at all til he was about 1. I have sometimes wondered, if I had known his life was going to be this way, would it have made any difference in my choice to keep him. The answer is no. He is here, I love him to bits and I couldn't imagine my life without him.
Click to expand...

Dunno what the special needs/health probs are and it's none of my business. The question to ask I guess is "Would your child have chosen to live or to be aborted with full knowledge of his future condition".

We live in a world where looks, image and personal feel-good are king. It's not a world where a good many people have an option to join. I once knew a little boy with spina bifida. He died when he was five but his life was rich and full of fun. Why deny him that?
 
Twonko said:
Yea the magic words....below a certain age. Exceeded in this instance I believe.
Click to expand...

The discussion had evolved from the circumstances of the initial example to a general discussion of abortion. Yes it was exceeded in the original example, and therefore in this case I agree that a life was ended, however there were specific reasons and imo (without knowing the exact medical situation and therefore taking the word of the doctors involved) it was a justified decision. It was done in this case because the medical profession believed that the child would have very serious problems and a very traumatic life, which left the parents with a very hard decision whether to continue with the pregnancy or not. .

As someone else said what is the lesser evil? Terminating a life that isn't even aware that it exists or bringing a child into the world that is going to suffer physical and mental trauma every day of it's life? That's the decision the parents had to make, and I am quite happy they were given that choice and chose what they believed would be the kinder option for the foetus.

Incidently, I don't believe any of us are in a position to discuss the exact medical reasons behind this case as without a full medical report in front of us we cannot judge whether the medical proffession made the right call in this particular situation. I am just basing my argument on the fact I believe people have the right to make the decision this couple did when placed in the situation they were.

No I am not a father myself and therefore I wouldn't be in a position to know what choice I would make myself, however as I said I believe in this situation the parents had the right to chose. Yes I had / have many disabled friends and relatives, although (thankfully) none in such a bad way that they cannot gain any pleasure from life itself.
 
Twonko said:
My daughter used to get chronic eczema as an infant. If I'd known, should she have been aborted?
Click to expand...

Do you think so? No, me either and I certainly dont think you would of been given the option if it had been known.

The decision that was given to this couple was one that should only be available in very, very serious circumstances. My assumed definition of this would be when it is deemed likely the child would be in such a position that they could not derive any enjoyment or pleasure from life at all, and never would be able to.

If the doctors thought that was likely in the above case then I have no qualms with the parents being given the informed decision to make. As I said, without seeing a medical report I couldn't say if the doctors were correct in making this assumption, however that is my pov in the described circumstances.
 
Twonko said:
Jesus, what the fuck is this? An extension of the mother? With a unique genetic identity? A different blood group? I think not.

Cannot survive as an entity? Sure it can after 24 weeks (so says the law and the medical profession).

No different to a piece of steak? Last time I eat in a Berni Inn.
Click to expand...

So it is compiled of different cells to the host? That doesn't mean it is a living entity. It has no capability to feel, think, move, do anything other than process chemicals fed to it by the mother. As far as I cam concerned that does not constitute a living creature.
 
Twonko said:
Nope. no problem. No central nervous system. No placental development. No concsiousness. It's just an argument taken to an extreme. The grey area is more important.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and until that central nervous system is developed to an extent where is can function in any way, abortion is not murder as far as I am concerned. This can be tested by numerous methods including the some of those used to determine whether an adult human is alive or dead (EEG tests etc).

Yes there may well be a grey area and if so, to avoid all doubt, the legal age limit for abortion should exist at the start of the grey area and not anywhere in the middle, however that line still exists.
 
Last edited:
Twonko said:
The most important opinion is the only one it isn't possible to get. The one of the unborn child whether it chooses to live or die. It's right that this should be decided by committee. Not by doctors alone, or even parents alone. Or MP's or UTA forum dwellers.
Click to expand...

Have to disagree with that bit, especially the bit about "parents alone". At the end of the day, the choice should be for the parents alone. Not for the medical, legal, or political or other professions to make for them. Those professions can and should offer advice, but at the end of the day, the choice of what to do or not to do is one for the parents.

