Compilation Post (Do Not Reply!)
Displaying all 14 posts.
Post #1
1 reply
Jen wroteon March 23, 2007 at 10:51am
With this massive swelling of posters, I'm seeing more and more WRONG statistics thrown out as casual fact, not just from Pro-Lifers, but from Pro-Choicers as well.
Example:
Myth: Abortions for health/fatality, rape, or incest take up a large percentage of abortions.
Fact: A very small percentage of abortions take place for this reason, and rape is the smallest, at or nearing 1%. According to the Guttmacher Institute, On average, women give four reasons for choosing abortion. Three-fourths of women cite concern for or responsibility to other individuals; three-fourths say they cannot afford a child; three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.
So lets start with Guttmacher: Here you will find unbiased statistics for all things abortion, from who gets one, to where, why, and how, and how many. Its all research done and reviewed in a double-blind peer review system which amounts to people who don't know each other but share in scientific knowledge, making sure that nothing is skewed in their evidence to one side or the other. You can find a starting point at this site:
http://www.guttmacher.org/
My favorite citation there is that 88% of all abortions take place within the first trimester, and about 50% take place before 5 weeks, which means that so called "partial birth abortions" account for much less than 12%
Now, as for all the other misconceptions I've seen time and time again, I'm going to recompile things I"ve seen or things I've posted that debunk other myths in the following order:
Pregnancy (Why its not easy at all for the woman to go through)
Fetal Development (fetus 8 inches long in 1 month = alien creature, not human)
Cancer (Abortion doesn't cause it and neither does the Pill)
Rape Statistics for Abortion
What its Really Like in an Abortion Clinic
The Abortion Procedure (Its not all skull crushing, not even close, so you can stop there)
So, scroll down to the appropriate post and learn learn learn! We're getting nowhere by arguing things that aren't true.
Example:
Myth: Abortions for health/fatality, rape, or incest take up a large percentage of abortions.
Fact: A very small percentage of abortions take place for this reason, and rape is the smallest, at or nearing 1%. According to the Guttmacher Institute, On average, women give four reasons for choosing abortion. Three-fourths of women cite concern for or responsibility to other individuals; three-fourths say they cannot afford a child; three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.
So lets start with Guttmacher: Here you will find unbiased statistics for all things abortion, from who gets one, to where, why, and how, and how many. Its all research done and reviewed in a double-blind peer review system which amounts to people who don't know each other but share in scientific knowledge, making sure that nothing is skewed in their evidence to one side or the other. You can find a starting point at this site:
http://www.guttmacher.org/
My favorite citation there is that 88% of all abortions take place within the first trimester, and about 50% take place before 5 weeks, which means that so called "partial birth abortions" account for much less than 12%
Now, as for all the other misconceptions I've seen time and time again, I'm going to recompile things I"ve seen or things I've posted that debunk other myths in the following order:
Pregnancy (Why its not easy at all for the woman to go through)
Fetal Development (fetus 8 inches long in 1 month = alien creature, not human)
Cancer (Abortion doesn't cause it and neither does the Pill)
Rape Statistics for Abortion
What its Really Like in an Abortion Clinic
The Abortion Procedure (Its not all skull crushing, not even close, so you can stop there)
So, scroll down to the appropriate post and learn learn learn! We're getting nowhere by arguing things that aren't true.
Post #2
1 reply
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 10:52am
Pregnancy (Why its not easy at all for the woman to go through)
Thanks to Christine and Suzanne for help on assembling these facts, the rest can be cited from my almighty bible: "Human Sexuality" by Simon Levay
A woman cannot exercise to the point that it significantly raises her body temperature, especially during the first trimester or when she has a fever. That's because high maternal temperatures may increase the likelihood of fetal abnormalities.
Producing a baby is an expensive proposition, metabolically speaking: it takes about 75,000 kilocalories (kcal: the "Calories of common dietary usage), which averages out at about 250-300 kcal per day above what the mother needs to support herself. Most of that energy (65,000 kcal) goes toward fetal development; the remainder goes toward fat accumulation by the mother. At term (just before childbirth), a woman typically weighs 9-15 kilograms (20-35 punds) abouve her pre-pregnancy weight; this includes the weight of the fetus, placenta, and amniotic fluid, as well as her own increased fat deposits, enlarged breasts, and increased volume of blood and tissue fluids. Underweigh women risk producing an underweight child, who is more likely to suffer a variety of medical problems. Being either underweight or overweight is associated with an increased likelihood of premature birth, which also may have adverse consequences for the child. Women who are overweight face an increased risk of certain serious disorders during pregnancy, including diabetes and hypertension.
A pregnant woman needs to consume adequate amounts of other nutrients especially protein, calcium, iron, vitamin A, and folic acid. The fetus is adept at TAKING these nutrients FROM ITS MOTHER and does not usually suffer any deficiency but the mother may do so. Iron deficiency for example, may cause the mother to become ANEMIC. Severe folate deficiency during the first few weeks of pregnancy increases the likelihood that the fetus will have MALFORMATIONS of the nervous system and spinal column, such as spina bifida (when the baby is born with spine exposed). But megadoses of vitamins can cause birth defects or mental retardation.
Many, many women suffer from some level of "morning sickness." Which doesn't always happen in the morning, btw. Many women are incapacitated by this sickness; some to the point where they are unable to eat/drink and must be hospitalized. I had a great deal of trouble eating/drinking enough to support myself and my fetus: in fact, I lost a few pounds during my second trimester. That's not good.
Many women have or develop high blood pressure during pregnancy. This is due to the heart having to work extra hard to support the new life growing within you. Most doctors (like mine) are unwilling to medicate you for this condition, because they have no idea what the meds will do to the developing fetus. So you are forced to remain on bed rest for an indeterminate amount of time - this actually stressed me out even more, but that's another story.
Some women have blood-related issues that would normally prevent them from keeping a pregnancy. Some of them must have medications or injections every day in order to keep their pregnancy and have their child.
In short, many women are actually incapacitated to the point where they are unable to eat, unable to drive, unable to work, unable to do housework, etc. When a woman has no health insurance or family to assist her, exactly how is she supposed to survive this?
There are diseases, like Pre-Eclampsia,when your organs start to fail because they can't handle the burden of supporting woman and fetus. It leads to full-blown eclampsia, which results in seizures, coma, and death. Lesser things like adema are pretty common as well, where your legs and feet swell up with the water stored in your body for 9 months because it fails to drain back out of you.
And then there's birth. Humans have evolved so far that birth has become increasingly dificult and HARMFUL to the female body. Just a few things off the top of my head, in natural birth, the woman's soft tissue rips apart (or doctors cut it apart with a scalpel) because a woman cannot naturally accomodate a baby without the skin ripping apart. It then gets stitched back together and the woman has to sit on an inflateable donut for weeks. C-sections on the other hand, are more and more common now, and in some cases, forced upon the mother (there have been cases where pregnant women have gone to court to battle the doctor imposing a forced C-section "for her betterment" when they didn't want to have one). One of the reasons American physicians prefer C-section is that they are poorly trained in proper use of instruments like forceps and vacuum devices to facillitate difficult vaginal deliveries, according to my book. A lot of times, the stomach is sewn up sloppily and the abdoment muscles don't always knit together as they were so women are lefts with a permanent sagging pouch of muscle. My teacher had one, and while its not the end of the world, she was incredibley self conscious about it. Also according to my book, there is an increased risk of one serious complication: RUPTURE OF THE UTERUS, in women who attempt vaginal delivery after a prior C-section.
After pregnancy, many women have to urinate frequently and they lose the ability to hold it in, due to the pressure put on the female's system during pregnancy, by the fetus. My mom is one of these women who suffer from that, and she had a C-section. Stretch marks are another issue, not te worst of them, but the loose skin and scarring left by the strain on the body makes the women feel grossly self-conscious.
Post partum depression is also a lasting effect. The fetus secretes hormones into the woman for 9 months and in effect, takes over her hormone system. With that absence comes a lasting period of depression, and becoming more prevalent now, post-partum psychosis within the post-partum depression period. There have been occasions of infanticide and suicide because of this. Just this year it was reported recently that a woman severely stabbed another woman and cut the baby out of her and when I read the report in the paper, the police made a statement saying the profile for these kinds of crimes is usually a woman suffering from post-partum psychosis. And there was that national story about the woman who killed her 3 kids - recently re-ruled as guilty by reason of insanity because the woman was suffering from post-partume depression. A Danish study suggests woman face a multitude of other mental illnesses after giving birth, including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and debilitating anxiety
Thanks to Christine and Suzanne for help on assembling these facts, the rest can be cited from my almighty bible: "Human Sexuality" by Simon Levay
A woman cannot exercise to the point that it significantly raises her body temperature, especially during the first trimester or when she has a fever. That's because high maternal temperatures may increase the likelihood of fetal abnormalities.
Producing a baby is an expensive proposition, metabolically speaking: it takes about 75,000 kilocalories (kcal: the "Calories of common dietary usage), which averages out at about 250-300 kcal per day above what the mother needs to support herself. Most of that energy (65,000 kcal) goes toward fetal development; the remainder goes toward fat accumulation by the mother. At term (just before childbirth), a woman typically weighs 9-15 kilograms (20-35 punds) abouve her pre-pregnancy weight; this includes the weight of the fetus, placenta, and amniotic fluid, as well as her own increased fat deposits, enlarged breasts, and increased volume of blood and tissue fluids. Underweigh women risk producing an underweight child, who is more likely to suffer a variety of medical problems. Being either underweight or overweight is associated with an increased likelihood of premature birth, which also may have adverse consequences for the child. Women who are overweight face an increased risk of certain serious disorders during pregnancy, including diabetes and hypertension.
A pregnant woman needs to consume adequate amounts of other nutrients especially protein, calcium, iron, vitamin A, and folic acid. The fetus is adept at TAKING these nutrients FROM ITS MOTHER and does not usually suffer any deficiency but the mother may do so. Iron deficiency for example, may cause the mother to become ANEMIC. Severe folate deficiency during the first few weeks of pregnancy increases the likelihood that the fetus will have MALFORMATIONS of the nervous system and spinal column, such as spina bifida (when the baby is born with spine exposed). But megadoses of vitamins can cause birth defects or mental retardation.
Many, many women suffer from some level of "morning sickness." Which doesn't always happen in the morning, btw. Many women are incapacitated by this sickness; some to the point where they are unable to eat/drink and must be hospitalized. I had a great deal of trouble eating/drinking enough to support myself and my fetus: in fact, I lost a few pounds during my second trimester. That's not good.
