July 13, 201313 yr It seems a lot of states are or are thinking of introducing legislation that will require women to have an ultrasound before they have an abortion. Regardless of your stance on abortion, given that its legal can someone tell me why this law makes sense?
July 13, 201313 yr I guess there could be a number of reasons. One is to confirm the pregnancy. A woman can produce positive tests and not be pregnant due to things like a blighted ovum or other such things. Having an abortion is a very emotional traumatizing thing. If there truly is no child developing it could maybe make less traumatizing. Another factor might be that after seeing an ultrasound the mother might change her mind.
July 13, 201313 yr Author I guess there could be a number of reasons. One is to confirm the pregnancy. A woman can produce positive tests and not be pregnant due to things like a blighted ovum or other such things. Having an abortion is a very emotional traumatizing thing. If there truly is no child developing it could maybe make less traumatizing. Another factor might be that after seeing an ultrasound the mother might change her mind. Your last reason is obviously the hope. That requires us to believe that the female doesn't already know that having an abortion will negate a baby being born. Why do you need the ultrasound then if you already know that?
July 13, 201313 yr Your last reason is obviously the hope. That requires us to believe that the female doesn't already know that having an abortion will negate a baby being born. Why do you need the ultrasound then if you already know that? It is a shaming technique, in my opinion.
July 13, 201313 yr I think seeing and hearing the heart beat of the baby is a lot more powerful and real that looking at a test stick. Even though they know what the consequences of their actions will be it is a lot easier to be disconnected when you haven't seen or heard the baby yet. I know that as happy as we were to find out that we were having our children, it went to a whole different level when we were able to see and hear them during that first ultrasound.
July 13, 201313 yr The first two ultrasounds are typically done to confirm the pregnancy and everything is developing as normal. Depending on what is seen and what happens a woman may need to have a D&C. While a lose in a pregnancy is difficult no matter why I would have to believe it is difference for the mother. Think about it in this manner. I woman has a positive test. She decides she will have an abortion. She goes and has the procedure done. She lives with the pain and grief. Now say the same woman was required to go do an ultrasound. She does and is told she has a blighted ovum. So in fact there is no child and for medical reasons has the same procedure. She does not live with the same pain and grief. Now I have no clue if a woman that goes to a clinic for an abortion is told if she had a blighted ovum or similar circumstance.
July 13, 201313 yr Author It is a shaming technique, in my opinion. No question on that. We complain about unnecessary legislation. This seems like it to me.
July 13, 201313 yr No question on that. We complain about unnecessary legislation. This seems like it to me. Any individual that lives to adulthood because his/her mom changed her mind because of a mandatory ultrasound, would think that this was good legislation.
July 13, 201313 yr I'm with the government intrusion crowd. Anyone railing about the size and the meddling of government that supports this is clearly in the, "I'm against intrusion except when it lines up with my beliefs" camp.
July 13, 201313 yr I'm with the government intrusion crowd. Anyone railing about the size and the meddling of government that supports this is clearly in the, "I'm against intrusion except when it lines up with my beliefs" camp. Does not the government, at all levels, defend life? Seems as if that would be in everyones camp.
July 13, 201313 yr Does not the government, at all levels, defend life? Seems as if that would be in everyones camp. Given that abortion has been legal for 40 years, I'll say no.
July 13, 201313 yr I'm with the government intrusion crowd. Anyone railing about the size and the meddling of government that supports this is clearly in the, "I'm against intrusion except when it lines up with my beliefs" camp. That goes the other way too, people that want the government to control more and want bigger government are generally against the government getting involved in this.
July 13, 201313 yr Does not the government, at all levels, defend life? Seems as if that would be in everyones camp. Given that abortion has been legal for 40 years, I'll say no. Shouldn't the government defend life though?
July 13, 201313 yr Shouldn't the government defend life though? Governments sanction killing all the time.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.