Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
However, if your significant other decides that she wants to abort your child - for whatever reason, is it reasonable in your opinion that the man has no rights?
Where does the morning after pill fit into this (I notice that stat was missing from CDC post)?
I agree that some males think that 'spreading your seed' is their human right, this needs to stop.
For the record when my cohabiting 'partner' (at 17) fell pregnant due to a failed contraceptive pill course, I said that I would support her and her decision. She decided on abortion and the process (via NHS) confirmed that at that time 'ethics' were prehistoric. 2 GP's had to decide you were mentally incapable of keeping the child.
For my part nearly 40 years on I can see that my reactions to this alter as I get older. I have not had children of my own, but I'm step dad to two and granddad to two, so sometimes I'm a little sad, particularly as grandchild 2 is 5 months old. Overriding that is the reason that she gave for her final decision, in that she was not ready for children/family and that she wanted a career (I was paying all the bills whilst she went to College). Last time I had any news of her she was a top flight graphic designer. Not sure about her status as a mum.
I do think that planetary over population should also be facet of this discussion. Not easy in more deprived parts of the world sure, but in 1st world countries the onus should be on responsible family size.
I'd like to see the evidence / stats for "lifestyle abortions". Mistakes happen or something goes wrong.
Abortion isn't simple. It's a nasty process on the body, whatever stage it happens at. For a vulnerable woman, it can also be a mentally harrowing experience.
Men seem to think that pregancy, birth, abortions, miscarriages are all just a walk in the park so they're perfectly placed to shame, blame, legislate and generally decide what a woman should do with her body.
That's a sweeping generalisation. I was present during my wife's caesarean, walked in just as they sliced. See that and it puts things into perspective.
If the parasite were separated from its host, could it move about without you sticking an electrode on it, would the feeding reaction take place (it's autonomic in babies for a short while), can it breathe unaided/minimal aid (premature babies have underdeveloped lungs so do need some help but will swiftly manage on their own), etc etc
I'm not talking about what's it's doing while still in the womb - what are it's chances of independent survival if it were to be born at the point the termination is being considered. The argument for lowering the time at which a termination should take place is related to the advances in medical science where foetuses born at 20 weeks are now able to survive with the right level of intensive care.
20 weeks gestation? Possibly very occasionally they may survive.
If the parasite were separated from its host, could it move about without you sticking an electrode on it, would the feeding reaction take place (it's autonomic in babies for a short while), can it breathe unaided/minimal aid (premature babies have underdeveloped lungs so do need some help but will swiftly manage on their own), etc etc
I'm not talking about what's it's doing while still in the womb - what are it's chances of independent survival if it were to be born at the point the termination is being considered. The argument for lowering the time at which a termination should take place is related to the advances in medical science where foetuses born at 20 weeks are now able to survive with the right level of intensive care.
Absolutely agree with your last point.
Brain the size of a planet and I still have to communicate with morons
Leave a comment: