"Incidentally, Khoury is an anti-Semitic member of the Arab Students' Assocation..."

I read those links and do see ANY evidence that Khoury is anti-Semitic. That's a really inappropriate slur Jill. (somebody call a moderator) Can't you guys focus on ending abortion and stop making ridiculous attacks on people who believe differently than you do?

"It's fun because you meet people from all over the country who do them," Khoury said. "It's pretty inspiring."...
----------------------------------------------

DANG! What is wrong with these MED students???
They're getting inspired by people who kill their patients??

"You'll be able to see arms and stuff, but still just miniscule."

Yeah..they're just little arms so they don't matter.

Ick. What is WRONG with these people?

I truly believe they must be mentally disturbed.

I agree. Good riddance and soon! Just too bad she's taking someone's place in med school who wants HEAL! What a novel idea - going in OB/GYN to treat BOTH patients instead of killing one and maiming the other!
I'm with you Elizabeth - these people are ICKY to the max!

Unfortunately, when she leaves for Palestine....guess what she's going to be doing over there? Heal people? Guess again.

Hal, I read the article several times, and clearly Khoury is anti-Semitic, calling those promoting Jews "Zionists" and agreeing the Holocaust takes up too much space.

Laws in effect in the West Bank and Gaza Strip do not allow abortion, even in cases of rape or incest. Abortion is thus considered a crime. The few cases in which an abortion will be permitted are limited to situations in which the health or life of the expecting mother is at stake. It is important here to clarify that by ‘health’, the law refers only to physical health, and not to psychological health, within a set of conditions and complications. As such, battered women or women under a threat of ‘honour’ killing as a result of rape or incest are not afforded the right to a legal abortion. Such women are left with one of two difficult options: to abort the foetus on her own, which carries serious risks to her life and safety, or to continue with the pregnancy and bear the social and psychological burdens of an ‘illegitimate’ pregnancy and childbirth.

http://www.mediterraneas.org/article.php3?id_article=278

Illegitimate’ pregnancy and childbirth

What makes certain pregnancies illegitimate and others not?

Such women are left with one of two difficult options: to abort the fetus on her own,

ANY woman who thinks of this as a serious option should be under psychological supervision.

Jill, some jews are "Zionists," and are happy to be called that. It is an appropriate word for those supporting a Jewish Homeland in the area now occupied by Isreal. Saying the "Holcaust takes up too much space" is not the same as denying it took place or even denying it was horrible. If I were a Palenstian I might very well hold the view that there is way too much talk about the Holocaust compared to the suffering of other groups.
Since I am Jewish (ethnically) , I don't think so, but it's not anti-Semitic to have that view.

The most complicated part of the procedure can be the emotional fallout some patients experience, she said.
“Often times, women are crying and cursing and saying they’re going to hell,” Khoury said. “It may be a quick and easy medical procedure, but it definitely is a very involved social-medical procedure.”

How many people leave gall bladder surgery cursing, crying and fearing hell?

Jill, Zionist Jews are those who supported the creation of the state of Israel. It is a perfectly accepted term. All Jews are not Zionists. Personally, I'm not in favor of the establishment of Israel. Does that mean I hate Jews? Of course not. That's ridiculous.

"How many people leave gall bladder surgery cursing, crying and fearing hell?"

Maybe no one is shouting day after day that gall bladder surgery is a sin.

Hal, but isn't it just a "choice"? If it is just a "choice" then why does one care what other people have to say about it? Maybe it's their own conscience shouting at them day after day.

Can someone post a picture of these ghoulish harridans? Seriously, I want to see what evil looks like in it's early stages. What happened in their lives to be like this?

I am pro life because when I was in Catholic High school we saw the infamous PBS Frontline video of an abortion with the bits and pieces and the blood and the fake and phoney "nurse" who kept on saying "scoot up, scoot up" or something like that to the girl terminating - I will never forget.

She is going to be doing self genocide by liquidating Arab babies...she is following in the grand tradition of the Sanger family, to limit the spread of Southern Europeans, people of color, Asians, Southern Mediterranean people...Oh, ancient gods of the Levant, we bow to you oh Moloch and Baal!

MAYBE Hal, because a gall bladder does not have a central nervous system, a brain, legs, arms etc.
Maybe because a gall bladder is an ORGAN and not a PERSON.

The obvious thing is that Khoury is going to go overseas with the intention of doing illegal abortions.
Obviously, she thinks this is going to be a liberating option for Palestinian women.
Maybe, with any luck, she'll get arrested and put where she belongs.

Patricia, there is nothing stopping someone from starting a religion where Gall Bladders are holy and abortion them would be a mortal sin.

Some might say a follower of that religion had a screw loose. Some might say the same about other religious beliefs.

And some might say that people who compare organs to people might have a screw loose.

Yes your right Hal. We've certainly seen that with scientology. However, a valid religion such as Christianity does not make unreasonable demands - it merely follows natural law which God has placed within us, enhancing and enriching this and guiding us.
Worshipping gall bladders, somehow doesn't seem reasonable to me. And PLEAAASSSE don't hit me with the response that to some it might!
Let's keep our discussion logical here.

Merritt Evans MED ’09, a coordinator for the abortion workshop, told the Yale Daily News that she wanted to show students that abortion is “a simple procedure, but the media attention around it … makes this an emotionally traumatic and a complicated thing.”

Really Merritt??

Read on.....
Anxiety, depression, regret, anger, a deep sense of loss, guilt, crying, nightmares, marital problems, difficulty sleeping, flashbacks, hopelessness, psychotic reactions, and loss of self-image were cited as directly resulting from abortion.

91% Suffer from Post-abortion Trauma, Studies Show

© 1992 Diane S. Dew in The Standard

As many as 91% of all abortions cause severe psychological problems, both immediate and long-term, according to reports of the Department of Education and the Alan Guttmacher Institute.

"Planned Parenthood ... has admitted something which pro-life forces have contended for years," reported the Christian Observer May 29.

"Apparently Planned Parenthood is now going public with the heretofore secret research data," the article states, "because they are trying to blame the post-abortion trauma on pro-lifers ... [who they say] have made [women] feel guilty."

For years, however, numerous studies consistently have indicated that abortion is the direct cause of many psychological problems, including lack of self-esteem, guilt, depression, psychoses, neurotic symptoms, chemical dependency and even suicide." ("Abortion: Pain or Pleasure?" by Howard W. Fisher, MD, in The Psychological Aspects of Abortion, D Mall and WF Watts, MD, ed, 1979)

Fisher studied the records of dozens of women with psychological problems who had induced abortions. He found a direct correlation between their emotional difficulties and abortion.

Squelching the facts

Doctors, however, often have been unwilling to retain the necessary information on patients, which would assist researchers studying abortion's after-effects, he found.

"It can be no accident," writes Fisher, "that physicians participating in abortion sought to prevent the keeping of records that might contain the data needed to expose these problems." (p. 50)

"Are physicians merely accomplices in [women's] self-destructive behavior?" Fisher asks.

In an almost prophetic tone, Fisher calls society to account: "... whether abortion is itself a symptom of the manipulation of medicine by antisocial personalities ... If that is so, and that symptom is allowed to become a disease of epidemic proportions, it may spell the demise of the whole of medicine and of society." (p. 50)

"The only solution to this problem," Fisher writes, "is ... recognizing [children] as separate living beings from the moment of conception ..." (p. 51)

In another study, 58 of 70 distressed women who called Milwaukee's Pregnancy Aftermath Helpline from in a two-year period related their psychological problem to abortion. ("The Psychological Sequelae of Abortion: Fact and Fallacy," by MH Liebman, MD and Jolie S. Zimmer, in The Psychological Aspects of Abortion, p. 128)

Anxiety, depression, regret, anger, a deep sense of loss, guilt, crying, nightmares, marital problems, difficulty sleeping, flashbacks, hopelessness, psychotic reactions, and loss of self-image were cited as directly resulting from abortion.

Misled by abortion personnel

Almost one out of four women in Liebman's study specifically complained that they had been either misled or misinformed about abortion by clinic personnel. They had been told the fetus was only "like a fish," for example, or "an acorn," or "only tissue."

"Don't think of it as killing," one counselor told a woman, but as "taking blood out of your uterus to get your periods going again."

Women also claimed that they had not been informed of the possibility of miscarriages, sterility or post-abortion trauma.

Pro-choice? or no choice?

If pro-aborts were really "pro-choice," they would not oppose the presentation of the other side of the issue. After all, "choice" does imply the demonstration of at least two options.

In light of these facts, and the post-abortion trauma to which women are subjected, pro-aborts might consider changing their chant* to: "Pro-choice, that's our lie; we don't care if women cry!"

* A common pro-abortion chant outside abortion clinics is: "Pro-life, that's a lie; you don't care if women die.")

This story is so telling and sad....I read Khoury's "sanitized version". Towards the end she refers to women having abortions as "having their body instrumented". These people need our continued prayers.

She also says, "85% of U.S. counties have no IDENTIFIED abortion provider".

Are we in an abortion state-of-emergency?? I suspect this number is greatly over exaggerated. How many small-town clinics go uncounted for fear of reprisal, etc... and how many counties have acres and acres of cattle and corn for every person who inhabits it. Do they each really need their own abortion doctor? The pro-aborts are just putting a spin on the numbers to further their cause. Again, these people need our prayers.

Anon 2:26 was me. Sorry!

