Planned Parenthood Plans 40 Days of Prayer (L)

[AreYouReady?]

Originally Posted by Jay

It would depend on how we defined 'threatened'. If we are discussing a case where the baby may be born fine but the mother may perish, then the life of the child is still sacrosact. However, if there is no hope, such as the child is already dead, then it is right to bring the everything to an end. However, the first is infinitely more likely to be than the second,

Jay, I like you. I just want to caution you that right now, with no wife and baby, you feel this way. Circumstances can and do change...and so does our actions. Sometimes the mother truly may perish. That does happen. But the mother does not always have to perish to bring a child to birth without the child dying. It is medically complicated to explain. Not sure I have the capacity to do that as I am not a dissertation writer.

Originally Posted by Jay

This then leaves us the gray area of the probabilities of a mother surviving to deliver the baby. It is a known fact that pregnancy is hazardous and carries risk to the lady's health. With this in mind, she has accepted the risks and must protect the child, even at the cost of her own life. People should be careful when a doctor recomends artificially ending a pregnancy by abortion. I would never recommend an abortion.

Again, this "gray area" you post of...

If it is known that a woman has a certain disease that may pose a great risk of dying to her and/or the baby if she ever gets pregnant, I would think that she should know all her risks beforehand. Some women have been told by their physician about the possibility of not being able to withstand a full-term pregnancy, with the possibility of dying...these women know the risks and many have taken steps to ensure they never become pregnant. They instead become mothers by adopting.

The issue we have recently been discussing is that at times, healthy, pregnant women rapidly develop life-threatening illnesses such as eclampia/toxemia, DIC, placenta abruption etc during their pregnancy. Nobody knows why this illness develops. It is a complication of pregnancy that sometimes happens. The body reacts and some women retain water and develop blood pressure so high to be "stroke level"..and some women do have strokes.

Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is a pathologic disruption of the finely-balanced process of hemostasis (blood clotting). Massive activation of the clotting cascade results in widespread thrombosis (also blood clotting), which leads to depletion of platelets and coagulation factors and excessive thrombolysis (dissolution of a blood clot). The end result is multiorgan failure and hemorrhage (profuse bleeding).

DIC was first described in 1901 as a state of "temporary hemophilia" in two pregnant women; one had a retained fetal demise and the other had a placental abruption [1]. Peripartum hemorrhage is estimated to account for 1 to 5 percent of all cases of DIC in high-resource countries; the frequency is higher in low-resource countries [2].

Any patient in DIC presents a major management challenge, and this challenge is further complicated when a viable fetus is also present. For example, delaying delivery [not abortion] to transfuse the mother in DIC may not be in the best interest of a fetus with a nonreassuring fetal heart rate tracing, whereas performing an emergency cesarean delivery [not abortion] on a mother in DIC may not be in her best interest. Even in the setting of fetal demise, labor and delivery of a woman in DIC carries the potential for catastrophic hemorrhage.

Note: comment in brackets is mine.

www.uptodate.com/ contents/ disseminated-intravascular-coagulation-during-pregnancy

That introduction to DIC is a very short explanation of what it is.

There are other pregnancy complications but I can't put them all on here.

In many these cases when treatment does not help, the baby must be taken in order to save the life of the mother. Where it gets complicated is that frog wants to call this medical procedure "an abortion" because it does terminate the pregnancy. But giving birth also terminates a pregnancy if you want to split hairs. The medical community considers the medical procedure to take the baby as a "premature delivery". Many times the medical procedure to take the baby will result in saving the life of both the baby and the mother. Sometimes the baby does not make it...but in cases of full-blown DIC, placenta abruption, eclampsia, if they do not take the baby, the mother will die and the baby will die anyway. If the mother does not live because of physiological/hemodynamic changes in the body, the baby will not live. Simple as that.

Titus2woman, please feel free to correct me if I am not totally correct in the above. You have a lot of experience in this and I know new treatments have come into the medical practice that I am not aware of.

Frog says all abortions are willful. In the frame he/she puts this in, he/she may be correct. But I do not consider the above scenario to be a willful abortion. I consider it to be a medical procedure of delivery in the attempt to save the lives of both the mother and the baby.