Many women have or develop high blood pressure during pregnancy. This is due to the heart having to work extra hard to support the new life growing within you. Most doctors (like mine) are unwilling to medicate you for this condition, because they have no idea what the meds will do to the developing fetus. So you are forced to remain on bed rest for an indeterminate amount of time - this actually stressed me out even more, but that's another story.
Some women have blood-related issues that would normally prevent them from keeping a pregnancy. Some of them must have medications or injections every day in order to keep their pregnancy and have their child.
In short, many women are actually incapacitated to the point where they are unable to eat, unable to drive, unable to work, unable to do housework, etc. When a woman has no health insurance or family to assist her, exactly how is she supposed to survive this?
There are diseases, like Pre-Eclampsia,when your organs start to fail because they can't handle the burden of supporting woman and fetus. It leads to full-blown eclampsia, which results in seizures, coma, and death. Lesser things like adema are pretty common as well, where your legs and feet swell up with the water stored in your body for 9 months because it fails to drain back out of you.
And then there's birth. Humans have evolved so far that birth has become increasingly dificult and HARMFUL to the female body. Just a few things off the top of my head, in natural birth, the woman's soft tissue rips apart (or doctors cut it apart with a scalpel) because a woman cannot naturally accomodate a baby without the skin ripping apart. It then gets stitched back together and the woman has to sit on an inflateable donut for weeks. C-sections on the other hand, are more and more common now, and in some cases, forced upon the mother (there have been cases where pregnant women have gone to court to battle the doctor imposing a forced C-section "for her betterment" when they didn't want to have one). One of the reasons American physicians prefer C-section is that they are poorly trained in proper use of instruments like forceps and vacuum devices to facillitate difficult vaginal deliveries, according to my book. A lot of times, the stomach is sewn up sloppily and the abdoment muscles don't always knit together as they were so women are lefts with a permanent sagging pouch of muscle. My teacher had one, and while its not the end of the world, she was incredibley self conscious about it. Also according to my book, there is an increased risk of one serious complication: RUPTURE OF THE UTERUS, in women who attempt vaginal delivery after a prior C-section.
After pregnancy, many women have to urinate frequently and they lose the ability to hold it in, due to the pressure put on the female's system during pregnancy, by the fetus. My mom is one of these women who suffer from that, and she had a C-section. Stretch marks are another issue, not te worst of them, but the loose skin and scarring left by the strain on the body makes the women feel grossly self-conscious.
Post partum depression is also a lasting effect. The fetus secretes hormones into the woman for 9 months and in effect, takes over her hormone system. With that absence comes a lasting period of depression, and becoming more prevalent now, post-partum psychosis within the post-partum depression period. There have been occasions of infanticide and suicide because of this. Just this year it was reported recently that a woman severely stabbed another woman and cut the baby out of her and when I read the report in the paper, the police made a statement saying the profile for these kinds of crimes is usually a woman suffering from post-partum psychosis. And there was that national story about the woman who killed her 3 kids - recently re-ruled as guilty by reason of insanity because the woman was suffering from post-partume depression. A Danish study suggests woman face a multitude of other mental illnesses after giving birth, including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and debilitating anxiety
Post #3
1 reply
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 10:53am
Cancer (Abortion doesn't cause it and neither does the Pill)
Just to clear up a myth here, abortion does not cause cancer, nor do birth control pills. Much of this is a repost, so sorry for the redundancy but I thought it was important to share this info. Here are just a few sites and cited works for your pleasure:
On the National Cancer Instutute website, www.cancer.gov
http://www.cancer.gov/canc
The relationship between induced and spontaneous abortion and breast cancer risk has been the subject of extensive research beginning in the late 1950s. Until the mid-1990s, the evidence was inconsistent. Findings from some studies suggested there was no increase in risk of breast cancer among women who had had an abortion, while findings from other studies suggested there was an increased risk. Most of these studies, however, were flawed in a number of ways that can lead to unreliable results. Only a small number of women were included in many of these studies, and for most, the data were collected only after breast cancer had been diagnosed, and women’s histories of miscarriage and abortion were based on their “self-report” rather than on their medical records. Since then, better-designed studies have been conducted. These newer studies examined large numbers of women, collected data before breast cancer was found, and gathered medical history information from medical records rather than simply from self-reports, thereby generating more reliable findings. The newer studies consistently showed no association between induced and spontaneous abortions and breast cancer risk.
--------------------------
http://www.breastcancer.or
Now a large, well-designed study provides solid evidence that birth control pills do NOT increase the risk of breast cancer. This finding is true even in women who have taken the pill for a long time and for women with a family history of breast cancer.
The study showed no increase in breast cancer risk even among women who started using the pill when they were young. This is important because large numbers of American women who took birth control pills years ago are now reaching the age when breast cancer risk increases. For these women, it is reassuring to know that having taken the pill will not add to their breast cancer risk.
http://www.cancer.gov/canc
--------------------------
However, there is a link between cancer and hormones. It happens after you reach menopause though. The way my bio teacher explained it, women who develop breast and uterine cancer have usually one thing in common: They had shorter menstrual cycles through their life, as in, they started menstruating at a late age, or went through menopause early. Its something to do with as long as those levels of estrogen are regulated in your body, you've got a better fighting chance of not getting reproductive cancers.
For more information, another helpful site on www.cancer.gov:
http://www.cancer.gov/news
Just to clear up a myth here, abortion does not cause cancer, nor do birth control pills. Much of this is a repost, so sorry for the redundancy but I thought it was important to share this info. Here are just a few sites and cited works for your pleasure:
On the National Cancer Instutute website, www.cancer.gov
http://www.cancer.gov/canc
The relationship between induced and spontaneous abortion and breast cancer risk has been the subject of extensive research beginning in the late 1950s. Until the mid-1990s, the evidence was inconsistent. Findings from some studies suggested there was no increase in risk of breast cancer among women who had had an abortion, while findings from other studies suggested there was an increased risk. Most of these studies, however, were flawed in a number of ways that can lead to unreliable results. Only a small number of women were included in many of these studies, and for most, the data were collected only after breast cancer had been diagnosed, and women’s histories of miscarriage and abortion were based on their “self-report” rather than on their medical records. Since then, better-designed studies have been conducted. These newer studies examined large numbers of women, collected data before breast cancer was found, and gathered medical history information from medical records rather than simply from self-reports, thereby generating more reliable findings. The newer studies consistently showed no association between induced and spontaneous abortions and breast cancer risk.
--------------------------
http://www.breastcancer.or
Now a large, well-designed study provides solid evidence that birth control pills do NOT increase the risk of breast cancer. This finding is true even in women who have taken the pill for a long time and for women with a family history of breast cancer.
The study showed no increase in breast cancer risk even among women who started using the pill when they were young. This is important because large numbers of American women who took birth control pills years ago are now reaching the age when breast cancer risk increases. For these women, it is reassuring to know that having taken the pill will not add to their breast cancer risk.
http://www.cancer.gov/canc
--------------------------
However, there is a link between cancer and hormones. It happens after you reach menopause though. The way my bio teacher explained it, women who develop breast and uterine cancer have usually one thing in common: They had shorter menstrual cycles through their life, as in, they started menstruating at a late age, or went through menopause early. Its something to do with as long as those levels of estrogen are regulated in your body, you've got a better fighting chance of not getting reproductive cancers.
For more information, another helpful site on www.cancer.gov:
http://www.cancer.gov/news
Post #4
1 reply
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 10:55am
Rape Statistics for Abortion
This is the best I can give of an accurate picture of rape stats on abortion, so here goes:
http://www.johnstonsarchiv
e.net/policy/a
bortion/abreasons.html#3
Issues with rape-related statistics: The AGI-based figure of 1% of abortions for cases of rape or incest is widely cited. However, it is the product of a limited survey by an organization with a stated objective of advocating unlimited access to abortion services. It is thus desirable to seek an independent source of such figures, such as that provided by the state reported statistics reviewed below. Evaluating this claim involves issues of reliability of rape-related statistics.
If the AGI figure for 1987 is correct, it would imply that 15,600 abortions in 1987 were for such cases.[5] Since the FBI only reported 91,110 forcible rapes in the U.S. in that year[6], this would imply that one out of six rapes resulted in pregnancy. This is higher fraction than appears to be supported by medical research--although the degree to which rapes go unreported is an issue here.
According to the FBI, reported annual numbers of rapes rose from just over 90,000 in the late 1980s to a peak of 109,000 in 1992, then dropped to about 90,000 for the years 1999-2002. Some sources estimate much larger unreported numbers. Stewart and Trussell [26] cite 333,000 rapes and sexual assaults reported in 1998, and additionally cite a National Women's Study which claimed 683,000 rapes in 1992. The latter figure would mean 5.3 unreported rapes for every reported rape. The wide range in estimates of unreported rapes is evidence of the problem of quantifying these figures.
Another issue is the frequency of rape-related pregnancy. Some sources claim very low frequencies, citing medical studies, and concluding the total number of pregnancies resulting from rape each year is on the order of 200-500.[7] Others obtain somewhat higher frequencies. Holmes et al. [25] surveyed 4,008 women and found a rate of pregnancy following rape of 5%. Additionally, of 34 cases of pregnancy after rape, they found 17 (50%) had an abortion, 11 (32%) kept the baby, 2 (6%) gave the baby up for adoption, and 4 (12%) miscarried. This frequency of 5% is representative of cited values.
Taking currently reported rapes of 90,000 per year and assuming 5% result in pregnancy and 50% of these are aborted, this implies 4,500 pregancies per year following rape of which 2,250 are aborted. The most extreme claimed rates of underreporting are necessary to bring this in line with AGI's claim of 13,000 rape-related abortions per year. Even higher levels of rape-related pregnancies have been claimed: Stewart and Trussell [26] cite the previously mentioned National Women's Study claiming 32,000 per year in 1992, and this figure is repeated by Holmes et al. [25] and by an AGI article in 2002 [23]. Stewart and Trussell extrapolate this to 25,000 per year in 1998 merely by considering lower crime rates. These higher rates are required to support the AGI claim of 1% of abortions for rape. Alternately, if only 50% of rapes are unreported then (using Holmes et al. data) a percentage of only 0.35% of abortions for rape is implied.
Such statistical approaches are very uncertain. The reasons for abortion are of course self-reported by the abortion seeker and thus not verifiable. It could be hypothesized that for various reasons women seeking abortions might falsely give rape as a reason, or alternately conceal rape as a reason. Apart from the issue of the rate of underreporting, certainly it is the case that many rapes go unreported. Thus, rape-related abortion data interpretation is hampered by the particularly traumatic circumstances of such cases. Nonetheless, it will be seen below that the larger sampling in states that report figures for rape-related abortions give consistent results, supporting the reasoning for lower figures than the AGI figures.