"If pro-aborts were really "pro-choice," they would not oppose the presentation of the other side of the issue. After all, "choice" does imply the demonstration of at least two options. "
---------------------------------------

Sandy, I wholeheartedly agree !!

"Worshipping gall bladders, somehow doesn't seem reasonable to me. "

Doesn't seem reasonable to me either. However, you lost me with your reference to "valid religion."

She also says, "85% of U.S. counties have no IDENTIFIED abortion provider".

Annonymous,
I was at a pro-life gathering in D.C. with Jill and MK hosted by Dawn Eden. She countered this statement by saying that probably more than 85% of all counties do not have a cardiolgist or neurologist either. Brilliant!

Thank you Sandy. Great post! I struggled with quite a few of the emotional consequences myself.

Carla,
Sorry to hear of your abortion. It must be so frustrating how people can't accept and continue to invalidate that women truly do suffer from this experience. Speaking of frustration...

I would like to again correct FF's false assertion that I have had an abortion. (Made on another recent thread)

I have never had an abortion and have tried to clarify this statement before with her.

Bethany, if you are around can you somehow put the catption "never aborted" under my photo.

It's amazing how she refuses to get her facts straight even on the simplest of issues.

I have experienced two devastating miscarriages.

I am so sorry Sandy. I have had 2 miscarriages myself. It is frustrating to think that others ignore the pain of someone who says, "Hey, I'm in pain!" Fortunately there are only 2 people on this blog that have ever been cruel about my abortion.

Carla,
The pro-choice movement continues to throw women under the bus just so they can maintain "choice" Any woman who gets in their way is just shuffled aside.

The pro-choice movement has done nothing positive for women who experience pregnancy loss. They have added to the pain by negating women who truly do greive over the loss of their babies.

Almost one out of four women in Liebman's study specifically complained that they had been either misled or misinformed about abortion by clinic personnel. They had been told the fetus was only "like a fish," for example, or "an acorn," or "only tissue."

Sandy, it was only 70 women in the first place, so "almost one out of four" would be a grand total of 17 or 16 or 15 if not less.

There may have been some few such women who were told things that are false or at least a bit misleading or exaggerations, but that is saying nothing about most women who have abortions. The vast majority of women who have abortions are glad they did so, and would do the same thing again in similar circumstances.

Pro-Choicers are not for women being coerced, either way.

Doug

I have had 2 miscarriages myself. It is frustrating to think that others ignore the pain of someone who says, "Hey, I'm in pain!" Fortunately there are only 2 people on this blog that have ever been cruel about my abortion.

Carla, as before, your feelings cannot be argued. You have them, period. Nobody is saying there are zero women who regret having abortions. Life is not like that, same as there are women who regret not having abortions.

I don't want you to be in pain nor do I think it's in any way the Pro-Choice position to ignore you.

Doug

The pro-choice movement continues to throw women under the bus just so they can maintain "choice" Any woman who gets in their way is just shuffled aside.

Nope, Sandy. Being for women having the freedom of choice in the matter is not saying there will never be regrets nor that women who suffer afterwards don't count.

They do, but their experience doesn't apply to all women. Just as some women suffer after giving birth, it's no reason to forbid the choice.

Doug

The pro-choice movement has done nothing positive for women who experience pregnancy loss. They have added to the pain by negating women who truly do greive over the loss of their babies.

Posted by: Sandy at January 28, 2008 3:48 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Pregnancy loss?"

Nah.

No one "loses" a pregnancy in the course of an abortion, they make a conscious decision to kick it OUT!
The vast, VAST majority of these women are happy and satisfied with the result.

Pro-Choicers are not for women being coerced, either way.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at January 28, 2008 4:00 PM

Plenty of pro abortion groups oppose laws that require abortionists to allow women to see ultrasound pics if they ask.

OMGz!! The Med Students are learning how to do medical procedures in their chosen field!! Oh noes!! An international student wants to go home when she graduates!!

THE END IS NEAR!!

She also says, "85% of U.S. counties have no IDENTIFIED abortion provider".

Annonymous,
I was at a pro-life gathering in D.C. with Jill and MK hosted by Dawn Eden. She countered this statement by saying that probably more than 85% of all counties do not have a cardiolgist or neurologist either. Brilliant!

Posted by: Sandy at January 28, 2008 3:06 PM

In the US 20% of counties have less than 10,000 people. And 95% have a population less than 100,000,

So duh, you aren't going to have a ton of specialists in each and every county in the US.

Thank you Doug. :) It may not be the Pro Choice position to ignore me...why the struggle for some PC's to believe that abortion hurts women?
Laura,
The vast, VAST majority of these women are happy and satisfied with the result. Says who? You?