So...I just want for you to be open to the difference between willful abortion because somebody does not want the baby, or the abortion doctor just wants to defend his money-making position by scaring the woman into thinking she cannot bring a baby to full term.

And the difference in the medical procedure delivery to save the life of a baby because of a medical emergency that cannot be turned around through medical treatment.

It is very important for couples contemplating marriage and children to educate themselves in medical care for a possible pregnancy as much as they can. Every woman should have a pre-marital gynecological check up.

Side note to Jay: I attended TCM for morning service today. They have moved their church to the other side of town.

[Jay]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Becoming pregnant does not mean a woman has accepted that she will carry that child to term NO MATTER WHAT.

Accepting the risks can be as simple of a process as I know some women get really sick during pregnancy. I hope that doesn't happen to me but if it does then I am going to do everything in my power to make sure I stay alive. That's an acceptance of risk that doesn't involve a woman having to protect the unborn NO MATTER WHAT.

As painful and cold as it might sound, I believe that when a woman becomes pregnant, she is required to see that the child comes first, even if that means placing her life at risk.

Originally Posted by AreYouReady?

Jay, I like you. I just want to caution you that right now, with no wife and baby, you feel this way. Circumstances can and do change...and so does our actions. Sometimes the mother truly may perish. That does happen. But the mother does not always have to perish to bring a child to birth without the child dying. It is medically complicated to explain. Not sure I have the capacity to do that as I am not a dissertation writer.



Again, this "gray area" you post of...

If it is known that a woman has a certain disease that may pose a great risk of dying to her and/or the baby if she ever gets pregnant, I would think that she should know all her risks beforehand. Some women have been told by their physician about the possibility of not being able to withstand a full-term pregnancy, with the possibility of dying...these women know the risks and many have taken steps to ensure they never become pregnant. They instead become mothers by adopting.

The issue we have recently been discussing is that at times, healthy, pregnant women rapidly develop life-threatening illnesses such as eclampia/toxemia, DIC, placenta abruption etc during their pregnancy. Nobody knows why this illness develops. It is a complication of pregnancy that sometimes happens. The body reacts and some women retain water and develop blood pressure so high to be "stroke level"..and some women do have strokes.

Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is a pathologic disruption of the finely-balanced process of hemostasis (blood clotting). Massive activation of the clotting cascade results in widespread thrombosis (also blood clotting), which leads to depletion of platelets and coagulation factors and excessive thrombolysis (dissolution of a blood clot). The end result is multiorgan failure and hemorrhage (profuse bleeding).

DIC was first described in 1901 as a state of "temporary hemophilia" in two pregnant women; one had a retained fetal demise and the other had a placental abruption [1]. Peripartum hemorrhage is estimated to account for 1 to 5 percent of all cases of DIC in high-resource countries; the frequency is higher in low-resource countries [2].

Any patient in DIC presents a major management challenge, and this challenge is further complicated when a viable fetus is also present. For example, delaying delivery [not abortion] to transfuse the mother in DIC may not be in the best interest of a fetus with a nonreassuring fetal heart rate tracing, whereas performing an emergency cesarean delivery [not abortion] on a mother in DIC may not be in her best interest. Even in the setting of fetal demise, labor and delivery of a woman in DIC carries the potential for catastrophic hemorrhage.

Note: comment in brackets is mine.

www.uptodate.com/ contents/ disseminated-intravascular-coagulation-during-pregnancy

That introduction to DIC is a very short explanation of what it is.

There are other pregnancy complications but I can't put them all on here.

In many these cases when treatment does not help, the baby must be taken in order to save the life of the mother. Where it gets complicated is that frog wants to call this medical procedure "an abortion" because it does terminate the pregnancy. But giving birth also terminates a pregnancy if you want to split hairs. The medical community considers the medical procedure to take the baby as a "premature delivery". Many times the medical procedure to take the baby will result in saving the life of both the baby and the mother. Sometimes the baby does not make it...but in cases of full-blown DIC, placenta abruption, eclampsia, if they do not take the baby, the mother will die and the baby will die anyway. If the mother does not live because of physiological/hemodynamic changes in the body, the baby will not live. Simple as that.

