Abortion Links 'n' Stuff
Jul. 18th, 2010 10:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
7rin posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
7rin_on_adoptionThenotsodailyherald's Blog (2010) Adoption or Parenting Not Always the Best Choice [online]. Available at: http://thenotsodailyherald.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/adoption-or-parenting-not-always-the-best-option/ [Accessed 07 December 2010]
<Quote>
Despite the claims of protesters, adoption or parenting may not be the best choice. There’s recent evidence that refutes the protesters’ claims to “Wait another six months and you’ll grow to love the child” or “Give your baby up for adoption. You don’t have to kill it.” In an excerpt from Kornfield and Geller, the authors write the following:
Kost, Landry, and Darroch (1998) found many negative consequences for mothers and children of carrying such a pregnancy to term, including late presentation for prenatal care, a decrease in health promotion behaviors during pregnancy, continued alcohol and nicotine use during pregnancy, premature delivery, low-birth-weight infants, infants that are small for gestational age, inconsistent or no presentation for well- baby care, and a lack of breastfeeding. An unwanted pregnancy increases the likelihood that the infant’s health will be compromised (odds ratio, 1.3; Kost et al., 1998) and it also shows poor outcomes for maternal fetal bonding should the birth mother keep and raise the child (Barber, Axinn, & Thornton, 1999). These authors also point out that poor mother–child relationships are not specific to the unwanted child; all of the children in the family suffer when the mother has given birth to a child as a result of an unwanted pregnancy. Many mothers with unwanted pregnancies deliver low or very low birth weight infants (Kost et al., 1998), which has been associated with higher levels of maternal psychological distress including depression, anxiety, and obsessive compulsive behaviors (Singer et al., 1999).
</Quote>
Read the rest over at thenotsodailyherald's page.
Van Mechelen, R. (1992) Abortion [online]. Longview; Washington. Available at: http://www.backlash.com/book/abort.html [Accessed 07 December 2010]
<Quote>
Suffragists, it may be remarked, were more than a little ambivalent about birth control.
-- Reay Tannahill, Sex in History
In cases of unplanned pregnancy, the law favors women. The choice to abort or not is theirs, the fathers have no say. The choice to keep the children or not is usually theirs, the fathers have no say. But if they keep the children, one way or another men are expected to pay.
This is one of the realities of sex discrimination against men: "A woman who finds herself inadvertently pregnant can decide, without so much as talking with the man involved, to destroy the child. Or, again, she can bear the child and make him pay." (Manhood Redux, C.H. Freedman, pp 169 - 170)
Many argue it's the woman's body, and any issues regarding child bearing are her concern, not his. If this is entirely the case, then just as women have a right to choose, so men must have the same right. If men have no choice in the abortion/birth decision, then there should be no way in which women can impose the responsibility for child support upon men, either directly, through payments from the father, or indirectly, through welfare payments from the government.
The equivalent of women's right to choose to keep or abort a pregnancy is men's right to choose whether to financially support women's choices. This is because the decision whether or not to pay and provide for a child's first 18 years is at least the equivalent of a woman's decision to abort or not.
Pop-feminists don't see it that way, and oppose men's right to choose. Ironically, they often resort to the same argument Pro-life uses to oppose Pro-choice: "She made her choice when she chose to have sex." The pop-feminist version goes something like this: "He made his choice when he chose to have sex, and now he must pay."
The politics of abortion require both sides to try to have it both ways.
</Quote>
Read the rest over at the What Every Man Should Know About Feminist Issues - Abortion page.
<Quote>
Despite the claims of protesters, adoption or parenting may not be the best choice. There’s recent evidence that refutes the protesters’ claims to “Wait another six months and you’ll grow to love the child” or “Give your baby up for adoption. You don’t have to kill it.” In an excerpt from Kornfield and Geller, the authors write the following:
Kost, Landry, and Darroch (1998) found many negative consequences for mothers and children of carrying such a pregnancy to term, including late presentation for prenatal care, a decrease in health promotion behaviors during pregnancy, continued alcohol and nicotine use during pregnancy, premature delivery, low-birth-weight infants, infants that are small for gestational age, inconsistent or no presentation for well- baby care, and a lack of breastfeeding. An unwanted pregnancy increases the likelihood that the infant’s health will be compromised (odds ratio, 1.3; Kost et al., 1998) and it also shows poor outcomes for maternal fetal bonding should the birth mother keep and raise the child (Barber, Axinn, & Thornton, 1999). These authors also point out that poor mother–child relationships are not specific to the unwanted child; all of the children in the family suffer when the mother has given birth to a child as a result of an unwanted pregnancy. Many mothers with unwanted pregnancies deliver low or very low birth weight infants (Kost et al., 1998), which has been associated with higher levels of maternal psychological distress including depression, anxiety, and obsessive compulsive behaviors (Singer et al., 1999).
</Quote>
Read the rest over at thenotsodailyherald's page.
Van Mechelen, R. (1992) Abortion [online]. Longview; Washington. Available at: http://www.backlash.com/book/abort.html [Accessed 07 December 2010]
<Quote>
Suffragists, it may be remarked, were more than a little ambivalent about birth control.
-- Reay Tannahill, Sex in History
In cases of unplanned pregnancy, the law favors women. The choice to abort or not is theirs, the fathers have no say. The choice to keep the children or not is usually theirs, the fathers have no say. But if they keep the children, one way or another men are expected to pay.
This is one of the realities of sex discrimination against men: "A woman who finds herself inadvertently pregnant can decide, without so much as talking with the man involved, to destroy the child. Or, again, she can bear the child and make him pay." (Manhood Redux, C.H. Freedman, pp 169 - 170)
Many argue it's the woman's body, and any issues regarding child bearing are her concern, not his. If this is entirely the case, then just as women have a right to choose, so men must have the same right. If men have no choice in the abortion/birth decision, then there should be no way in which women can impose the responsibility for child support upon men, either directly, through payments from the father, or indirectly, through welfare payments from the government.
The equivalent of women's right to choose to keep or abort a pregnancy is men's right to choose whether to financially support women's choices. This is because the decision whether or not to pay and provide for a child's first 18 years is at least the equivalent of a woman's decision to abort or not.
Pop-feminists don't see it that way, and oppose men's right to choose. Ironically, they often resort to the same argument Pro-life uses to oppose Pro-choice: "She made her choice when she chose to have sex." The pop-feminist version goes something like this: "He made his choice when he chose to have sex, and now he must pay."
The politics of abortion require both sides to try to have it both ways.
</Quote>
Read the rest over at the What Every Man Should Know About Feminist Issues - Abortion page.