I don't know if the vast majority of women who have abortions are happy and satisfied or unhappy and unsatisfied. Some number clearly are in each camp. I don't think the fact that some number of women feel that they were "hurt" by abortion is a reason to make it illegal. I lot of people are hurt by (and regret) a lot of legal things.

Hal, nobody's shouting that gall bladder surgery is a sin because the goal of gall bladder surgery isn't to kill an innocent human being, which actually is the case in abortion.

It never ceases to bewilder me that people are perplexed as to why anybody could possibly be disturbed by the practice of killing babies. What part of "Pick on somebody your own size" is that difficult to grasp?

Christina, it's the concept "baby" where you get a disagreement. It's not that we don't understand why you might be "disturbed by the practice of killing babies," it's that we're perplexed why you get to decide. Be disturbed all you want, but don't

Sandy, some counties in the US have fewer than 1,000 residents. Do they really need an on-call abortionist, poised and ready to spring into action? In Texas, people think nothing of driving over an hour to get a hamburger. The abortion lobby obviously wants abortion to be more "accessable" than supermarkets and movie theaters if they want it in every freaking county!

Doug, any woman who is glad her baby is dead has something fundamentally wrong with her and ought not to be held up as a role model of womanhood.

What kind of psychopath do you have to be to celebrate the death of any child, much less your own child?

Doug, in case you haven't noticed, giving birth isn't an act that inherently involves killing a helpless, innocent human being. Thus it is fundamentally different from abortion.

You might as well compare how much satisfaction an arsonist feels watching a building burn with how much satisfaction a firefighter feels extinguishing the blaze, then call both lighting the fire and putting it out equally valid moral choices.

I dunno Christina, but most women I've encountered who've had abortions and don't regret them don't seem psycopathic. One of the posters on this blog has had an abortion she doesn't regret, and she seems like a great person to me.

You can judge them, categorize them, etc, all you want, but it isn't going to change how they feel.

Hal, what else would a woman be pregnant with? Human beings beget human babies, not hamsters or fish or anything else. This isn't rocket science here.

human yes, babies no. It's not rocket science, but it is science.

Dan, human beings are capable of both great good and great evil. Killing a baby is still a deplorable thing, even if an otherwise "nice" person has done it. Ted Bundy used to work a suicide hotline and once rescued a toddler from drowning. Do we look at the good things he did, decide he's basically a good person, and thus exucse the murders? Or to we recognize that good and evil can exist in the same person?

The celebration of your baby's death is freaking psychopathic, no matter how nice you may be to puppies and kittens or even other kids.

Hal, what the hell is it then? It's human. It's a separate organism. It's a brand new human being.

Go through all your semantics and gymnastics to pretent it's somehow okay to kill somebody because they're small and helpless. Most decent people feel called on to DEFEND the small and helpless, not to kill them. Yet you and other prochoicers, supposedly champions of the defenseless, point to the very defenselesssness of the unborn as your JUSTIFICATION for killing them.

How much weight do you think it ought to carry, when some guy is in court for murder, for his lawyer to point out that the victim was much younger, smaller, and more defenseless than the perpetrator?

Ok Christina, have these women psycologically evaluated.

Bet you the ones who are fine with their abortion (well a large majority anyway, there are nutcases everywhere)will test perfectly fine, and not have psycopathic behavior

Abortion hurts and kills women and babies. Abortion hurts men as well. Abortion devastates families. Abortion cheapens life.
I do not for one second believe that one can have an abortion and "be perfectly fine with it."
A high school girl called me last night. She recently had an abortion and is distraught. She couldn't stop crying on the phone. I offered her compassion. Should I have said, "Oh, you should be happy and satisfied now. Click."??!!
I find the lack of compassion for women and babies very telling indeed.

There's a difference between having compassion for those who were unsure or regret the choice they made and accepting that someone who had their abortion feels relief.

Having compassion is perfectly acceptable/fine/etc, but not everyone requires it.

I know for a fact that I am free of any psychological disorders except for mild clinical depression and social anxiety that I have had for the majority of my adolescent and adult years. I have nothing but relief about my abortion. Would you consider me psychopathic?

"Pregnancy loss?"

Nah.

No one "loses" a pregnancy in the course of an abortion, they make a conscious decision to kick it OUT!
The vast, VAST majority of these women are happy and satisfied with the result.

Posted by: FetusFascist at January 28, 2008 4:06 PM

More specifically, I was referring to women who experience a miscarriage or stillborn. But the same applies to women who grieve an abortion as witnessed by your continued callus remarks to women on this site who have shared their stories.

In the US 20% of counties have less than 10,000 people. And 95% have a population less than 100,000,

So duh, you aren't going to have a ton of specialists in each and every county in the US.

Posted by: hippie at January 28, 2008 4:31 PM

Uhhh.......that was exactly Dawn's point. Sorry if I didn't communicate that properly.

