Cultural Insensitivity Comments for Cultural Insensitivity at , comment 1 to 29 out of 20 comments Tue, 25 Oct 2011 00:33:38 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 Sort of my point, Tom Since there can never really be documented evidence of why women may abort, the numbers given saying it is because of gender selection, cultural reasons, personal or financial reasons, rape, incest, etc are ALL suspect. And because of this, creating prohibitive law based on any one of those reasons is flawed logic, since the numbers cannot be there to support it's necessity. - MoonliteSonata Wed, 10 Jun 2009 04:40:22 +0100 ... I got the 90% figure (of aborted Down's Syndrome fetuese) from an article I remember reading from October 13, 2008 which may be found at: It astounded me at the time as I too know of some couples who knew that they were having children with Down's Syndrome prior to their being born. It staggers me to think how few of these people make it to birth. Seems like being born makes them some of the luckiest people on earth. Moon: I'm not sure how much "culling" is going on presently as I don't believe that women are required to give a reason for their abortions thus there would be no documented evidence one way or the other. - tom anderson Tue, 09 Jun 2009 15:12:43 +0100 Was that really necessary? "But don't let your western views cloud your judgement. Just because you can vote, see a man without a brother along and still have an intact clitoris is no reason to consider that your rights might not be universally accepted." Sarcasm? Really? - auntypsychotic Tue, 09 Jun 2009 15:10:10 +0100 all or nothing is an unpleasant but necessary argument I understand that there are very different (and usually more restrictive) cultural interpretations regarding abortion and other women's issues. There probably always will be those who wish to, can and/or do dominate and control women. Still, those cultural differences cannot and should not be used to hinder all women's rights personal autonomy and to choose the course of their lives. To do so in order to prophylactically "protect" them or their unborn children is a cure that is worse than the disease. - auntypsychotic Tue, 09 Jun 2009 15:07:13 +0100 Thanks Odin Thanks Odin, I was thinking too fast when replying last night and either didn't notice or intended to visit the link u provided and forgot to. I forget stuff alot, sometimes within minutes. Sorry. I'm somewhat familiar with the Koop study but I can now take a current and more indepth look at it now. - auntypsychotic Tue, 09 Jun 2009 14:57:52 +0100 Hard to track down the original studies, Aunty, but . . . clicking on the link I previously provided would lead you to this article that talks a bit about methodology used, mostly pertaining to factoring in pre-existing conditions. [url][/url] The S.G. Koop study is mentioned. Also a U.K. study that followed 13,000 women. According to the article's author, Susan Cohen, the latter's authors concluded that "women who had an abortion following an unintended pregnancy were not at any higher risk of subsequent mental health problems than were women whose unintended pregnancy was carried to term." Also according to Cohen, " Koop did state that it was clear to him that the psychological effects of abortion are 'minuscule' from a public health perspective." - Odin Tue, 09 Jun 2009 14:12:14 +0100 Very culturally sensitive of you I say we let Muslims decided how to treat thier women. Who are we to say that abortion for sex selection is wrong? Of course letting Muslims decided women's rights issues is like letting Nazi debate the Torah and having the KKK handle school integration. But don't let your western views cloud your judgement. Just because you can vote, see a man without a brother along and still have an intact clitoris is no reason to consider that your rights might not be universally accepted. - Barthélemy Barbancourt Tue, 09 Jun 2009 13:53:33 +0100 Using cultural values to justify I understand your points, Barthélemy, but using long standing cultural values to justify imposing more laws upon those who do NOT share those values based simply on fear is no different than the left imposing more laws on the same basis of "Not for me, but for thee". I'm not comfortable with any men having a hand in any decision making for laws that only intimately affect women and their decisions in this country, or any "free" country, such as New Zealand. Let only women decide, and I might be more comofortable with the outcome. But then again, women as a group are no smarter than the average, so maybe not. - MoonliteSonata Tue, 09 Jun 2009 08:38:38 +0100 Oops.. saw the url after Okay.. so that is one source, and thanks. I'll check it after work tonight, if I make it that long. I'm really really tired this AM.. and woke up with a raging headache to boot. My apologies, Ben. - MoonliteSonata Tue, 09 Jun 2009 02:06:40 +0100 Supporting data Ben, until you can cite your sources, it looks like you're pulling numbers from a hat. I don't doubt that the numbers are high, but please, when you get into hard data, you really should get into the habit of giving your source. So should we all, if we start bandying numbers around here. - MoonliteSonata Tue, 09 Jun 2009 02:04:17 +0100 see... This is another thing that I have a problem with, yes the baby/fetus is growing inside the woman but is half the mothers genes and half the fathers genes. Throwing all the crap away that both sides have said so far in this discussion a vast majority of this can be pointed to one big culprit (and I'm going to get flak for this I know) and that's the Africian-American teenage boy. Yes obviously the girls do it and get knocked up because they want someone to love but in today's messed up society it is 230% more likely that a black child will be born out of wedlock than in a stable marriage (another way to put it 70% of all children are born out of wedlock in the African American community). Until that culture is changed about the women being treated as nothing but sex objects and baby machines this will be a growing trend. - Ben Mon, 08 Jun 2009 19:28:20 +0100 ... "How could you possibly know this? I talked it over with a friend who said my comments helped her decide, so apparently my opinion did matter, unless she was just trying to make me feel helpful." Unless she was relatively weak-willed or weak-minded, she had probably already made up