This is the best I can give of an accurate picture of rape stats on abortion, so here goes:
http://www.johnstonsarchiv
e.net/policy/a
bortion/abreasons.html#3
Issues with rape-related statistics: The AGI-based figure of 1% of abortions for cases of rape or incest is widely cited. However, it is the product of a limited survey by an organization with a stated objective of advocating unlimited access to abortion services. It is thus desirable to seek an independent source of such figures, such as that provided by the state reported statistics reviewed below. Evaluating this claim involves issues of reliability of rape-related statistics.
If the AGI figure for 1987 is correct, it would imply that 15,600 abortions in 1987 were for such cases.[5] Since the FBI only reported 91,110 forcible rapes in the U.S. in that year[6], this would imply that one out of six rapes resulted in pregnancy. This is higher fraction than appears to be supported by medical research--although the degree to which rapes go unreported is an issue here.
According to the FBI, reported annual numbers of rapes rose from just over 90,000 in the late 1980s to a peak of 109,000 in 1992, then dropped to about 90,000 for the years 1999-2002. Some sources estimate much larger unreported numbers. Stewart and Trussell [26] cite 333,000 rapes and sexual assaults reported in 1998, and additionally cite a National Women's Study which claimed 683,000 rapes in 1992. The latter figure would mean 5.3 unreported rapes for every reported rape. The wide range in estimates of unreported rapes is evidence of the problem of quantifying these figures.
Another issue is the frequency of rape-related pregnancy. Some sources claim very low frequencies, citing medical studies, and concluding the total number of pregnancies resulting from rape each year is on the order of 200-500.[7] Others obtain somewhat higher frequencies. Holmes et al. [25] surveyed 4,008 women and found a rate of pregnancy following rape of 5%. Additionally, of 34 cases of pregnancy after rape, they found 17 (50%) had an abortion, 11 (32%) kept the baby, 2 (6%) gave the baby up for adoption, and 4 (12%) miscarried. This frequency of 5% is representative of cited values.
Taking currently reported rapes of 90,000 per year and assuming 5% result in pregnancy and 50% of these are aborted, this implies 4,500 pregancies per year following rape of which 2,250 are aborted. The most extreme claimed rates of underreporting are necessary to bring this in line with AGI's claim of 13,000 rape-related abortions per year. Even higher levels of rape-related pregnancies have been claimed: Stewart and Trussell [26] cite the previously mentioned National Women's Study claiming 32,000 per year in 1992, and this figure is repeated by Holmes et al. [25] and by an AGI article in 2002 [23]. Stewart and Trussell extrapolate this to 25,000 per year in 1998 merely by considering lower crime rates. These higher rates are required to support the AGI claim of 1% of abortions for rape. Alternately, if only 50% of rapes are unreported then (using Holmes et al. data) a percentage of only 0.35% of abortions for rape is implied.
Such statistical approaches are very uncertain. The reasons for abortion are of course self-reported by the abortion seeker and thus not verifiable. It could be hypothesized that for various reasons women seeking abortions might falsely give rape as a reason, or alternately conceal rape as a reason. Apart from the issue of the rate of underreporting, certainly it is the case that many rapes go unreported. Thus, rape-related abortion data interpretation is hampered by the particularly traumatic circumstances of such cases. Nonetheless, it will be seen below that the larger sampling in states that report figures for rape-related abortions give consistent results, supporting the reasoning for lower figures than the AGI figures.
Post #5
1 reply
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 10:55am
What its Really Like in an Abortion Clinic: A personal account by a Planned Parenthood Employee
I've mentioned several times in wall posts that I intern for Planned Parenthood in their patient education department. I keep reading blatent misrepresentations of 1. how the abortion process works, and 2. what really goes on in abortion providers offices, and 3. what its like. So I thought I'd just write about my experiences and hopefully clear some things up for people who have been misinformed or would like to believe the BS they hear from anti-choice propaganda.
First of all, as much as pro-lifers would love to believe that the office is full of teenage "sluts" or "whores" who have sex with anything that walks and take no responsibility for birth control, this is absolutely a misconception. The two main groups that I see the most are grown women,( Id say 19-30- a lot of them are married or living with a partner) and VERY young teens (Im talking 12-15). With the older girls, usually the reason is a broken condom or other failed birth control. With the younger girls, a lot of them think they couldn't get pregnant yet.
Secondly, and this is very important, under NO CIRCUMSTANCES is a woman EVER encouraged or talked in to getting an abortion. There are usually two pre-procedure counseling sessions. In the first one, the woman is told ALL of her other options, everything from the adoption process to public assistance programs. She is asked to consider these options for a few days before she makes a final decision. I've met a lot of women who reconsider when they find out that we can help them fill out applications for housing assistance, WIC, welfare, etc. Sometimes they just have no idea these programs even exist. If they do decide to go through with an abortion, they come back for a medical consult - this is where the actual abortion process is described to them. We don't lie to them - we tell them it can be very painful, physically and emotionally. We tell them it is common to feel guilty and depressed afterwards. We tell them what is going to happen to their fetus. A lot of women change their minds at this point too - because I think the reality of what they're about to do sinks in at this point.
If they decide to go through with it, they come in on a Saturday for the abortion. They are STRONGLY encouraged, but not required, to come with a parent or good friend. 99% of abortions are done by vacuum method. The patient is given a local anesthetic, and a tube with a sealed container on the other end (it is not transparent) is inserted in to the uterus. At this point, the pregnancy is terminated. RU486 is much less commonly used because it has more side-effects. In 5 months of my internship, I have never seen a woman who was past her 1st semester getting an abortion. After the abortion, the patient makes a follow up appointment. At the follow up appointment, she is given birth control (options include the depo shot, a prescription for the pill, condoms, or an emergency prescription for Plan B) so that she hopefully will never have to go through this again.
Now a note to those of you who might protest outside of Planned Parenthoods or know people who do... Planned Parenthood's primary purpose is NOT to provide abortions, but PREVENT them. Abortions are only performed on Saturdays, and make up a very small percentage of the total patients we see. Many girls come in for STD screenings, birth control prescriptions, pregnancy tests, free condoms, pre-natal screenings, etc. So before you scream at a girl walking in the door, realize you might be screaming at a woman who is making sure she takes the proper precautions before she becomes sexually active. You might be screaming at a girl who has decided to KEEP her baby and is coming in for a WIC application.
I have been called a slut, a whore, a baby killer, a heathen, told that Jesus hates me, God hates me, everyone hates me, I'm going to Hell, I'm going to burn for eternity, some lady once told me she wished I'd have a miscarriage (that makes a lot of sense coming from a pro-lifer, doesnt it??) I've been called all of these things for walking in the door of the office, where I work for free, giving classes on how to put on condoms, and empowerment for girls to take charge of using birth control. The last month or so I've been working on a project for education about Post-Partum Depression - yet that still makes me a baby killer somehow... I've been followed to my car, threatened, had stuff thrown at me. The reason why I'm telling you all of this is so some of you realize that there is NOTHING you can say that hasnt been said already, and NOTHING that will make me reconsider my belief that I'm doing a good thing. The same goes for any other employee you might scream at or threaten - if you could change our minds with that kind of stupidity, trust me, we wouldn't still be working there.
I should also note that I've seen PLENTY of people who tell me they are pro-life, but that for whatever reason, THEY deserve to get an abortion, but everyone else who gets one is a (slut/whore/babykiller/wha
You can ask me any questions, pro-life or not - unless its insulting or completely assanine, I'll answer it. I respect the personal decision to be pro-life. In fact my PERSONAL choice would be to keep a baby, but that is PERSONAL... I do not believe anyone has the right to let their personal beliefs effect the choices of others, regardless of what I might think about it.
I also want to clear up the misconceptions about Roe V Wade that I've read in here from time to time. Roe V Wade was not a case that legalized abortion persay. It was a case that determined as human beings in a free country, we have a right to privacy, provided by our constitution, that gives us the right to govern our own bodies.
I've mentioned several times in wall posts that I intern for Planned Parenthood in their patient education department. I keep reading blatent misrepresentations of 1. how the abortion process works, and 2. what really goes on in abortion providers offices, and 3. what its like. So I thought I'd just write about my experiences and hopefully clear some things up for people who have been misinformed or would like to believe the BS they hear from anti-choice propaganda.
First of all, as much as pro-lifers would love to believe that the office is full of teenage "sluts" or "whores" who have sex with anything that walks and take no responsibility for birth control, this is absolutely a misconception. The two main groups that I see the most are grown women,( Id say 19-30- a lot of them are married or living with a partner) and VERY young teens (Im talking 12-15). With the older girls, usually the reason is a broken condom or other failed birth control. With the younger girls, a lot of them think they couldn't get pregnant yet.
Secondly, and this is very important, under NO CIRCUMSTANCES is a woman EVER encouraged or talked in to getting an abortion. There are usually two pre-procedure counseling sessions. In the first one, the woman is told ALL of her other options, everything from the adoption process to public assistance programs. She is asked to consider these options for a few days before she makes a final decision. I've met a lot of women who reconsider when they find out that we can help them fill out applications for housing assistance, WIC, welfare, etc. Sometimes they just have no idea these programs even exist. If they do decide to go through with an abortion, they come back for a medical consult - this is where the actual abortion process is described to them. We don't lie to them - we tell them it can be very painful, physically and emotionally. We tell them it is common to feel guilty and depressed afterwards. We tell them what is going to happen to their fetus. A lot of women change their minds at this point too - because I think the reality of what they're about to do sinks in at this point.
If they decide to go through with it, they come in on a Saturday for the abortion. They are STRONGLY encouraged, but not required, to come with a parent or good friend. 99% of abortions are done by vacuum method. The patient is given a local anesthetic, and a tube with a sealed container on the other end (it is not transparent) is inserted in to the uterus. At this point, the pregnancy is terminated. RU486 is much less commonly used because it has more side-effects. In 5 months of my internship, I have never seen a woman who was past her 1st semester getting an abortion. After the abortion, the patient makes a follow up appointment. At the follow up appointment, she is given birth control (options include the depo shot, a prescription for the pill, condoms, or an emergency prescription for Plan B) so that she hopefully will never have to go through this again.
Now a note to those of you who might protest outside of Planned Parenthoods or know people who do... Planned Parenthood's primary purpose is NOT to provide abortions, but PREVENT them. Abortions are only performed on Saturdays, and make up a very small percentage of the total patients we see. Many girls come in for STD screenings, birth control prescriptions, pregnancy tests, free condoms, pre-natal screenings, etc. So before you scream at a girl walking in the door, realize you might be screaming at a woman who is making sure she takes the proper precautions before she becomes sexually active. You might be screaming at a girl who has decided to KEEP her baby and is coming in for a WIC application.