Pro-Choicers are not for women being coerced, either way.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at January 28, 2008 4:00 PM

Doug,
Have you not read the countless countless accounts of abortion providers coming forward to admit that their main job was to talk women into the abortion???? Do you not believe these stories?

Doug, any woman who is glad her baby is dead has something fundamentally wrong with her and ought not to be held up as a role model of womanhood.

What kind of psychopath do you have to be to celebrate the death of any child, much less your own child?

Posted by: Christina at January 28, 2008 6:01 PM

Christina,
Great comments.

Sandy, some counties in the US have fewer than 1,000 residents. Do they really need an on-call abortionist, poised and ready to spring into action? In Texas, people think nothing of driving over an hour to get a hamburger. The abortion lobby obviously wants abortion to be more "accessable" than supermarkets and movie theaters if they want it in every freaking county!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 28, 2008 5:58 PM

Anon,
I agree. It is ridiculous the pro-choice movement is playing on the fact that 85% of US counties have no abortion provider, just like those same counties probably do not have a neurologist or cardiologist, podiatrist, opthomalogist, etc....all due to the reasons you stated. Why should abortion be any different??

Erin, if you say you have nothing but "relief" after your abortion, then you are "relieved" that you were able to kill your child. It's just that simple.

"Pregnancy loss?"

Nah.

No one "loses" a pregnancy in the course of an abortion, they make a conscious decision to kick it OUT!
The vast, VAST majority of these women are happy and satisfied with the result.

Posted by: FetusFascist at January 28, 2008 4:06 PM

More specifically, I was referring to women who experience a miscarriage or stillborn. But the same applies to women who grieve an abortion as witnessed by your continued callus remarks to women on this site who have shared their stories.

Posted by: Sandy at January 28, 2008 7:02 PM
..........................................

Many women are relieved to spontaneously abort not particularly wanted pregnancies. Many women become angry, sad and depressed when their desire for a baby from a particular pregnancy is taken away from them. Even lack of choice in the matter doesn't effect all women the same way.
Personally, I have a hard time understanding a women 'grieving' over a choice she made for herself.

Got it. You have made no attempt to understand any of my regret and remorse over my abortion even though I've talked about it enough. Try believing me. I went through relief, denial, anger, and acceptance. I will always regret it and you don't or won't understand.
I am so thankful that now my experience will be used to help other women.

I have nothing but relief about my abortion. Would you consider me psychopathic?

I don't think you're technically psychopathic, but I feel sad for you Erin. I do hope that you may grow in wisdom to see how beautiful having a baby/being a parent is. I do also hope you have the chance in life to have children so that your eyes may be opened to the wonder of it all. You did rob yourself of that for the time being.

Doug, 4:00 P.M.said:

"Pro-Choicers are not for women being coerced, either way."

Can you prove this? There IS evidence to prove otherwise.

Jill, mk,

Just curious, Is there any data on abortion doctors in the U.S.? For example, what percentage of abortionists in the U.S. are foreign-born? How many are trained in this country and how many are trained outside of this country? What med schools are they graduating from? How many are second generation?

I don't think you're technically psychopathic, but I feel sad for you Erin. I do hope that you may grow in wisdom to see how beautiful having a baby/being a parent is. I do also hope you have the chance in life to have children so that your eyes may be opened to the wonder of it all. You did rob yourself of that for the time being.

Posted by: Elizabeth at January 28, 2008 10:41 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Don't feel sorry for Erin, she didn't want a child.
Think of all the things YOU'VE managed lose for having one.

Abortion is an affront to the creative nature of God, it negates God as Creator,

Abortion denies the power of God to right a wrong, it negates God as Redeemer,

Abortion makes that which is good, the birth of human life, into that which is evil, the death of human life, and then calls it good, the very definition of blasphemy,

Abortion negates the resurrection power of God as it takes flesh that is alive in it's earthly abode (the womb) and kills it, while God takes that flesh which is dead in it's earthly abode (the grave) and desires to make it alive,

Abortion's desire is to take that which was composed from the chaotic array of elemental molecules into a symphony of life infused with an eternal soul, and turn it back to the entropy of randomness, chaos, nothingness, uselessness.

Abortion is against all that is hopeful, all that requires faith for success; for it's solution; annihilation, it's goal; death, it's dream; breaking God's heart, it's vision, Satan's ultimate power.

Abortion is a counterfeit, for the clawprints of Satan are everywhere to be found in its performance;

Abortion disguises hate as love, bondage as freedom, choice as maturity, sin as righteousness, political correctness as wisdom,

Abortion pits men against women, mothers against their children, fathers against God,
Yes, abortion is Satan's feeble attempt at killing God Himself, for abortion is a metaphor for Satan; it is his coat of arms, his family crest, his logo, his brand, it belongs to him......for he laughs at its willing proponents as they craft their own self-destruction, mantled in self-deception.