Titus2woman, please feel free to correct me if I am not totally correct in the above. You have a lot of experience in this and I know new treatments have come into the medical practice that I am not aware of.

Frog says all abortions are willful. In the frame he/she puts this in, he/she may be correct. But I do not consider the above scenario to be a willful abortion. I consider it to be a medical procedure of delivery in the attempt to save the lives of both the mother and the baby.

So...I just want for you to be open to the difference between willful abortion because somebody does not want the baby, or the abortion doctor just wants to defend his money-making position by scaring the woman into thinking she cannot bring a baby to full term.

And the difference in the medical procedure delivery to save the life of a baby because of a medical emergency that cannot be turned around through medical treatment.

It is very important for couples contemplating marriage and children to educate themselves in medical care for a possible pregnancy as much as they can. Every woman should have a pre-marital gynecological check up.

Side note to Jay: I attended TCM for morning service today. They have moved their church to the other side of town.

I never said that the baby had to come to term, but that the life should not be ended by artificial means. That is what we means when we say abortion. The ending of a pregnancy early to save mother and child is not an abortion.

My morality does not change just because my circumstances will change. As long as God has not changed, I will not change my stance on legalized abortions.

I hope that you had a good time there at TCM's morning service. Any further details would be nice. Thanks for the update.

[AreYouReady?]

Originally Posted by Jay

I never said that the baby had to come to term, but that the life should not be ended by artificial means. That is what we means when we say abortion. The ending of a pregnancy early to save mother and child is not an abortion.

You made my point for me. Thanks.

Originally Posted by Jay

My morality does not change just because my circumstances will change. As long as God has not changed, I will not change my stance on legalized abortions.

I never meant for you to think that your morality will change. I don't believe in abortion any more than you do. However, since you clarified your thoughts that ending a pregnancy early to save mother and child is not an abortion, then I don't expect you will have any problems doing the right thing should something like this come up in your life. Peace to you.

[Michlow]

Originally Posted by Jay

As painful and cold as it might sound, I believe that when a woman becomes pregnant, she is required to see that the child comes first, even if that means placing her life at risk.

Out of curiosity, what if the "Mother" is your 13 year old daughter who was violently raped? Should she be given a death sentence as well as the horror that has already been visited on her?

What if the Mother is a widow, with 5 other young children?

Rarely are these things black and white. The Majority of women I know (and for the record, I am a big heathen, and so I am not speaking of christian women). Most of them WOULD sacrifice their lives for the life of their unborn child. But sometimes one must make a horrible painful choice for the greater good.

Just my thoughts....

[jfrog]

If human life starts at conception why is it not customary to have funerals and memorial services for miscarriages?

Also, if human life really begins at conception then why aren't names given before birth?

Also, why is it that not one society has ever counted abortion to be equal with murder?

Could it be that deep down people feel the unborn is something different than the born?

In my opinion if you want to eliminate abortion then you are going to have to make people really believe that there is no difference between the unborn and the born. You are going to have to start giving names as soon as pregnancy is confirmed. You are going to have to start holding burial services for unborns. So here's the problem, Christians want everyone to act like unborns are people when it comes to abortion but they haven't been acting like unborns are people in any way for 2000 years and have only actually been equating abortion to murder for maybe the last 100 years.

[jfrog]

Here's a more theological slant on the question of abortion:

Since unborn's are not given names then how can their names be written in the Lamb's book of life and if their names are not written in that book then how can they go to heaven?

[Aquila]

I believe abortion is a grevious sin. However, is the GOVERNEMNT really capable of properly policing and regulating it? I mean... if my wife were on the table facing a situation that might call for terminating the pregnancy we'd have to have a group of doctors agree that it's the safest option and then it would have to be approved by a public official or judge (God forbid it's an election year) who might sacrifice my wife on the altar of political points.