I have been called a slut, a whore, a baby killer, a heathen, told that Jesus hates me, God hates me, everyone hates me, I'm going to Hell, I'm going to burn for eternity, some lady once told me she wished I'd have a miscarriage (that makes a lot of sense coming from a pro-lifer, doesnt it??) I've been called all of these things for walking in the door of the office, where I work for free, giving classes on how to put on condoms, and empowerment for girls to take charge of using birth control. The last month or so I've been working on a project for education about Post-Partum Depression - yet that still makes me a baby killer somehow... I've been followed to my car, threatened, had stuff thrown at me. The reason why I'm telling you all of this is so some of you realize that there is NOTHING you can say that hasnt been said already, and NOTHING that will make me reconsider my belief that I'm doing a good thing. The same goes for any other employee you might scream at or threaten - if you could change our minds with that kind of stupidity, trust me, we wouldn't still be working there.
I should also note that I've seen PLENTY of people who tell me they are pro-life, but that for whatever reason, THEY deserve to get an abortion, but everyone else who gets one is a (slut/whore/babykiller/wha
You can ask me any questions, pro-life or not - unless its insulting or completely assanine, I'll answer it. I respect the personal decision to be pro-life. In fact my PERSONAL choice would be to keep a baby, but that is PERSONAL... I do not believe anyone has the right to let their personal beliefs effect the choices of others, regardless of what I might think about it.
I also want to clear up the misconceptions about Roe V Wade that I've read in here from time to time. Roe V Wade was not a case that legalized abortion persay. It was a case that determined as human beings in a free country, we have a right to privacy, provided by our constitution, that gives us the right to govern our own bodies.
Post #6
1 reply
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 10:56am
The Abortion Procedure (Its not all skull crushing, not even close, so you can stop there)
I'm sick of misconceptions, so here it is, plain as day, from my bio book to you (with some help from Guttmacher):
In September 2000, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the abortion drug mifepristone to be marketed in the United States as an alternative to surgical abortion.
In nonhospital facilities offering mifepristone for use in medication abortion in 2001, the average cost of a medication abortion was $490.[22]
At one large network of providers, the proportion of early abortions performed with mifepristone increased from 9% of eligible women in 2001 to 24% in 2004.[23]
--------------------------
Source: Human Sexuality by Simon LeVay and Sharon M. Valente
WARNING: Graphic descriptions may be encountered here, but its science, so don't be afraid.
Vacuum Apsiration Is the Standard First-Trimester Surgical Method:
Surgical abortions are done in diefferent ways depending on the age of the fetus. During the first trimester, most surgical abortions are done by vacuum aspiration. This procedure - which accounts ofr the majority of all abortions done in the US - is done on an outpatient basis with local anethesia or no anethesia. The first step in the procedure is a rinsing of the vagina with an antiseptic solution. Next, the provider dilates the cervix by passing a series of metal rods of increasing diameter through the cervical canal. Once the cervix has been dilated, the provider passes a cannula into the uterus. The other end of the cannula is connected to a pump that applies suction. (With very early abortions, suction may be applied by hand, using a syring.) The suction breaks up the fetus and its membranes and removesthem from the uterus. This process takes less than 5 minutes. The extracted tissue is examined to ensure that abortion is complete. The provider may insert a curette ( a metal loop) to clean the walls of the uterus of any remaining tissue. The woman remains in the clinic or doctor's office for an hour or so before being allowed to go home.
--------------------------
Vacuum Aspiration is the procedure used 88% of the time, but after 12 weeks comes a D & E.
Dilation and Evacuation is Used Early in the Second Trimester:
Dilation and evacuation, or D and E, is the procedure most commonly used early in the second trimester. It is sometimes done at up to 20 weeks of pregnancy or beyond. But most D and Es are done in the period from 13 to 16 weeks. D and Es are usually done under general anesthesia in a hospital. The procedure is fairly similar to a vacuum aspiration abortion, but the cervix has to be dilated more widely. A suction cannula is used to remove fluid and some tissue, then the remainder is removed with forceps or other instruments. Finally, the lining of the uterus is cleaned with a curett. The D and E is a very safe procedure, but it has a somewhat greater likelihood of complications such as excessive bleeding, than vacuum apsiration abortion.
--------------------------
Medical Abortions are Two-Step Procedures (This has to do with RU-486 related abortion)
In a medical abortion, the woman receeives two different drugs 2 or more days apart. The first drug terminates the pregnancy, while the seond causes uterine contractions and the expulsion of the remains of the fetus and its membranes as with a spontaneous miscarriage. Medical abortions can be performed any time up to 7 to 9 weeks aftger the start of the last menstrual period.
The drug used to terminate the pregnancy can be either mifepristone (also known as RU-486) or methotrexate. These two drugs work in quite different ways. Mifepristone is a progestin receptor antagonist. Recall that progesterone, secreted by the corpus luteum and later by the placenta, is required to keep the uterus in a state capable of sustaining pregnancy. When mifepristone blocks progestin receptors, it is as if progesterone is absent, so the endometrium begins to break down and ceases to support the fetus, which detaches from the endometrium and dies. Methotrexate, ont he other hand, is a cancer drug that kills rapidly dividing cells: it has a direct toxic effect on the fetus. Regardless of which drgu is used in the first step, the drug used to cause contractions is always the same: the prostaglandin misoprostol. Prostaglandins are naturally secreted by the mother during the time of birth to expel the baby.
From the perspective of the woman, the two drug combinations are slightly different. Mifepristone is given by mouth; methotrexate is usually given by injection. With mifepristone, some women (about 10%) will expel the fetal remains before they even take the misoprostol. For the other 90%, bleeding begins within 23 hours of taking misoprostol, and the entire process takes no more than about a week. With methotrexate, ont he other hand, the abortion does not begin before the misoprostol is taken, and the entire process can last over 2 weeks - sometimes up to 5 weeks. Wither way, a follow-up visit to the clinic is required to check that the abortion is complete.
--------------------------
Induced Labor and Hysterotomy (not to be confused with Hysterectomy, which many Pro-Life sites I've seen claim to be a procedure) Are done Late in the Second Trimester:
Late in the second trimester, the D and E procedure becomes more risky, and other surgical techniques may be used. In one method, the provider simply induces premature labor. This may be done by injecting a strong salt solution into the amniotic sac (saline-induced abortion). Alternatively, and more commonly, labor is induced by administration of a prostaglandin. The drug is either inujected into the amniotic sac or administered by means of a vaginal suppository (in which case, this procedure shoule be considered a meical rather than a surgical abortion). Contractions usually begin within an hour or so, and the fetus is expelled withint 48 hours.
If the woman's health is such that labor seems risky, the fetus may be removed by means of a surgical incision in the abdomen and the uterus (hysterotomy). This procedure is essentially equivalent to a cesarean section, except that the fetus is smaller and nonviable. Both induced labor and hysterotomy are done infrequently - each of them accounds for fewer than 1% of all abortions in the US.
--------------------------
Intact D and X
A very infrequent late-term abortion procedure is a variant of the D and E known as intact dilation and extractions (intact D and X). In this procedure, the provider manipulates the fetus into a breech position, then delivers the fetus's lower body. Before the head is delivered, the provider punctures it and suctions out the brain, thus easing delivery of the head and ensuring that the fetus is not born alive. This procedure is done very rarely, and it is mainly of interest because it has been a major target of abortion opponents, who refer to it as partial-birth abortion. The American Medical Association has recommended that this procedure not be used unless alternative methods would expose the mother to greater risk.
Partial birth abortion term is general used in place of the various types of dialation and extraction procedures. Such procedures account for 0.17% of all abortions. But then there is some confusion, and some would insist they are talking about "late term abortions." Less than 2% of abortions occur after the 20th week.
http://www.guttmacher.org/
I'm sick of misconceptions, so here it is, plain as day, from my bio book to you (with some help from Guttmacher):
In September 2000, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the abortion drug mifepristone to be marketed in the United States as an alternative to surgical abortion.
In nonhospital facilities offering mifepristone for use in medication abortion in 2001, the average cost of a medication abortion was $490.[22]
At one large network of providers, the proportion of early abortions performed with mifepristone increased from 9% of eligible women in 2001 to 24% in 2004.[23]
--------------------------
Source: Human Sexuality by Simon LeVay and Sharon M. Valente
WARNING: Graphic descriptions may be encountered here, but its science, so don't be afraid.
Vacuum Apsiration Is the Standard First-Trimester Surgical Method:
Surgical abortions are done in diefferent ways depending on the age of the fetus. During the first trimester, most surgical abortions are done by vacuum aspiration. This procedure - which accounts ofr the majority of all abortions done in the US - is done on an outpatient basis with local anethesia or no anethesia. The first step in the procedure is a rinsing of the vagina with an antiseptic solution. Next, the provider dilates the cervix by passing a series of metal rods of increasing diameter through the cervical canal. Once the cervix has been dilated, the provider passes a cannula into the uterus. The other end of the cannula is connected to a pump that applies suction. (With very early abortions, suction may be applied by hand, using a syring.) The suction breaks up the fetus and its membranes and removesthem from the uterus. This process takes less than 5 minutes. The extracted tissue is examined to ensure that abortion is complete. The provider may insert a curette ( a metal loop) to clean the walls of the uterus of any remaining tissue. The woman remains in the clinic or doctor's office for an hour or so before being allowed to go home.
--------------------------
Vacuum Aspiration is the procedure used 88% of the time, but after 12 weeks comes a D & E.
Dilation and Evacuation is Used Early in the Second Trimester:
Dilation and evacuation, or D and E, is the procedure most commonly used early in the second trimester. It is sometimes done at up to 20 weeks of pregnancy or beyond. But most D and Es are done in the period from 13 to 16 weeks. D and Es are usually done under general anesthesia in a hospital. The procedure is fairly similar to a vacuum aspiration abortion, but the cervix has to be dilated more widely. A suction cannula is used to remove fluid and some tissue, then the remainder is removed with forceps or other instruments. Finally, the lining of the uterus is cleaned with a curett. The D and E is a very safe procedure, but it has a somewhat greater likelihood of complications such as excessive bleeding, than vacuum apsiration abortion.
--------------------------
Medical Abortions are Two-Step Procedures (This has to do with RU-486 related abortion)
In a medical abortion, the woman receeives two different drugs 2 or more days apart. The first drug terminates the pregnancy, while the seond causes uterine contractions and the expulsion of the remains of the fetus and its membranes as with a spontaneous miscarriage. Medical abortions can be performed any time up to 7 to 9 weeks aftger the start of the last menstrual period.