Copyright 2007, 2008 by HisMan

I would like to again correct FF's false assertion that I have had an abortion. (Made on another recent thread)

Posted by: Sandy at January 28, 2008 3:23 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gee, I'm sorry.
After awhile you all seem to whine alike...

*nods* Abortion allowed me to not have children for the time being. It let me put it off and wait until a better time for me. If I ever decide that I want children in the future, it'll be on my terms. Honestly, my life is going absolutely FANTASTIC right now. I've finally seemed to figure out the direction my life is going, I have a job, I'm acing school, things are GREAT. If I'd had a baby around this time, I'd not have had these kinds of opportunities.

Don't feel sorry for Erin, she didn't want a child.
Think of all the things YOU'VE managed lose for having one.

FF, wow, I think that was really uncalled for. I'm one of the women Christina is calling psychopathic: I've had an abortion and I don't regret it at all, several years later. I do, however, have many friends who chose differently when they got pregnant, and I am thrilled for them -- just as I'm thrilled that Elizabeth was able to make the right choice for her, especially since she has said before that it is a choice that immeasurably improved her life. I think that all of the "you're a psychopath and I hope you live to regret it!" "you're a voiceless breeder and I hope you are one day smart enough to realize it!" crap is really unnecessary and counter-productive.

Elizabeth, I know that what you said was directed at Erin and not at me, but I'll respond to it anyway since it probably applies to me. I think that being a parent is a beautiful thing, something I absolutely want at some point in my life. I don't think, however, that being a parent will change my mind on whether abortion should be legal or not. If anything I think it will probably reinforce my beliefs.

Erin,

Do you think women in their 40s and 50s who are in the final stages of breast cancer because they delayed or didn't have kids because society said they would be better off with a career think things are great in their lives?

Before you say those are just percentages, remember every one of those numbers is a person. Before you say it was their choice, remember that no one told them what their delay could really cost them and that before society hammered into women that careers were better than kids, most women chose to have families sooner rather than later, which literally saved their lives.

Honestly, my life is going absolutely FANTASTIC right now. I've finally seemed to figure out the direction my life is going, I have a job, I'm acing school, things are GREAT. If I'd had a baby around this time, I'd not have had these kinds of opportunities.

Posted by: Erin at January 29, 2008 6:07 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You sound like you're thriving!
Good for you. You made all the right decisions.

Do you think women in their 40s and 50s who are in the final stages of breast cancer because they delayed or didn't have kids because society said they would be better off with a career think things are great in their lives?

Posted by: hippie at January 29, 2008 7:35 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

They didn't have kids because they didn't want any.
Should I crank out a child I don't want and live a life I can't stand in order to avoid breast cancer?
Thanks, but I think I'll just stick with the mamograms and blood tests.

Would you support comprehesive sex ed that informs teens that every year they delay childbearing increases their breast cancer risk by 10%.?

It is medically accurate.

That way they can make an informed choice.

If I ever decide that I want children in the future, it'll be on my terms.

Don't be so sure that it will be "on your terms". You can never be sure that when you want children, you will be able to conceive. Trust me, I know.

If I'd had a baby around this time, I'd not have had these kinds of opportunities.

I would have adopted your twins, Erin, in a heartbeat. So many people would have. And you could have still had those opportunities. And your children could have had the most important opportunity - the opportunity to be ALIVE and to be loved.

If I ever decide that I want children in the future, it'll be on my terms.

Don't be so sure that it will be "on your terms". You can never be sure that when you want children, you will be able to conceive. Trust me, I know.

Posted by: Bethany at January 29, 2008 8:30 AM

Great point Bethany. You I and millions of other women understand this is not always possible.

My brother always wanted a huge family. Unfortunately, his wife aborted when she was young and she has never been able to have children. This has put enormous stress on her and their relationship.

A woman I worked with aborted when she was young and according to her own doctor, the abortion left her unable to conceive on her own due to scar tissue etc... Eight years later and thousands of dollars in fertility treatments, she finally got pregnant had one daughter but was never been able to conceive again.

My brother always wanted a huge family. Unfortunately, his wife aborted when she was young and she has never been able to have children. This has put enormous stress on her and their relationship.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Wow.
Clearly she has a history of successful conception. Must be his fault.

Erin,
I am glad that your life is going well right now. If that is not the case down the road, please remember there are tons of resources and people that can help you come to terms with your abortion.

Laura,

You were strangely silent on the Weekend question thread...you know. The "religious" one?

Did you store up all the unsaid sarcasm from that post and decide to unleash it now? You're being especially mean today? Are you okay?

Think of all the things YOU'VE managed lose for having one.

ohhh, you mean like having a boyfriend or friends? well if I have to be single and childless to have those...don't want em'.

