Reply to: Female Infanticide

[d000hg]

If a couple are not getting the sex of child they want then the wife needs to bonk somebody else, basic biology that.

PS Not sure I understand previous comments about own gratification. Is it better to have the little sods by mistake?

I mean you should have children because you want to bring a child into the world and love them - of course there is still some self-interest in that - rather than to live through them or use them as some kind of status symbol or to provide for you when you get old.

[wim121]

wim121 some people have long term health issues that will never be resolved. Does that mean they should never have children?

A few of the people I knew who were in that category survived until they children were well into adulthood.

Clarification request: Do you mean either:
1: Someone unwell that could have a limited lifespan?
2: Or someone that has health issues that would cause a danger to the mother or child during pregnancy?

In regards to #1, personally, if I or the OH had a untreatable condition where we knew we had a strong possibility of dropping dead, while the child was still a minor, before conception, I wouldnt want to have a child.

It was bad enough when my father just left when I was a kid, it would be emotional torture and unfair for a child that isnt as capable as an adult in dealing with death and still hasnt been developed properly. For example, having your dad to teach his son how to shave, or a mother sitting down with a daughter when they have their first period is all the things you miss when one parent leaves your world. I couldnt knowingly inflict that pain on someone and take a dim view of others that could be so heartless, wreck-less, thoughtless and cruel.

In this circumstance, one could do short term fostering instead.




In regards to #2, the OH's sister in law, has medical problems surrounding pregnancies. She has had several miscarriages already and was told after the birth of her first child by the doctors that she had problems they couldnt resolve and if she fell pregnant again; at the very least, she would have a strong likelihood of miscarrying, but the issues are so severe if she risked it, she had a good chance of dying herself.

Yet they ploughed ahead and were extremely lucky in having a couple more miscarriages and then had another baby. She had to be rushed in to hospital in the last pregnancy and was close to deaths door, very luckily, she survived.

They knowingly went ahead with these risks which especially disgusted the OH. How can a parent risk leaving a little boy who hadnt even started school yet, without his mummy? We find that extremely warped and sick, that someone could be so greedy and do something so wreckless especially as they were already a parent.

We also agree and feel sorry for the current boy. Once he wasnt a baby or toddler any more, he wasnt deemed cute like a new baby and all their focus switched to having another baby. The child is starting to have behavioural issues so we have heard, which when observed, is no surprise as his parents dont seem to care as much as we would hope parents would, so such behaviour is probably an outreach just for attention which is very sad.

In this circumstance, long term fostering/adoption is a far better option.




I dont know where the people you know fit in to this, unfortunately, we all know evil people.

[wim121]

Oh I guess we'll have to agree to differ on this one then Wim.

It's just one of those emotive subjects where there's no middle ground.

Oh well, we cant agree on them all can we?

Maybe this will also put to bed the rumours that we are clones of each other



So are you a pro lifer then? Can I just ask, with no hostility/negativity, as some find this an emotive subject like you said, but out of interest;
- Is that purely a moral choice or influenced by religion?
- Is it all abortions you find objectionable or just pointless abortions for the reasons in the article? If it is the latter, I would be inclined to agree. While I would prefer someone who couldnt parent properly for whatever reason to be allowed to have an abortion, I dislike the extreme end of the scale like in this article, where people use abortion for the flimsiest of reasons or as contraception for instance. While I dislike it however, I would still prefer them to be allowed to abort then to have a child they dont really want and then for the child to be neglected.
- If you have the opinion of no abortions at all, then is it really better to have a neglected or abused child rather than terminating it before it suffers endlessly?

[SueEllen]

wim121 some people have long term health issues that will never be resolved. Does that mean they should never have children?

A few of the people I knew who were in that category survived until they children were well into adulthood.

[wim121]

PS Not sure I understand previous comments about own gratification. Is it better to have the little sods by mistake?

WHS. We either have kids because we want them, or because we got a bit careless with the contraception.

Thought so! I can't think of another reason why you'd have them.

I understood d000hg perfectly and fail to see how others cant?

Definition - "Having kids for your own gratification":
Many people, decide to have a child for what some may debate as the wrong reasons. They want a child to play with like a doll. They often have a very strong desire to have a child and get pregnant by any means possible including using deception, because they want a child.

They fail to consider or care about having both parents around, caring for, or supporting the child. Many I see, continue to smoke and drink during the pregnancy, then just have the baby as a play doll and when the child starts to grow up, suddenly it isnt so cute anymore, so gets ignored and neglected, with some people even leaving young children at home while they use their welfare payments to go out and get drunk, drop their knickers and convince a man she's on the pill just so she can have another baby as play accessory. As a society, we pay them obscene amounts of money for this lifestyle and at the same time, the CSA hound the father for all they can squeeze out of him, even though he wont ever be able to see the child or had a choice or voice in any of this. They fail to recognise they are bringing another soul in to the world and their obligations.