The drug used to terminate the pregnancy can be either mifepristone (also known as RU-486) or methotrexate. These two drugs work in quite different ways. Mifepristone is a progestin receptor antagonist. Recall that progesterone, secreted by the corpus luteum and later by the placenta, is required to keep the uterus in a state capable of sustaining pregnancy. When mifepristone blocks progestin receptors, it is as if progesterone is absent, so the endometrium begins to break down and ceases to support the fetus, which detaches from the endometrium and dies. Methotrexate, ont he other hand, is a cancer drug that kills rapidly dividing cells: it has a direct toxic effect on the fetus. Regardless of which drgu is used in the first step, the drug used to cause contractions is always the same: the prostaglandin misoprostol. Prostaglandins are naturally secreted by the mother during the time of birth to expel the baby.
From the perspective of the woman, the two drug combinations are slightly different. Mifepristone is given by mouth; methotrexate is usually given by injection. With mifepristone, some women (about 10%) will expel the fetal remains before they even take the misoprostol. For the other 90%, bleeding begins within 23 hours of taking misoprostol, and the entire process takes no more than about a week. With methotrexate, ont he other hand, the abortion does not begin before the misoprostol is taken, and the entire process can last over 2 weeks - sometimes up to 5 weeks. Wither way, a follow-up visit to the clinic is required to check that the abortion is complete.
--------------------------
Induced Labor and Hysterotomy (not to be confused with Hysterectomy, which many Pro-Life sites I've seen claim to be a procedure) Are done Late in the Second Trimester:
Late in the second trimester, the D and E procedure becomes more risky, and other surgical techniques may be used. In one method, the provider simply induces premature labor. This may be done by injecting a strong salt solution into the amniotic sac (saline-induced abortion). Alternatively, and more commonly, labor is induced by administration of a prostaglandin. The drug is either inujected into the amniotic sac or administered by means of a vaginal suppository (in which case, this procedure shoule be considered a meical rather than a surgical abortion). Contractions usually begin within an hour or so, and the fetus is expelled withint 48 hours.
If the woman's health is such that labor seems risky, the fetus may be removed by means of a surgical incision in the abdomen and the uterus (hysterotomy). This procedure is essentially equivalent to a cesarean section, except that the fetus is smaller and nonviable. Both induced labor and hysterotomy are done infrequently - each of them accounds for fewer than 1% of all abortions in the US.
--------------------------
Intact D and X
A very infrequent late-term abortion procedure is a variant of the D and E known as intact dilation and extractions (intact D and X). In this procedure, the provider manipulates the fetus into a breech position, then delivers the fetus's lower body. Before the head is delivered, the provider punctures it and suctions out the brain, thus easing delivery of the head and ensuring that the fetus is not born alive. This procedure is done very rarely, and it is mainly of interest because it has been a major target of abortion opponents, who refer to it as partial-birth abortion. The American Medical Association has recommended that this procedure not be used unless alternative methods would expose the mother to greater risk.
Partial birth abortion term is general used in place of the various types of dialation and extraction procedures. Such procedures account for 0.17% of all abortions. But then there is some confusion, and some would insist they are talking about "late term abortions." Less than 2% of abortions occur after the 20th week.
http://www.guttmacher.org/
Post #7
1 reply
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 10:57am
For all of you out there who think that the bare-bones government funding that Planned Parenthood recieves is funding abortions, or anyone who is just curious about what PP is all about, I hope this might eliminate some of the erroneous assumptions that pro-life propaganda has spread about PP. The following is the list of services the center I intern at provides, in alphabetical order:
Services:
Abnormal Pap Follow-up
Abortion Services - Medical
Abortion Services - Surgical
Adoption Counseling and Placement
Annual Exam
Birth Control: Pills, Condoms, Depo-Provera, etc.
Breast Exam
Counseling - Abortion
Counseling - Birth Control
Counseling - Pregnancy Options
Counseling - STD
Depo-Provera
Education
Emergency Contraception (EC)
High Blood Pressure Screening
HIV/AIDS Testing and Counseling
Immunizations
IUD
Male Health Services
NuvaRing
Patch (Ortho-Evra)
Pregnancy Testing and Counseling
Prenatal Care
Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing & Treatment
Sonogram
Vaginal Infection Testing & Treatment
Cancer Screening (Pap Test)
Coloscopy
Cryotherapy
Diabetes Screening
Hepatitis A & B Vaccine
Paragard
Post-Abortion Exam
Ultrasound
Urinary Tract Infection Diagnosis and Treatment
PP is open 7 days a week. Abortions are only performed on ONE day a week. The vast majority of PP exployees work Mon-Fri. Abortions are only performed on Saturday. Most of the weekend staff, with the exception of physicians, are volunteers. So even if you are against abortion, you can still support 99% of what Planned Parenthood does. And think about the fact that if you protest outside of PP and berate those who step through their doors, you might be berating a woman getting a Hepatitis vaccine.
Services:
Abnormal Pap Follow-up
Abortion Services - Medical
Abortion Services - Surgical
Adoption Counseling and Placement
Annual Exam
Birth Control: Pills, Condoms, Depo-Provera, etc.
Breast Exam
Counseling - Abortion
Counseling - Birth Control
Counseling - Pregnancy Options
Counseling - STD
Depo-Provera
Education
Emergency Contraception (EC)
High Blood Pressure Screening
HIV/AIDS Testing and Counseling
Immunizations
IUD
Male Health Services
NuvaRing
Patch (Ortho-Evra)
Pregnancy Testing and Counseling
Prenatal Care
Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing & Treatment
Sonogram
Vaginal Infection Testing & Treatment
Cancer Screening (Pap Test)
Coloscopy
Cryotherapy
Diabetes Screening
Hepatitis A & B Vaccine
Paragard
Post-Abortion Exam
Ultrasound
Urinary Tract Infection Diagnosis and Treatment
PP is open 7 days a week. Abortions are only performed on ONE day a week. The vast majority of PP exployees work Mon-Fri. Abortions are only performed on Saturday. Most of the weekend staff, with the exception of physicians, are volunteers. So even if you are against abortion, you can still support 99% of what Planned Parenthood does. And think about the fact that if you protest outside of PP and berate those who step through their doors, you might be berating a woman getting a Hepatitis vaccine.
Post #8
1 reply
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 10:57am
Information About Emergency Contraception/Plan B/The Morning After Pill:
Most Importantly, Emergency Contraception is NOT an abortion.
For more information, please read
http://www.go2planb.com/Fo
http://www.fda.gov/cder/dr
*currently, the FDA website is out of date regarding Plan B, as it has not been updated since the 2006 decision to allow states to determine whether or not they will permit the OTC sales of Plan B*
As of November, 2006: In Alaska, California, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Washington and Vermont women 17+ can get Plan B directly from a pharmacy. If you are younger than that, you still need a prescription, which you may obtain from a doctor or your local Planned Parenthood branch.
To find a Planned Parenthood near you, visit http://www.plannedparentho
Outside of those 9 states, you still need a prescription no matter how old you are. HOWEVER - there may be a way to order EC online soon, which could be done from any state.
At this point, all major pharmacy chains SHOULD be carrying it. The ones who refused were sued and it was determined that it is illegal to refuse to carry it, however it is NOT illegal to refuse to give it out. So the problem is, you could call at 9 am, and talk to one pharmacist who says "sure, just come pick it up" but lets say you don't get there until 4, and that pharmacist has left and the new one says "I wont give it to you, you'll have to go to another pharmacy." Technically, as long as that pharmacist refers you to another, he/she is not breaking the law.
Target has claimed that "at all times, atleast one pharmacist who will fill Plan B will be available". But who knows how well that is enforced.
My advice for all of you is to make an appointment at PP and pick up a pack to keep just in case. If you don't use it in a year, it expires and you're out 30 bucks, but in my opinion, its worth it. Also, if you have a pharmacist you trust and who you know will fill it for you, ask them for their hours and their direct extension if they have one, so that you can just go right to them next time.
If you do encounter a problem, MAKE NOISE. write letters, make phone calls, ask for a manager. Sometimes people will just give in and give it to you to avoid drama. NEVER EVER EVER just say OK and walk out. STICK UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS.
A degree in pharmacy does NOT grant a person the credentials to legislate their morality on others, and don't hesitate to remind them of that if you encounter a problem.
Most Importantly, Emergency Contraception is NOT an abortion.
For more information, please read
http://www.go2planb.com/Fo
http://www.fda.gov/cder/dr
*currently, the FDA website is out of date regarding Plan B, as it has not been updated since the 2006 decision to allow states to determine whether or not they will permit the OTC sales of Plan B*
As of November, 2006: In Alaska, California, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Washington and Vermont women 17+ can get Plan B directly from a pharmacy. If you are younger than that, you still need a prescription, which you may obtain from a doctor or your local Planned Parenthood branch.
To find a Planned Parenthood near you, visit http://www.plannedparentho
Outside of those 9 states, you still need a prescription no matter how old you are. HOWEVER - there may be a way to order EC online soon, which could be done from any state.
At this point, all major pharmacy chains SHOULD be carrying it. The ones who refused were sued and it was determined that it is illegal to refuse to carry it, however it is NOT illegal to refuse to give it out. So the problem is, you could call at 9 am, and talk to one pharmacist who says "sure, just come pick it up" but lets say you don't get there until 4, and that pharmacist has left and the new one says "I wont give it to you, you'll have to go to another pharmacy." Technically, as long as that pharmacist refers you to another, he/she is not breaking the law.
Target has claimed that "at all times, atleast one pharmacist who will fill Plan B will be available". But who knows how well that is enforced.
My advice for all of you is to make an appointment at PP and pick up a pack to keep just in case. If you don't use it in a year, it expires and you're out 30 bucks, but in my opinion, its worth it. Also, if you have a pharmacist you trust and who you know will fill it for you, ask them for their hours and their direct extension if they have one, so that you can just go right to them next time.
If you do encounter a problem, MAKE NOISE. write letters, make phone calls, ask for a manager. Sometimes people will just give in and give it to you to avoid drama. NEVER EVER EVER just say OK and walk out. STICK UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS.
A degree in pharmacy does NOT grant a person the credentials to legislate their morality on others, and don't hesitate to remind them of that if you encounter a problem.