Whatever I've lost, although I don't find to be much..wasn't worth it in the first place. Not compared to my precious little girl.

If I'd had a baby around this time, I'd not have had these kinds of opportunities

Well, Erin..that is your assumption..and again..I was not criticizing you in any way. It is just my opinion on what I think based on the question that you asked.

After awhile you all seem to whine alike...

Posted by: FetusFascist at January 29, 2008 2:24 AM

Virtually all counselors and therapists agree that it is good for people to share their feelings about their difficult experiences. I posted some stuff about a pro abortion lady in San Francisco who set up a help line for other pro aborts to help counsel people after abortion. People have feelings even though they are different.

Saying people are whining because they are talking about their difficult experiences seems mean for no reason.

What is the point? Do you think everyone should just shut up?

Elizabeth,

Good point.

Whatever I've lost, although I don't find to be much..wasn't worth it in the first place. Not compared to my precious little girl.

Posted by: Elizabeth at January 29, 2008 9:21 AM

We will lose everything we have, but we get to keep our family and our good deeds for eternity.

Laura,

You were strangely silent on the Weekend question thread...you know. The "religious" one?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I was in Vegas most of the weekend at the wedding of one of Mike's music industry buddies. It was amazing, posh, and full of drunk celebrities.

For the life of me I can't figure out why all of the women you people hang out with can't seem to make adult decisions. They all seem to have an abortion and then spontaniously combust. Considering that almost 1/3 of all American women of childbearing age and older have had an abortion, can't you think of a single one who just got on with her happy, balanced life? With those kind of numbers, it must be the vast majority of them.

Elizabeth, I know that what you said was directed at Erin and not at me, but I'll respond to it anyway since it probably applies to me. I think that being a parent is a beautiful thing, something I absolutely want at some point in my life. I don't think, however, that being a parent will change my mind on whether abortion should be legal or not. If anything I think it will probably reinforce my beliefs.

Well, Alexandra...you will just have to wait and see I guess. Not that I'm saying actually having a baby will change your mind..but it's a powerful experience...powerful enough to do so.

My brother always wanted a huge family. Unfortunately, his wife aborted when she was young and she has never been able to have children. This has put enormous stress on her and their relationship.
A woman I worked with aborted when she was young and according to her own doctor, the abortion left her unable to conceive on her own due to scar tissue etc... Eight years later and thousands of dollars in fertility treatments, she finally got pregnant had one daughter but was never been able to conceive again.

What's so sad about this is how frequent it is, and women just are not told about this risk! It's terrible.

We will lose everything we have, but we get to keep our family and our good deeds for eternity.

This is true...and when life gets hard, I just look at my daughter who is smiling and happy and doesn't know how to be any other way..and I think I can get through anything.

I was in Vegas most of the weekend at the wedding of one of Mike's music industry buddies. It was amazing, posh, and full of drunk celebrities.

For the life of me, I can't seem to understand why you think such a superficial existence is just so "amazing and posh."

For the life of me I can't figure out why all of the women you people hang out with can't seem to make adult decisions. They all seem to have an abortion and then spontaniously combust. Considering that almost 1/3 of all American women of childbearing age and older have had an abortion, can't you think of a single one who just got on with her happy, balanced life? With those kind of numbers, it must be the vast majority of them.

Why do you think that is, Laura? oh, I guess it's because depressive disorders are sooooo rare among women? That must be why I never, EVER see commercials on TV advertising medications specifically for women with mood disorders like bi-polar, clinical depression, social anxiety, manic depression, etc.... no, stuff like that REALLY rare....

That must be why I never, EVER see commercials on TV advertising medications specifically for women with mood disorders like bi-polar, clinical depression, social anxiety, manic depression, etc.... no, stuff like that REALLY rare....

Posted by: Bethany at January 29, 2008 9:53 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

...And the majority of those disorders manifest themselves in very young women and teens - most of whom have never been pregnant.
Why don't you address PPD and PPP? If you outlaw childbearing, both of those things would go away.

For the life of me, I can't seem to understand why you think such a superficial existence is just so "amazing and posh."

Posted by: Elizabeth at January 29, 2008 9:41 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Two nice, deserving people got married and had a monster wedding.
They did that because they love each other. They said it right out loud in front of God and everybody.
Why is that superficial?

Wow.
Clearly she has a history of successful conception. Must be his fault.

Posted by: FetusFascist at January 29, 2008 9:11 AM

Laura,
You must really be in a bad mood. You are especially mean today. I have heard that coming down from a drug induced high over a weekend bender can be difficult. Maybe it's just the DDTs, Oh well, try your best to get through the day. Maybe some sleep will help.

If not, remember the number. 1-800-GET-HELP

Maybe it's just the DDTs,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OK, THAT was funny.

