Log In Sign Up

spin off of medical abortions


Abortion Debate

This forum is for Abortion debate only. If you are highly sensitive about this topic, read at your own discretion.

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to boards@justmommies.com.

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Abortion Debate LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #1  
May 25th, 2009, 11:39 AM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988
not sure why my post isn't showing up under the other topic but I'm going to try and paste it here lest someone thinks I had no response.



You did say that "if he knows he will die than it is an intended consequence." Also, you argue that something can only be unintended if the outcome is uncertain. I disagree and I will try and spell it out even more simply than I already have. I will use my soldier example again because it seems to be the most basic straight forward example I can think of at the moment.
For an outcome to be intended that would mean it was the goal or objective of a certain action. In fact, if you look up the word intention, goal and objective are listed as synonyms. Therefore an action would only be deemed successful if the intended outcome occurred - or at least it would only be completely successful if all intended outcomes occurred but maybe partially successful with partial outcomes etc. Now, even if an outcome is CERTAIN you can still look at a result without that outcome to see if the action performed would be successful. In the example of the soldier - HE WILL DIE - that is certain - but the success of he action does not DEPEND on his death therefore it is not intended. He doesn't have to try and mitigate the change of his death as you argued earlier that if the danger of death is not mitigated than it is intended. In fact he likely completely covers the grenade as much as possible with his body causing the most harm to him but with the greatest chance of success at saving the other lives. But again - the success of his action does not depend on his death.
For an abortion to be successful, the fetus must die otherwise the abortion is not successful by definition. A procedure to remove the fallopian is successful if the fallopian tube is removed.
This really isn't a foreign principle - did you know that INTENT is often an element in crimes that has to proven by the prosecution - for example for someone to be charged with first degree murder the prosecution has to prove INTENT as one of the elements. So, back to the trolley - if someone threw a person on the track one could argue intent pretty easily but if the trolley was diverted onto another track hitting the one rather than 5 no prosecution would try and argue 1st degree murder arguing that the driver INTENDED to kill the one when clearly he intended to save the 5 and the one death WHILE KNOWN was still UNINTENDED - not just undesired because the element to the tort is INTENT not desire. Oh, and the supreme court has also used the principle in past decisions - not that I agree with the supreme court on everything by any means but it is a stretch to call something intellectually dishonest just because you don't agree.
If you choose not to respond I will have to assume you cannot defend your position.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
May 25th, 2009, 12:07 PM
**Badfish**'s Avatar Worth Saving
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 7,141
Using this same example, to me removing the fallopian tube instead of resolving the ectopic pregnancy with less invasive methods is as if the soldier used his hand to pick up the grenade and throw it, thus blowing off his hand when he could have just kicked it away and not harmed himself. Both have the same end results: he removed the grenade, but one has a devastating effect on his body.

If a doctor chooses to resolve an ectopic pregnancy by excising a fallopian tube rather than dissolving the embryonic tissue with a shot of Methotrexate or removing it laparoscopically if the shot didn't work, that doctor will surely be sued for malpractice. Removing the fallopian tube should be done only if it ruptures. It would be unethical for the doctor to cause that amount of harm to the woman for no reason other than allowing the embryo to remain in place.
__________________





Reply With Quote
  #3  
May 25th, 2009, 12:10 PM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess12_9 View Post
Using this same example, to me removing the fallopian tube instead of resolving the ectopic pregnancy with less invasive methods is as if the soldier used his hand to pick up the grenade and throw it, thus blowing off his hand when he could have just kicked it away and not harmed himself. Both have the same end results: he removed the grenade, but one has a devastating effect on his body.

If a doctor chooses to resolve an ectopic pregnancy by excising a fallopian tube rather than dissolving the embryonic tissue with a shot of Methotrexate or removing it laparoscopically if the shot didn't work, that doctor will surely be sued for malpractice. Removing the fallopian tube should be done only if it ruptures. It would be unethical for the doctor to cause that amount of harm to the woman for no reason other than allowing the embryo to remain in place.
Do you know how many Catholic hospitals are in this country? Those hospitals don't perform abortions. It isn't as though this is some new idea I came up with - it happens everyday all around the country.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
May 25th, 2009, 12:12 PM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988
oh, and I am admittedly horrible with computers but does anyone know why my posts aren't showing up as newly added when you look at the topic?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
May 25th, 2009, 12:40 PM
**Badfish**'s Avatar Worth Saving
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 7,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDG View Post
Do you know how many Catholic hospitals are in this country? Those hospitals don't perform abortions. It isn't as though this is some new idea I came up with - it happens everyday all around the country.
And your point? How is unnecessarily removing a fallopian tube ethical from a medical standpoint? I don't know anything about Catholic hospitals, but I assume they still must comply with informed consent laws which let the patient know there are less dangerous and invasive means for resolving an ectopic pregnancy. To be honest, until I started reading this debate board, I'd never heard the term "abortion" used in reference to ectopic pregnancies.