I HATE abortion. But... I'm not sure that I believe GOVERNMENT has the answer. I believe we need to address the issues that pregnant women face like poverty, health care, daycare, education, and abuse. I believe that ddressing these issues would have a deeper impact on abortion rates than merely banning the procedure. Let's face it, over 30 years since Roe and guess what.... we're nowhere. Let's address those issues that women with unplanned pregnancies face at attack abortion at the root... by relieving their fears and coming along side to help them. The Democrats for Life of America proposed the 95/10 initiative that was intended to target many of these issues. Their hope was to reduce the abortion rate in the United States through Federal and State level initiatives that targetted the concerns of women considering abortion. The initiative included the following proposals:

-establish a toll-free number to direct women to places that will provide support;
- collect accurate data on why women choose abortion;
- provide Pregnancy Counseling and Childcare on University Campuses;
-provide accurate information to patients receiving a positive result from prenatal testing;
-provide counseling in maternity group homes;
-increase the adoption tax credit and it permanent
-eliminate pregnancy as a pre-existing condition with respect to health care;
- provide grants for ultrasound equipment;
- support informed consent for Abortion Services;
- increase awareness about violence against pregnant women;
-require the SCHIP to cover pregnant women and unborn children;
- provide free home visits by registered nurses for new mothers

The initiative was largely opposed by the Republicans who felt that policies aimed specifically at reducing the abortion rate and saving the unborn were too expensive. They'd rather see us picketting for another 30 years before addressing the actual social issues that leave so many women with unplanned pregnancies terrified and considering abortion.

But then again... that's government.

[Titus2woman]

Originally Posted by jfrog

If human life starts at conception why is it not customary to have funerals and memorial services for miscarriages?

They sometimes are and many times there is no funeral for adults. Funerals are a social custom (and a huge business) driven by the need to say goodbye to a loved one. Since no one but the mother has met the child inside her she usually chooses to grieve privately or alone with her husband.

Originally Posted by jfrog

Also, if human life really begins at conception then why aren't names given before birth?

Where have you been froggy? Invitations to baby showers now come with baby names! However, since we culturally choose names to reflect gender most couples keep two choices and only choose once gender is known at about 16 weeks. Many more however choose gender neutral names and give them as soon as they know they are pregnant sometimes changing spelling for boy/girl.

Originally Posted by jfrog

Also, why is it that not one society has ever counted abortion to be equal with murder?

Simply not true.

Originally Posted by jfrog

Could it be that deep down people feel the unborn is something different than the born?

I think people outside the immediate family feel less attached to the unborn because they have not seen them. Some people have a hard time with God for the same reason.

Originally Posted by jfrog

In my opinion if you want to eliminate abortion then you are going to have to make people really believe that there is no difference between the unborn and the born. You are going to have to start giving names as soon as pregnancy is confirmed. You are going to have to start holding burial services for unborns. So here's the problem, Christians want everyone to act like unborns are people when it comes to abortion but they haven't been acting like unborns are people in any way for 2000 years and have only actually been equating abortion to murder for maybe the last 100 years.

Legal abortion has made an 'in your face' proposition of what was once a private matter between a woman and her doctor. Political candidates are elected or not based on their stance for or against it. Before abortion was legal procedures were done that were technically the same thing, however they were done for medical reasons. There were (and still are) also abortion practitioners who were unlicensed and served prostitutes and other women in cities. So there have always been ways that some women could get an abortion... It is still much the same today. Our million plus elective TOPs are still going to women in urban areas while those who live rurally often do not have a provider of abortion services for hundreds of miles. Because of the stigma of 'legal' abortions most regular gyns will not terminate a pregnancy even for medical reasons but refer to an abortion provider unless there is a fetal demise. The whole thing has become quite a mess that may never be resolved until Jesus comes back.

Unfortunately it is a mess in a way that does not well serve women on either end. The scales of balance have tipped far right and left on this issue... it would be nice to see them level off awhile. Try just a minute to see other points here and be open to them. Of course the ' a woman should be willing to die to give life ' stance always makes me want to tip the scale the other way by just denying a fetus is human. But now I've come to a place where I feel I can be more honest with myself and say; 'yes a fetus is human and there are circumstances when a mothers life/health/sanity trump that fetuses right to live.' That allows me to see many abortions as wrong and a few as right without denial or a mental snow storm.

Not necessarily trying to change your mind frog, it seems pretty made up... but just saying there may be other information you want to consider before you try to change someone else;

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by jfrog

If human life starts at conception why is it not customary to have funerals and memorial services for miscarriages?