But for them, there would be no "will one day become another human being" growing inside the mother. The choice should rest with the parents, and in particular the mother. Anything else is trying to force someone into acting in a particular way with their body, or doing something to it which is against their wishes.

I can't speak for all countries, but in the UK, we call that kind of thing torture, assault, violence against the person and so on. It happens to breach many human rights in various constitutions drawn up in most "western democracies".

Interesting to see how some avowed socialists/democrats/blablabla seem to be quite comfortable with dictating to others what to do with their bodies. Glad none of you lot are in positions of political power...
 
Twonko said:
Would be interesting to get the view of the parent of a seriously disabled child. My daughter used to get chronic eczema as an infant. If I'd known, should she have been aborted?
Click to expand...

I posted! :thumb:
 
Twonko said:
Dunno what the special needs/health probs are and it's none of my business. The question to ask I guess is "Would your child have chosen to live or to be aborted with full knowledge of his future condition".
Click to expand...

Kieran has an "undiagnosed genetic disorder". He's pretty unique with a set of health problems that seem to be his own. He has sensory immaturity, struggles with the world in general, he doesn't walk or talk, he had heart surgery last year to correct a problem with that, and will need more in the future. New things crop up all the time, and some things seem to be sorting themselves out. He will probably be dependent on me as a carer all through his life, although I can't say that with 100% certainty, as doctor's still don't have a proper diagnosis for him. Just symptoms to treat.

As for answering the question, I really don't know the answer to that. For all his problems, Kieran is a happy, funloving and caring little boy. I think he enjoys life, though there are time when he's in a lot of pain and he has endured a fair bit of suffering for someone so young. Tbh, I haven't thought about it in this way before. As humans, I just think that once we are here it's our instinct to survive and to live life as best we can. Kieran, imo, still has no concept of life, what it is, and if he wants it. He's just "here".

Like I said in my other post, if I was to fall pregnant again and found that the next child was to be the same way, it would be a terribly difficult decision to make and I don't think I would know the answer til the time came. Kieran is rewarding, and I love him to bits, but he's VERY hard work. I've been incredibly lucky in that I have a supportive family and a bf who is great with him, so I manage to live a bit of life myself still. Another disabled child would be twice the work. Would I cope? Would my family cope? It would affect many people close to me.

Abortion is a personal thing, and you're right Twonko, we don't know the ins and outs of this case, but I feel it should be up to the parents. Whether they are making the right or wrong decision, in the eyes of the law, I feel that's the best way to go.

Edit: Just wanted to add... The decision for/against abortion of a child that was confirmed seriously disabled is so difficult in itself, that the threat of judges/outsiders making the decision for me would be a total nightmare.
 
Last edited:
Thuringwethil said:
Have to disagree with that bit, especially the bit about "parents alone". At the end of the day, the choice should be for the parents alone. Not for the medical, legal, or political or other professions to make for them. Those professions can and should offer advice, but at the end of the day, the choice of what to do or not to do is one for the parents.

But for them, there would be no "will one day become another human being" growing inside the mother. The choice should rest with the parents, and in particular the mother. Anything else is trying to force someone into acting in a particular way with their body, or doing something to it which is against their wishes.

I can't speak for all countries, but in the UK, we call that kind of thing torture, assault, violence against the person and so on. It happens to breach many human rights in various constitutions drawn up in most "western democracies".
Click to expand...



I have to agree with everything Thur said.
I would also go as far as to say, what are any men doing deciding what women can do with their bodies anyway? Surely it's about choice? The idea of a commitee deciding what anyone is allowed to do to themselves is surely an abhorrent idea.
 
Last edited:
Thuringwethil said:
Interesting to see how some avowed socialists/democrats/blablabla seem to be quite comfortable with dictating to others what to do with their bodies. Glad none of you lot are in positions of political power...
Click to expand...

And how exactly do you know I'm not? (or anyone else for that matter). Supposition as usual from the forum terrorist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back