And you're not doing anything wrong with the posts. The site is messed up.
__________________





Reply With Quote
  #6  
May 25th, 2009, 12:44 PM
Keepin' it real!
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDG View Post
oh, and I am admittedly horrible with computers but does anyone know why my posts aren't showing up as newly added when you look at the topic?
Computer issue: It's the website. I post on forums all the time, and this is the only one that gives me issues. LOL

Other "Stuff"

You are okay. LOL I saw somewhere where someone wrote "if you don't respond, you can't defend...." Something like that. LOL

Well, I have disagreed with a lot of people about abortion. It comes to the point where everyone just thinks they are right because it justifies their "reasons" for doing what isn't the right thing or the "easy" thing.

With that, I don't believe you to be uneducated, but maybe people do not understand what you are writing. You should really put it in more simplistic writing that "others" might understand better. LOL You just write too well for your own good. LOL LOL

I , on the other hand, have decided to NOT respond to those who are full of excuses, and are uneducated. You know, the ones who write a lot, but say nothing! So if you see me post to YOU and not many others, that's what happened. I can definitely defend my position on anything, but how many times do I have to explain the same things to certain people only to not get thru to them? Really... LOL. Hun, I think that's what you could be going thru too. Everyone wishes to yell at you for your stance because they are offended by something. What that is? Hmmmm.....Secrets.
__________________
Lynn
Mom to many



1 Girl 2011 and 1 Boy 2013. Their family is COMPLETE!

Surrogacy # 3 for new family?: 2014??
Reply With Quote
  #7  
May 25th, 2009, 02:40 PM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess12_9 View Post
And your point? How is unnecessarily removing a fallopian tube ethical from a medical standpoint? I don't know anything about Catholic hospitals, but I assume they still must comply with informed consent laws which let the patient know there are less dangerous and invasive means for resolving an ectopic pregnancy. To be honest, until I started reading this debate board, I'd never heard the term "abortion" used in reference to ectopic pregnancies.

And you're not doing anything wrong with the posts. The site is messed up.
I misread what you wrote in your first post. Yes, I agree, if a doctor was not clear about the procedure that would be wrong. I'm guessing the doctors just inform the patient that if she wants an abortion she will have to go elsewhere.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
May 25th, 2009, 08:10 PM
smt smt is offline
Mega Super Daddy
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,587
The goal should be very simple... minimize harms to the best degree possible. There is no reason to remove part of a fallopian tube except to appease some nonsensical religious belief that a fertilized egg has some sort of extraordinary value. Further harming the woman does not gain us anything. It is unconscionable.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
May 25th, 2009, 09:04 PM
Keepin' it real!
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by smt View Post
The goal should be very simple... minimize harms to the best degree possible. There is no reason to remove part of a fallopian tube except to appease some nonsensical religious belief that a fertilized egg has some sort of extraordinary value. Further harming the woman does not gain us anything. It is unconscionable.
I can understand your point here, except I would think the woman has to make a decision to this effect. Hopefully, the doctor would steer her in the right direction. I don't know if abortion for death of both mom and baby should be illegal or not. I am glad I don't have to make those laws. Obviously, if a woman and her husband for example, tried for 5 years to conceive, only to get an ectopic pregnancy, this would be an awful situation. But I doubt she could get "dinged" morally or be condemned to a life of Hell by God... if she chose to either end the pregnancy with medications or remove the tube (which thereby ends the pregnancy). I think this would be more like if a woman miscarried unintentionally. I think *most* people wouldn't argue against a severe medical issue being a reason to electively abort. Otherwise, you may lose TWO lives.
__________________
Lynn
Mom to many



1 Girl 2011 and 1 Boy 2013. Their family is COMPLETE!

Surrogacy # 3 for new family?: 2014??
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:56 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0