Post #9
1 reply
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 10:58am
These are all about the fight for fair access to birth control and Plan B.
http://www.guttmacher.org/
Fair access to contraception:
http://www.covermypills.or
Refusal clauses & the fight for birth control
http://www.movingideas.org
Birth control as a labor law issue
http://www.law.duke.edu/jo
http://www.guttmacher.org/
Fair access to contraception:
http://www.covermypills.or
Refusal clauses & the fight for birth control
http://www.movingideas.org
Birth control as a labor law issue
http://www.law.duke.edu/jo
Post #10
2 replies
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 10:59am
Who uses birth control in this nation? Who needs to use it and isn't? The answers may surprise you.
http://guttmacher.org/pubs
WHO NEEDS CONTRACEPTIVES?
• 62 million U.S. women are in their childbearing years (15-44). 1
• 43 million women of reproductive age, or 7 in 10, are sexually active and do not want to become pregnant, but could become pregnant if they or their partners fail to use a contraceptive method. 2
• The typical U.S. woman wants only 2 children. To achieve this goal, she must use contraceptives for roughly 3 decades of her life. 3
WHO USES CONTRACEPTIVES?
• Virtually all women (98%) aged 15-44 who have ever had intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method. 4
• Overall, 62% of the 62 million women aged 15-44 are currently using a contraceptive method. 5
• 31% of the 62 million women do not need a method because they are infertile; are pregnant, postpartum or trying to become pregnant; have never had intercourse; or are not sexually active. 6
• Thus, only 7% of women aged 15-44 are at risk of unwanted pregnancy but are not using contraceptives. 7
• Among the 42 million fertile, sexually active women who do not want to become pregnant, 89% are practicing contraception. 8
WHICH METHODS DO WOMEN USE?
• 64% of reproductive-age women who practice contraception use reversible methods, such as oral contraceptives or condoms. The remaining women rely on female or male sterilization. 9
• Contraceptive choices vary markedly with age. For women younger than 30, the pill is the leading method. By age 35, more women rely on sterilization. 10
• The pill and female sterilization have been the two leading contraceptive methods overall in the United States since 1982. However, sterilization is the leading method among black women and Hispanic women, while the pill is the leading method for white women. 11
• Female sterilization is most commonly relied on by women who are aged 35 or older, women who are currently or have previously been married and women with less than a college education. 12
• 50% of all women aged 40-44 who practice contraception have been sterilized, and another 18% have a partner who has had a vasectomy. 13
• The pill is the method most widely used by women who are in their teens and 20s, never-married women and and women with at least a college degree. 14
• Women in their teens and 20s are more likely to rely on the 3-month injectable than are older women. Women aged 25-29 are more likely than women in other age-groups to rely on the implant, 1-month injectable or patch. 15
• Compared with non-Hispanic white women, Hispanic and black women are less likely to rely on their partner's vasectomy or the pill, and more likely to rely on the 3-month injectable or no method.
• Poor and low-income women are more than twice as likely as higher income women to use the 3-month injectable. 16
• 7.3 million women use barrier contraceptives, such as the male condom. 17 Condom use is especially common among teenagers, 20-24-year-olds, childless women and never-married women. 18
• 15% of contraceptive users rely on dual methods (most often the condom combined with another method). The proportions using more than one method are greatest among teenagers and never-married women. 19
TEEN CONTRACEPTIVE USE
• Teenagers (aged 15-19) who do not use a contraceptive at first sex are twice as likely to become teen mothers as are teenagers who use a method. 20
• 27% of teenage women using contraceptives choose condoms as their primary method. Condom use declines as women grow older and marry. 21
• Of the 3.1 million teenage women who use contraceptives, 53% - more than 1.5 million women - rely on the pill. 22
• 45% of teenage women who practice contraception use condoms, either alone (19%) or with another method (25%). 23
CONTRACEPTIVE USE AT FIRST INTERCOURSE
• The proportion of women who used a contraceptive method the first time they had sex has nearly doubled, from 43% in the 1970s to 79% in 1999-2002. The change is mostly due to an increase - from 22% to 67% - in the proportion using the male condom at first sex. 24
• The proportion of women using contraceptives at first intercourse increases as age at first intercourse increases. 55% of women who first had sex before age 16 used a method, compared with 70% who first had sex at age 19 or older. 25
• 67% of non-Hispanic white women used a method at first intercourse, compared with 60% of black women and just 46% of Hispanic women. 26
There's a whole lot more on that link. Take a look : )
http://guttmacher.org/pubs
WHO NEEDS CONTRACEPTIVES?
• 62 million U.S. women are in their childbearing years (15-44). 1
• 43 million women of reproductive age, or 7 in 10, are sexually active and do not want to become pregnant, but could become pregnant if they or their partners fail to use a contraceptive method. 2
• The typical U.S. woman wants only 2 children. To achieve this goal, she must use contraceptives for roughly 3 decades of her life. 3
WHO USES CONTRACEPTIVES?
• Virtually all women (98%) aged 15-44 who have ever had intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method. 4
• Overall, 62% of the 62 million women aged 15-44 are currently using a contraceptive method. 5
• 31% of the 62 million women do not need a method because they are infertile; are pregnant, postpartum or trying to become pregnant; have never had intercourse; or are not sexually active. 6
• Thus, only 7% of women aged 15-44 are at risk of unwanted pregnancy but are not using contraceptives. 7
• Among the 42 million fertile, sexually active women who do not want to become pregnant, 89% are practicing contraception. 8
WHICH METHODS DO WOMEN USE?
• 64% of reproductive-age women who practice contraception use reversible methods, such as oral contraceptives or condoms. The remaining women rely on female or male sterilization. 9
• Contraceptive choices vary markedly with age. For women younger than 30, the pill is the leading method. By age 35, more women rely on sterilization. 10
• The pill and female sterilization have been the two leading contraceptive methods overall in the United States since 1982. However, sterilization is the leading method among black women and Hispanic women, while the pill is the leading method for white women. 11
• Female sterilization is most commonly relied on by women who are aged 35 or older, women who are currently or have previously been married and women with less than a college education. 12
• 50% of all women aged 40-44 who practice contraception have been sterilized, and another 18% have a partner who has had a vasectomy. 13
• The pill is the method most widely used by women who are in their teens and 20s, never-married women and and women with at least a college degree. 14
• Women in their teens and 20s are more likely to rely on the 3-month injectable than are older women. Women aged 25-29 are more likely than women in other age-groups to rely on the implant, 1-month injectable or patch. 15
• Compared with non-Hispanic white women, Hispanic and black women are less likely to rely on their partner's vasectomy or the pill, and more likely to rely on the 3-month injectable or no method.
• Poor and low-income women are more than twice as likely as higher income women to use the 3-month injectable. 16
• 7.3 million women use barrier contraceptives, such as the male condom. 17 Condom use is especially common among teenagers, 20-24-year-olds, childless women and never-married women. 18
• 15% of contraceptive users rely on dual methods (most often the condom combined with another method). The proportions using more than one method are greatest among teenagers and never-married women. 19
TEEN CONTRACEPTIVE USE
• Teenagers (aged 15-19) who do not use a contraceptive at first sex are twice as likely to become teen mothers as are teenagers who use a method. 20
• 27% of teenage women using contraceptives choose condoms as their primary method. Condom use declines as women grow older and marry. 21
• Of the 3.1 million teenage women who use contraceptives, 53% - more than 1.5 million women - rely on the pill. 22
• 45% of teenage women who practice contraception use condoms, either alone (19%) or with another method (25%). 23
CONTRACEPTIVE USE AT FIRST INTERCOURSE
• The proportion of women who used a contraceptive method the first time they had sex has nearly doubled, from 43% in the 1970s to 79% in 1999-2002. The change is mostly due to an increase - from 22% to 67% - in the proportion using the male condom at first sex. 24
• The proportion of women using contraceptives at first intercourse increases as age at first intercourse increases. 55% of women who first had sex before age 16 used a method, compared with 70% who first had sex at age 19 or older. 25
• 67% of non-Hispanic white women used a method at first intercourse, compared with 60% of black women and just 46% of Hispanic women. 26
There's a whole lot more on that link. Take a look : )
Post #11
1 reply
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 11:00am
Partial Birth Abortion Does Not Exist
Despite the fact that many members here have repeatedly explained that the term "partial birth abortion" was NOT an actual medical term, but a catch phrase made up by a pro-life politician with no medical background whatsoever, the pro-lifers who post in here continue to use the term.
While I'm all for debating, it is not good arguing style to use terms that are medically incorrect, terms that were CREATED to make an appeal to emotion, terms that mislead and misinform. One of these terms is "partial birth abortion".
SO - from a non-biased source, The Journal of the American Medical Association, which is one of the oldest, most trusted medical publications, I have copied the following:
"AMA House of Delegates adopted recommendations on late-term abortion and abortion techniques.1 The recommendations reaffirmed AMA policies regarding abortion (5.990, 5.993, and 5.995) that state that the early termination of pregnancy is a medical matter between the patient and physician subject to the physician's clinical judgment, the patient's informed consent, and the availability of appropriate facilities.
The AMA policy also states that abortion is a medical procedure and should be performed by a physician in conformance with standards of good medical practice and that support of or opposition to abortion is a matter for members of the AMA to decide individually, based on personal values or beliefs.
The AMA will take no action that may be construed as an attempt to alter or influence the personal views of individual physicians regarding abortion procedures. Also reaffirmed was the policy that neither physician, hospital, nor hospital personnel shall be required to perform any act violative of personally held moral principles (Amended Resolution 158, A-90); (Resolution 49, I-89) (Substitute Resolution 43, A-73; Reaffirmed: I-86; Reaffirmed: Sunset Report, I-96; Reaffirmed by Substitute Resolution 208, I-96).
>>>>>>>>Additional recommendations were also adopted. First, the AMA noted that because partial birth abortion is not a medical term, the AMA would not use it. Instead, the term intact dilatation and extraction (or intact D&X) should be used when referring to a specific procedure comprising the following elements: deliberate dilatation of the cervix, usually over a sequence of days; instrumental or manual conversion of the fetus to a footling breech; breech extraction of the body except the head; and partial evacuation of the intracranial contents of the living fetus to effect vaginal delivery of a dead but otherwise intact fetus. This procedure is distinct from D&E procedures, which are more commonly used to induce abortion after the first trimester.<<<<<<<<
Second, the AMA recommended that the intact D&X procedure not be used unless alternative procedures pose materially greater risk to the woman. It is the physician, however, who must retain the discretion to make that judgment, acting within standards of good medical practice and in the best interest of the patient.
Third, because the viability of the fetus and the time when viability is achieved may vary with each pregnancy, it is the physician who should determine the viability of a specific fetus, using the latest available diagnostic technology. In addition, the AMA recommended that abortions not be performed in the third trimester except in cases of serious fetal anomalies incompatible with life. According to the recommendation, except in extraordinary circumstances, maternal health factors that demand termination of the pregnancy can be accommodated without sacrifice of the fetus, and the near certainty of the independent viability of the fetus argues for ending the pregnancy by appropriate delivery. "
Despite the fact that many members here have repeatedly explained that the term "partial birth abortion" was NOT an actual medical term, but a catch phrase made up by a pro-life politician with no medical background whatsoever, the pro-lifers who post in here continue to use the term.