her mind and just did the "smile and nod" routine. Maybe she just didn't want to get into the inevitable and endless discussion with its pros and cons even one more time. I discussed my second pregnancy with a male friend too. The male perspective was interesting, and led me to inform the father of both my pregnancy and my decision, but it had no bearing on my decision. "And if I'd been the one who got her pregnant, I'd like to think my opinion would matter to her when she was considering her choices." I suppose most men would like to think that but it just isn't true. It can't be. Moon is correct that pregnancy is the most isolation a woman can ever feel but that isolation is not all bad. The "magic" and sense priviledge and sheer WONDER that I felt with my first pregnancy during that isolation was worth all the rest, including the miscarriage and therapeutic abortion. "Do you really feel comfortable speaking for all women?" You seem to feel comfortable making sweeping statements about women who have had abortions and what they feel. Until you (or men in general) have felt and watched your body become deformed; have had hormonal changes play ping pong with your emotions and have dragged a 10 lb. bag of flour thru your left nostril you can never and will NEVER "understand". Also, just as only women who have chosen and undergone an abortion can understand THAT. - auntypsychotic Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:29:47 +0100 If one is to voice opinions and provide numbers, please cite the sources. "... and the most common emotion women have said they feel after an abortion is relief." Odin, Just as with the anti-abortion forces, please show me your data and it's research methodologies. I have never heard this or similar statements from women who have actually undergone abortions. Certainly, in my experiences, I did not feel much of anything. Not, I hasten to add, because I was "emotionally numb" due to my "ordeal" but because it just didn't matter that much to me. I did what was best for myself and for the almost person I was afflicted with. It was a relatively minor medical procedure, soon over and easily recovered from. There was no agonzing, no tears, no guilt and no relief. - auntypsychotic Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:55:40 +0100 Ben, Ben, Ben. Hey, toots. "Most notably my position has softened to the pro-life side not for concern of the fetus/baby (as usually is the case) but for the mother and the proven after effects abortion has." When I had a therapeutic abortion and later when I had an elective one, I did not experience any "after effects" other than a little bleeding and some slight cramps. Nothing else, either short- or long-term. And believe me, I was already well down the road to Nutville when the first occurred. So far as I know, none of the women I know who have undergone an abortion have ever had much in the way of negative repercussions. I'm sure it has happened but you are getting your information from an anti-abortion website. Their data is automatically suspect until I see the studies that it was derived from. - auntypsychotic Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:46:29 +0100 Hey Kermie "...over 100,000 abortions performed each year." Kermit, Do you have the source for that number? Jeebers! I'm gonna have a lot of reading to do. - auntypsychotic Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:39:38 +0100 I dunno but I would like to. "Also, it is widely belived that ultrasound imgaes humanize the fetus thus making it harder for people to decide to abort." Bart, Neither I nor other women I know who have had abortions EVER underwent an ultrasound. Why would we? We knew what we were going to do and the sooner the better. I suppose there must be some women who have but I don't know of any. Just as I asked tom a.; would you supply the research and source of your information? I would be interested to read it. - auntypsychotic Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:37:47 +0100 tom a.? "Sadly, using knowledge about fetuses to determine their future is already done here in America fairly regularly. I believe that over 90% of the fetuses that posses an extra chromosome (Down's Syndrome) are aborted." Could you please provide the research that supports your statement? I have known a number of people (both personally and professionally) who are the parents of Downs Syndrome children or those with other birth defects. Some of them knew that their child would be non-traditional, either physically or mentally, and none of them made the choice to terminate any of those pregnancies. Those who knew prior to birth did consider all their options but chose not to terminate. All of the parents have said and continue to say that they are GRATEFUL for those children and would not change a thing. In two cases, the parents knew the odds were against them EVER having a child that was not birth damaged and they CHOSE to have more children, all of which were indeed "differently abled". Im sure that some people, when faced with such an agonizing decision, have chosen to terminate. And while those I know do not form a statistical sampling, I don't believe the incidence of abortion due to genetic defects to be anything close to the number you state. Please send me a link to the studies from which you get your information. - auntypsychotic Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:33:35 +0100 ... Unfortunately, you seem to have gotten your facts wrong. The facts are that it's less risky to a woman's health to have an abortion in a medical facility, and the most common emotion women have said they feel after an abortion is relief. - Odin Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:06:04 +0100 One other thing, Ducé before a fetus is at least 4 months into gestation if not further along, only a trained ultrasound tech can even interpret what is being seen on the screen at all. Take my word for it, since I've had 4 kids, and about 6 ultrasounds at various stages of pregnancy. The earlier and the later ones are impossible to tell what you're looking at at all, until the tech points it out. And a patient has the option to NOT LOOK AT ALL. So your argument is moot. - MoonliteSonata Mon, 08 Jun 2009 15:21:03 +0100 spelling error "consider" rather than conider. Slippery fingers from the frosty beer in my hand, I guess. - MoonliteSonata Mon, 08 Jun 2009 15:17:12 +0100