This varies in degrees. Not everyone is akin to Britney Spears attitudes towards children. The above example is one end of the scale at the extreme end. At the other end, the least extreme, we have some friends who had a child, both mother and father are together, the mother is an excellent carer and one of the best mothers I know and they arent a scummy welfare family at all. They had a child for the right reasons, such as wanting a family, but failed to address practicalities. They had set objectives on a timescale that nothing could change; 'get engaged, married and pregnant on such and such a date'. Before they got pregnant, she had health issues and they had severe money issues for some time, which kept getting worse with only one of them working. I have no fears that the child will ever be neglected at all, however they cant afford to eat themselves at times and continue to spiral in to further debt. Personally, under such circumstances I would never have a child without addressing the health problems first instead of compounding them and then at least trying to address overspending and debt levels, so they could afford all the future expenses.

That is why at least two of us so far on CUK, think such people are unfit to be parents as they just want a play doll, a.k.a. babbby or need to consider the implications of having a child, such as affording one before getting knocked up.




The right reasons behind having a child are debatable, but I would say you would have a child as you would want the aspects of family life and want to be able to impart some of yourself and take a baby and nurture it to a well rounded adult. Reason is not justification enough. One could have the most noble desires for starting a family, but this needs to be backed up by justified practicalities.

[beaker]

WHS. We either have kids because we want them, or because we got a bit careless with the contraception.

Thought so! I can't think of another reason why you'd have them - but once they come you realise they're the best thing that ever happened and give you a reason to live. Apparently. I don't have kids...

[pacharan]

I disagree. I see nothing wrong here. Although why abort a female? If anything, abort a male if they want to save suffering.


Goodness knows. I find it odd people have a problem with abortion.

Every woman that goes through with an abortion deserves a hug, cake and a thumbs up from everyone.


That would take a while since females outweigh males making up 52% of the worlds population.

Oh I guess we'll have to agree to differ on this one then Wim.

It's just one of those emotive subjects where there's no middle ground.

[mudskipper]

WHS. We either have kids because we want them, or because we got a bit careless with the contraception.

[xoggoth]

If a couple are not getting the sex of child they want then the wife needs to bonk somebody else, basic biology that.

PS Not sure I understand previous comments about own gratification. Is it better to have the little sods by mistake?

[wim121]

With an attitude like that, she's not fit to be a parent in the first place. Having kids for your own gratification has to be one of the most selfish things you can do.

Completely agree with you here.

In my opinion, most parents are unfit. One doesnt have a child for your own gratification as a play thing.

I would like to see child licensing enforced, but that will never happen unfortunately. A shame really as it would save a lot of lives, prevent a lot of abuse physically, sexually and emotionally.

[wim121]

Surprised we haven't covered the Telegraph's recent expose yet.

This is scandalous.

I disagree. I see nothing wrong here. Although why abort a female? If anything, abort a male if they want to save suffering.

Have to ask the question though, why is this more morally repugnant than the case of a woman who doesn't want the child just because, say, it's going to get in the way of her career?

Goodness knows. I find it odd people have a problem with abortion.

Every woman that goes through with an abortion deserves a hug, cake and a thumbs up from everyone.

One is legal and the other isn't. I can see a practical reason for the former being illegal as the male- female ratio in our population could become skewed, but the moral one?

That would take a while since females outweigh males making up 52% of the worlds population.

[d000hg]

Yes.

If the couple having the baby want a boy then it should be down to them. My white non catholic friends now have 4 boys because the wife wanted a girl... How nice for the kids to know that they were not good enough for mum. Cheerful subject.

With an attitude like that, she's not fit to be a parent in the first place. Having kids for your own gratification has to be one of the most selfish things you can do.

[bobspud]

Differ with the opinion that it's scandalous to abort a foetus based on its sex?

Yes.

If the couple having the baby want a boy then it should be down to them. My white non catholic friends now have 4 boys because the wife wanted a girl... How nice for the kids to know that they were not good enough for mum. Cheerful subject.

[d000hg]

Gender spectrum

Like only having 66% of a willy... is that what happened to <insert CUK username>?

[NotAllThere]

You could stop telling mothers the gender of their unborn child.

Good point, well presented. <pc mode on>Except you can't tell the gender by ultrasound, because they might be transexual or anywhere on the gender spectrum, and that doesn't show up.<pc mode off>

Strange attitude though. I'd've though most men would prefer a surplus of women. Maybe that particular sector of society are all gay? Is that it?