While I'm all for debating, it is not good arguing style to use terms that are medically incorrect, terms that were CREATED to make an appeal to emotion, terms that mislead and misinform. One of these terms is "partial birth abortion".
SO - from a non-biased source, The Journal of the American Medical Association, which is one of the oldest, most trusted medical publications, I have copied the following:
"AMA House of Delegates adopted recommendations on late-term abortion and abortion techniques.1 The recommendations reaffirmed AMA policies regarding abortion (5.990, 5.993, and 5.995) that state that the early termination of pregnancy is a medical matter between the patient and physician subject to the physician's clinical judgment, the patient's informed consent, and the availability of appropriate facilities.
The AMA policy also states that abortion is a medical procedure and should be performed by a physician in conformance with standards of good medical practice and that support of or opposition to abortion is a matter for members of the AMA to decide individually, based on personal values or beliefs.
The AMA will take no action that may be construed as an attempt to alter or influence the personal views of individual physicians regarding abortion procedures. Also reaffirmed was the policy that neither physician, hospital, nor hospital personnel shall be required to perform any act violative of personally held moral principles (Amended Resolution 158, A-90); (Resolution 49, I-89) (Substitute Resolution 43, A-73; Reaffirmed: I-86; Reaffirmed: Sunset Report, I-96; Reaffirmed by Substitute Resolution 208, I-96).
>>>>>>>>Additional recommendations were also adopted. First, the AMA noted that because partial birth abortion is not a medical term, the AMA would not use it. Instead, the term intact dilatation and extraction (or intact D&X) should be used when referring to a specific procedure comprising the following elements: deliberate dilatation of the cervix, usually over a sequence of days; instrumental or manual conversion of the fetus to a footling breech; breech extraction of the body except the head; and partial evacuation of the intracranial contents of the living fetus to effect vaginal delivery of a dead but otherwise intact fetus. This procedure is distinct from D&E procedures, which are more commonly used to induce abortion after the first trimester.<<<<<<<<
Second, the AMA recommended that the intact D&X procedure not be used unless alternative procedures pose materially greater risk to the woman. It is the physician, however, who must retain the discretion to make that judgment, acting within standards of good medical practice and in the best interest of the patient.
Third, because the viability of the fetus and the time when viability is achieved may vary with each pregnancy, it is the physician who should determine the viability of a specific fetus, using the latest available diagnostic technology. In addition, the AMA recommended that abortions not be performed in the third trimester except in cases of serious fetal anomalies incompatible with life. According to the recommendation, except in extraordinary circumstances, maternal health factors that demand termination of the pregnancy can be accommodated without sacrifice of the fetus, and the near certainty of the independent viability of the fetus argues for ending the pregnancy by appropriate delivery. "
Post #12
Jen replied to Jen's poston March 23, 2007 at 11:00am
The Three WORST Arguments Against Abortion
I have seen some really brilliant Pro-Life Arguments. Arguments that have helped shape my stance on Pro-Choice exceptionally, arguments that made me think. These three are definately not those arguments. So in the interest of ending the redundancy, I'd like to point them out in an effort to BANNISH them from this forum. We have heard these, and they have never convinced us of anything. They don't prove anything, except how immature some Pro-Lifers are, and how some Pro-Lifers don't even think before they speak.
Argument #1: You Could Very Well Have Aborted the Person Who Will Cure Cancer.
Where to even start with this?? While its all well and good to have this kind of optimism for the human race, but when applying it in an emotionally manipulative and wholely unrealistic sense such as this, its just plain ridiculous. Yes, you could very well have the next scientist who cures cancer on your hands. OR you could have the next mass murderer on your hands. Or the man who ends the world, or the man who invents a new kind of delicious candy. Or most likely, you'll have a very average, very normal, human being. In an argument like this, potential is what you're aiming for, the potentiality of a life, but you're falling miserabley short, and aiming for unrealistic expectations. 2/3rds of conceptions never even make it to birth, to start telling people they took the cure for cancer away is like saying by not watering my plant, I single-handedly ruined the ozone layer. Focus on your point, don't delve into the fantasy of potentiality.
Argument #2: What if your mother had aborted you?
Well, if my mother aborted me, then I wouldn't be here. And that's about it. This is a completely arrogant view for anyone to hold, and it reeks of entrapment. I don't think I am so special that if I had been aborted the world would end. You can't miss what never was. My mother had a choice. She chose to carry me to term. I ask only that I too have this right. And I have personally told my mother that if she were in my position, a poor college student with no full time job, debt, no husband, nothing, I would not have thought twice or ever held it against her for aborting. And my mother agrees with me.
But really, if I had been aborted, I wouldn't be alive, so really, I wouldn't care. If you believe in Heaven, I'd be in Heaven, if you believe in reincarnation, I'd be somebody else, if you believe in purgatory, my unbaptized, unborn fetus soul would be floating around, chilling with the rest of the unbaptized kids, and if you don't believe in anything then I just wouldn't exist, the end. And that's all there is to it, so to this argument I can only say "So what?"
Argument #3: If you couldn't wear a condom, then too bad!
This is possibley the most outrageous statement I've heard to date. In the very first post of this compilation thread, it was proved that 54% of all women who abort were practicing some form of birth control which not only includes condoms that failed, but birth control pills, IUDs, cervical caps, spermicides, or even at least natural family planning. All failed to enough of a degree that the woman was impregnated. That's over HALF of the women you condemn, using contraceptives. Not to mention that if we went case by case in abortion situtations, we'd find women who didn't know how to use birth control. Women who were embarassed to use it because of their upbringing, and the very intolerance of birth control that can be found in many parts of this country. Women who can't afford birth control is by far the worst situation, and they exist, they exist becasue birth control is expensive, there are few programs that accomodate for it, and there are very few Planned Parenthoods (sometimes only 1) in each state that can supply these things to women. Women are not stupid for having an unwanted pregnancy, and who are you to judge each and every woman?
This argument is ridiculous because its made from an ignorant standpoint of someone who refuses to even try and learn about what they're claiming. Its an assumption, and in a debate assumptions are as good as dirt. To be frank, if you're using this argument, you really have absolutely no idea what you're even arguing about, and therefore have absolutely no business arguing about it.
I have seen some really brilliant Pro-Life Arguments. Arguments that have helped shape my stance on Pro-Choice exceptionally, arguments that made me think. These three are definately not those arguments. So in the interest of ending the redundancy, I'd like to point them out in an effort to BANNISH them from this forum. We have heard these, and they have never convinced us of anything. They don't prove anything, except how immature some Pro-Lifers are, and how some Pro-Lifers don't even think before they speak.
Argument #1: You Could Very Well Have Aborted the Person Who Will Cure Cancer.
Where to even start with this?? While its all well and good to have this kind of optimism for the human race, but when applying it in an emotionally manipulative and wholely unrealistic sense such as this, its just plain ridiculous. Yes, you could very well have the next scientist who cures cancer on your hands. OR you could have the next mass murderer on your hands. Or the man who ends the world, or the man who invents a new kind of delicious candy. Or most likely, you'll have a very average, very normal, human being. In an argument like this, potential is what you're aiming for, the potentiality of a life, but you're falling miserabley short, and aiming for unrealistic expectations. 2/3rds of conceptions never even make it to birth, to start telling people they took the cure for cancer away is like saying by not watering my plant, I single-handedly ruined the ozone layer. Focus on your point, don't delve into the fantasy of potentiality.
Argument #2: What if your mother had aborted you?
Well, if my mother aborted me, then I wouldn't be here. And that's about it. This is a completely arrogant view for anyone to hold, and it reeks of entrapment. I don't think I am so special that if I had been aborted the world would end. You can't miss what never was. My mother had a choice. She chose to carry me to term. I ask only that I too have this right. And I have personally told my mother that if she were in my position, a poor college student with no full time job, debt, no husband, nothing, I would not have thought twice or ever held it against her for aborting. And my mother agrees with me.
But really, if I had been aborted, I wouldn't be alive, so really, I wouldn't care. If you believe in Heaven, I'd be in Heaven, if you believe in reincarnation, I'd be somebody else, if you believe in purgatory, my unbaptized, unborn fetus soul would be floating around, chilling with the rest of the unbaptized kids, and if you don't believe in anything then I just wouldn't exist, the end. And that's all there is to it, so to this argument I can only say "So what?"
Argument #3: If you couldn't wear a condom, then too bad!
This is possibley the most outrageous statement I've heard to date. In the very first post of this compilation thread, it was proved that 54% of all women who abort were practicing some form of birth control which not only includes condoms that failed, but birth control pills, IUDs, cervical caps, spermicides, or even at least natural family planning. All failed to enough of a degree that the woman was impregnated. That's over HALF of the women you condemn, using contraceptives. Not to mention that if we went case by case in abortion situtations, we'd find women who didn't know how to use birth control. Women who were embarassed to use it because of their upbringing, and the very intolerance of birth control that can be found in many parts of this country. Women who can't afford birth control is by far the worst situation, and they exist, they exist becasue birth control is expensive, there are few programs that accomodate for it, and there are very few Planned Parenthoods (sometimes only 1) in each state that can supply these things to women. Women are not stupid for having an unwanted pregnancy, and who are you to judge each and every woman?
This argument is ridiculous because its made from an ignorant standpoint of someone who refuses to even try and learn about what they're claiming. Its an assumption, and in a debate assumptions are as good as dirt. To be frank, if you're using this argument, you really have absolutely no idea what you're even arguing about, and therefore have absolutely no business arguing about it.
Post #13
Jen wroteon October 12, 2007 at 4:44pm
Fetal Development (Taken from the book "Human Sexuality" by Simon Levay):
All of this is taken from the Bilogy book "Human Sexuality" by Simon Levay, I do add some smarmy comments in retort to that god aweful poem but its all completely factual, and taken verbatum from the book.
Months 1 & 2
The EMBRYONIC phase of development begins about 15 days after conception and lasts until about 7 weeks after conception. During this relatively brief period, the embryo transforms itself from a tiny plate of cells into a semblance of a human being, only 2-3 CENTIMETERS long but already in posession of all its major organ systems.
Nature has not completely mastered the difficult task of creating a normal embryo. Some large fraction - perhaps over 50% - of all human conceptuses are genetically abnormal and have little or no chance of giving rise to a viable child.
Months 2 & 3
The embryonic phase of development is complete by about 7 weeks of conception, at which point the embryo is referred to as a fetus. Subsequent fetal development involves mainly an increase in sive (growth) and the funtional maturation of body systems. In several respects, the fetus takes control of its mother. For example, it secretes increasing levels of progesterone and estrogens. (More specifically, grogesterone is secreted by the fetal side of the placenta, and androgens are secreted by the fetal adrenal gland and converted to estrogens by the placenta.) As a consequence, progesterone and estrogen levels in the mother's blood rise to higher levels than at any other time in a woman's life. These hormones ensure the maintenance of the uterus in a state conducive to pregnancy.
The fetus is not just smaller than a child, but is different from one - especially in terms of its adaptation to life in the uterus. Its cardiovascular system, in particular, is organized quite differently: the left and right ventricles pump the blood in parallel, rather than in series as they do after birth, and the lungs are largely bypassed. The fetus's hemoglobin - the oxygen-carrying molecule in its blood - is different from adult hemoglobn and is designed to operate at lower oxygen levels.
By the end of the first trimester, the fetus is about 10 cm in its longest dimension (crown-rump length) and weighs about 50 grams (1.75 ounces). The external genitalia have differentiated as male or female and most of the fetus's organ systems are funtioning in a rudimentary way.
Months 3,4, & 5
The fetus moves, as a mother first notices around weeks 14-16 of pregnancy. Its kicks are what are most noticeable but the fetus may also make more controlled movements, such as placing its thumb in its mouth. It responds to stimuli such as loud sounds with an increase in heart rate. It drinks copious amounts of amniotic fluid and voids a dilute urine back into the fluid. It wakes and sleeps and during sleep it has episodes of rapid eye movement (REM sleep - the phase that in children and adults is associated with vivid dreaming). During REM sleep the fetus "practices" breaking by contracting its diaphragm; these movements are essntial for normal lung development.
The fetus is not yet a child, however. In particular, the development of the cerebral cortex, and of its connections to other parts of the nervous system, is very incomplete even at birth. It is conceivable - though by no means documented - that a fetus can consciously experience pain, but it cannot establish durable memories. It also seems unlikely that a fetus can make any kind of fine discrimination, such as preferring one musical composer to another, in spite of some mothers' assertions.
Months 6, 7, & 8
The third trimester begins at 26 weeks of gestational age. At this time, the fetus already weighs about 900 grams (2 pounds) and has a decent chance of surviving if born prematurely, although its survival would require weeks of intensive neonatal care. During the third trimester, the fetus increases rapidly in weight; at the time of fastest growth, which is around 33 weeks, the fetus is putting on about 50 grams (2 ounces) every day. By the time of birth it has reached about 3.2 kilograms (7.1 pounds).
All of this is taken from the Bilogy book "Human Sexuality" by Simon Levay, I do add some smarmy comments in retort to that god aweful poem but its all completely factual, and taken verbatum from the book.
Months 1 & 2
The EMBRYONIC phase of development begins about 15 days after conception and lasts until about 7 weeks after conception. During this relatively brief period, the embryo transforms itself from a tiny plate of cells into a semblance of a human being, only 2-3 CENTIMETERS long but already in posession of all its major organ systems.
Nature has not completely mastered the difficult task of creating a normal embryo. Some large fraction - perhaps over 50% - of all human conceptuses are genetically abnormal and have little or no chance of giving rise to a viable child.
Months 2 & 3
The embryonic phase of development is complete by about 7 weeks of conception, at which point the embryo is referred to as a fetus. Subsequent fetal development involves mainly an increase in sive (growth) and the funtional maturation of body systems. In several respects, the fetus takes control of its mother. For example, it secretes increasing levels of progesterone and estrogens. (More specifically, grogesterone is secreted by the fetal side of the placenta, and androgens are secreted by the fetal adrenal gland and converted to estrogens by the placenta.) As a consequence, progesterone and estrogen levels in the mother's blood rise to higher levels than at any other time in a woman's life. These hormones ensure the maintenance of the uterus in a state conducive to pregnancy.
The fetus is not just smaller than a child, but is different from one - especially in terms of its adaptation to life in the uterus. Its cardiovascular system, in particular, is organized quite differently: the left and right ventricles pump the blood in parallel, rather than in series as they do after birth, and the lungs are largely bypassed. The fetus's hemoglobin - the oxygen-carrying molecule in its blood - is different from adult hemoglobn and is designed to operate at lower oxygen levels.
By the end of the first trimester, the fetus is about 10 cm in its longest dimension (crown-rump length) and weighs about 50 grams (1.75 ounces). The external genitalia have differentiated as male or female and most of the fetus's organ systems are funtioning in a rudimentary way.
Months 3,4, & 5
The fetus moves, as a mother first notices around weeks 14-16 of pregnancy. Its kicks are what are most noticeable but the fetus may also make more controlled movements, such as placing its thumb in its mouth. It responds to stimuli such as loud sounds with an increase in heart rate. It drinks copious amounts of amniotic fluid and voids a dilute urine back into the fluid. It wakes and sleeps and during sleep it has episodes of rapid eye movement (REM sleep - the phase that in children and adults is associated with vivid dreaming). During REM sleep the fetus "practices" breaking by contracting its diaphragm; these movements are essntial for normal lung development.
The fetus is not yet a child, however. In particular, the development of the cerebral cortex, and of its connections to other parts of the nervous system, is very incomplete even at birth. It is conceivable - though by no means documented - that a fetus can consciously experience pain, but it cannot establish durable memories. It also seems unlikely that a fetus can make any kind of fine discrimination, such as preferring one musical composer to another, in spite of some mothers' assertions.
Months 6, 7, & 8
The third trimester begins at 26 weeks of gestational age. At this time, the fetus already weighs about 900 grams (2 pounds) and has a decent chance of surviving if born prematurely, although its survival would require weeks of intensive neonatal care. During the third trimester, the fetus increases rapidly in weight; at the time of fastest growth, which is around 33 weeks, the fetus is putting on about 50 grams (2 ounces) every day. By the time of birth it has reached about 3.2 kilograms (7.1 pounds).
Post #14
Jen wroteon July 8, 2008 at 9:45am
Proof that Margaret Sanger (And Planned Parenthood by extension) was not a racist eugenicist organization.
By Cameron Johnson
Summary:
1) She’s anything but racist, and uncharacteristically egalitarian and progressive with respect to race even by today’s standards.
2) She spoke out against the Nazis.
3) She was a “reform eugenicist” and was opposed to and opposed by the popular racial eugenicists, though she insisted that they work together, because they supposedly had more in common than different, in attempt to garner their support. The racial eugenicists were the dominant players of the time.
4) Last but not least…. For all the ignorant prolifers out there PAY ATTENTION: She spoke out against abortion.
1) The popular evidence of supposed racism:
"We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population"
The full quote in context (getting Negro ministers and Doctors involved… because black people will speak more openly with them):
“We don want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
Sanger didn’t “want word to get out” because she didn’t “want to exterminate the Negro population.” She was afraid, and justifiable so given the lack of success at clinics run by white doctors, that blacks would be suspicious of a white political or racial agenda. The predominate mind-set of the time, particularly amongst affluent whites, is what Sanger derided and called a “cradle competition” to make more babies than the other ethnic group.
2) Sanger’s reputed influence/affiliation with Nazis is based on tenuous second-hand and third-hand affiliations: because she wrote a letter to this or that guy, and because that guy knew or worked with someone in the third Reich. In reality, she spoke out strongly against the Nazis on numerous occasion and was a member of the American Council Against Nazi Propaganda. In a letter to a friend, she wrote: “all the news from Germany is sad and horrible and to me more dangerous than any other war going on any where because it has so many good people who applaud the atrocities and claim it is right”
3) Sanger was opposed to the popularly embraced version of eugenics, the racial superiority eugenics which she called the “cradle competition”, and they were opposed to her efforts to get birth control going on for fear that the unfits would out-populate the fits.
4) Finally... In Pivot of Civilzation, from which prolifers love to cherry-pick, Sanger writes: “These unwanted pregnancies often provoke the crime of abortion,….
That’s right, Sanger opposed abortion and thought it was a crime.
And now for some humorous evidence of the embarrassing desperation and dishonesty of some….
Photoshopped image
http://politicalpartypoop.
Actual image
http://personal.georgiasou
Photo-shopped image
http://www.realclearreligi
Actual images
http://www.americanrhetori
http://www.st-marys.hull.s
By Cameron Johnson
Summary:
1) She’s anything but racist, and uncharacteristically egalitarian and progressive with respect to race even by today’s standards.
2) She spoke out against the Nazis.
3) She was a “reform eugenicist” and was opposed to and opposed by the popular racial eugenicists, though she insisted that they work together, because they supposedly had more in common than different, in attempt to garner their support. The racial eugenicists were the dominant players of the time.
4) Last but not least…. For all the ignorant prolifers out there PAY ATTENTION: She spoke out against abortion.
1) The popular evidence of supposed racism:
"We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population"
The full quote in context (getting Negro ministers and Doctors involved… because black people will speak more openly with them):
“We don want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
Sanger didn’t “want word to get out” because she didn’t “want to exterminate the Negro population.” She was afraid, and justifiable so given the lack of success at clinics run by white doctors, that blacks would be suspicious of a white political or racial agenda. The predominate mind-set of the time, particularly amongst affluent whites, is what Sanger derided and called a “cradle competition” to make more babies than the other ethnic group.
2) Sanger’s reputed influence/affiliation with Nazis is based on tenuous second-hand and third-hand affiliations: because she wrote a letter to this or that guy, and because that guy knew or worked with someone in the third Reich. In reality, she spoke out strongly against the Nazis on numerous occasion and was a member of the American Council Against Nazi Propaganda. In a letter to a friend, she wrote: “all the news from Germany is sad and horrible and to me more dangerous than any other war going on any where because it has so many good people who applaud the atrocities and claim it is right”
3) Sanger was opposed to the popularly embraced version of eugenics, the racial superiority eugenics which she called the “cradle competition”, and they were opposed to her efforts to get birth control going on for fear that the unfits would out-populate the fits.
4) Finally... In Pivot of Civilzation, from which prolifers love to cherry-pick, Sanger writes: “These unwanted pregnancies often provoke the crime of abortion,….
That’s right, Sanger opposed abortion and thought it was a crime.
And now for some humorous evidence of the embarrassing desperation and dishonesty of some….
Photoshopped image
http://politicalpartypoop.
Actual image
http://personal.georgiasou
Photo-shopped image
http://www.realclearreligi
Actual images
http://www.americanrhetori
http://www.st-marys.hull.s