Also, if human life really begins at conception then why aren't names given before birth?

Also, why is it that not one society has ever counted abortion to be equal with murder?

Could it be that deep down people feel the unborn is something different than the born?

In my opinion if you want to eliminate abortion then you are going to have to make people really believe that there is no difference between the unborn and the born. You are going to have to start giving names as soon as pregnancy is confirmed. You are going to have to start holding burial services for unborns. So here's the problem, Christians want everyone to act like unborns are people when it comes to abortion but they haven't been acting like unborns are people in any way for 2000 years and have only actually been equating abortion to murder for maybe the last 100 years.

Heard of it many times, and have a couple friends who did name the child and have a service for the child after miscarriage.

Our society DOES equate abortion with murder - with one small caveat... it has to be a "wanted" child.

There is a difference in that the unborn child has built fewer relationships at that point in there life. This is true for the born as well. As a baby grows so does his circle of friends and influence.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Titus2woman

They sometimes are and many times there is no funeral for adults. Funerals are a social custom (and a huge business) driven by the need to say goodbye to a loved one. Since no one but the mother has met the child inside her she usually chooses to grieve privately or alone with her husband.

Where have you been froggy? Invitations to baby showers now come with baby names! However, since we culturally choose names to reflect gender most couples keep two choices and only choose once gender is known at about 16 weeks. Many more however choose gender neutral names and give them as soon as they know they are pregnant sometimes changing spelling for boy/girl.

Simply not true.

I think people outside the immediate family feel less attached to the unborn because they have not seen them. Some people have a hard time with God for the same reason.



Legal abortion has made an 'in your face' proposition of what was once a private matter between a woman and her doctor. Political candidates are elected or not based on their stance for or against it. Before abortion was legal procedures were done that were technically the same thing, however they were done for medical reasons. There were (and still are) also abortion practitioners who were unlicensed and served prostitutes and other women in cities. So there have always been ways that some women could get an abortion... It is still much the same today. Our million plus elective TOPs are still going to women in urban areas while those who live rurally often do not have a provider of abortion services for hundreds of miles. Because of the stigma of 'legal' abortions most regular gyns will not terminate a pregnancy even for medical reasons but refer to an abortion provider unless there is a fetal demise. The whole thing has become quite a mess that may never be resolved until Jesus comes back.

Unfortunately it is a mess in a way that does not well serve women on either end. The scales of balance have tipped far right and left on this issue... it would be nice to see them level off awhile. Try just a minute to see other points here and be open to them. Of course the ' a woman should be willing to die to give life ' stance always makes me want to tip the scale the other way by just denying a fetus is human. But now I've come to a place where I feel I can be more honest with myself and say; 'yes a fetus is human and there are circumstances when a mothers life/health/sanity trump that fetuses right to live.' That allows me to see many abortions as wrong and a few as right without denial or a mental snow storm.

Not necessarily trying to change your mind frog, it seems pretty made up... but just saying there may be other information you want to consider before you try to change someone else;

Interesting points.

Having served in the military as a medic and having had to decide when to let my mother go after medical staff felt little more could be done unless she stablized... I've come to realize that people make life and death decisions every day. Some are very painful and frankly... the government has no right to meddle in such matters. I fear the governemnt more than I fear freedom of choice. Because at least the choice of abortion is in the hands of each and every individual woman. Change hearts and minds... we save lives. Address issues women face... we save lives. However... using the police power of government to decide when your wife is justified to have an abortion is a bit disturbing to me. Because if it's an election year... they might just let her suffer and die on the table before granting her permission to terminate the pregnancy. Just bothers me. Should me and a spouse face a situation wherein terminating the pregnancy was strongly advised as a course of action... it would be a very dark and painful day. And the choice of what to do next would be handled with much prayer and mutual support. And ultimately that choice should rest in our hands... not the governments.

Abortion will never go away. And banning abortion will never resolve the issues that women face that help drive them to the decision to abort. And... after 30 years of protests and political football.. it's evident politics will not change the issue. We need to geet down to social policy. Get down on our hands and knees... get dirty... spend money... and help women.