Honestly, that's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. You're basically threatening women with breast cancer to make them have children. If you don't want children, then YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE THEM.

Honestly Laura,

Glad you were able to see some humor today. It is hard to respond to you with anything other than nonsense.

Please help us understand why you are always so mean spirited. You are always on the defense and quickly attack for no reason. You really are just mean on your posts. I liken you to a junk yard dog who has been abused and neglected and the only way it can get noticed is to bark, sneer and growl at everyone for no reason to get negative attention.

You say you like to debate the subject, but most often your posts lean more towards hurling personal insults at people instead of debating people.

The subject matter of abortion is deeply personal and sensitive. I especially applaude and support post-abortive women for coming to this site and sharing their experiences. I can't imagine you have never regretted choices in your life. You'd be lying if you said you haven't.

Considering that almost 1/3 of all American women of childbearing age and older have had an abortion,

Posted by: FetusFascist at January 29, 2008 9:36 AM

I think it is only 15% because most of the abortions are repeat customers. So although the number of abortions is high enough for it to be 30% of women, most of the actual abortions are on the same women. I think just under half were new customers last year. Also half of the repeaters have had 2 or more.

"Don't feel sorry for Erin, she didn't want a child.Think of all the things YOU'VE managed lose for having one."

fetish facist,
what did Elizabeth lose exactly? she has a beautiful child.

Erin,

Honestly, that's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. You're basically threatening women with breast cancer to make them have children. If you don't want children, then YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE THEM.

Posted by: Erin at January 29, 2008 10:39 AM

People have different goals. Some women want to have families and are not that interested in careers. No one cares what those women want. They are told they will their lives by getting married and having kids.

I don't think we need to threaten women by telling them kids ruin their lives.

I think women are intelligent and can handle the truth.

The truth in this case is that every year past 19 years old that you wait to have a baby increases your risk of breast cancer by 10%.

Do you support telling teens the truth about delaying childbearing and the risk of breast cancer?

Their risk is the same whether we tell them or not.

This is about honesty, not about forcing someone to make one decision over another.

Do you support accurate medical info for teens about reproductive health or not?

According to pp 40,000 women a year die from breast cancer.

Women who delay childbearing or have no kids get breast cancer at twice the rate of those who have a baby by age 20.

So that means over 26,000 die each year because of their decision.

Any words for those 26,000 ladies?

Guess I'm screwed then. I'm 20 and no behbehs for me yet.

Come to think of it, my mom is probably screwed too...she didn't have kids till she was 26 and wasn't married till she was 21.

"For the life of me I can't figure out why all of the women you people hang out with can't seem to make adult decisions. They all seem to have an abortion and then spontaniously combust. Considering that almost 1/3 of all American women of childbearing age and older have had an abortion, can't you think of a single one who just got on with her happy, balanced life? With those kind of numbers, it must be the vast majority of them."

Posted by: FetusFascist at January 29, 2008 9:36 AM

I may be very naive, but I truly do not believe that those numbers are true. I think they have been distorted by the pro-aborts to further their cause by making abortion seem as normal as going to the dentist. I don't know one person who has had an abortion (and I live in a highly populated area). Really.

Whether or not to have an abortion is not an adult decision in the same way that buying your first house or car might be. With an abortion the decision is permanent; sometimes with unforseeable repercussions. I can't imagine why one would consider it immature for a woman to have an emotional response to such a decision. There are women who wear their emotions on their sleeve. There are women who bury their emotions. These emotions can surface many years later. Is it possible that you just haven't met one of these women yet?

Guess I'm screwed then. I'm 20 and no behbehs for me yet.
*
Come to think of it, my mom is probably screwed too...she didn't have kids till she was 26 and wasn't married till she was 21.

WooHoo! I'm safe...baby at 20 and no breasts to speak of...I like Sandy's idea of getting breast augmentation at the taxpayers expense!

All right Laura,

DISH! You can't just casually mention that you spent the weekend with celebrities and then not drop any names! Give!

wooo hooo i'm safe too..baby by 20..no breast cancer for meeeee. lol.

wooo hooo i'm safe too..baby by 20..no breast cancer for meeeee. lol.

Posted by: Elizabeth at January 29, 2008 2:56 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Actually, if your genetic markers carry certain types of characteristics, your risk of breast cancer could be 100%
http://www.breastcancer.org/risk/genetic/

Yeah, have a baby by the time you're 20-
It works out so well for everyone:

Babies of teen mothers have 21% higher probability of low birth weight, increasing possibilities for infant death, blindness, deafness, chronic respiratory problems, mental retardation, mental illness, and cerebral palsy. It doubles chances for dyslexia, hyperactivity, and other disabilities.1

Teen mothers are often victims of abuse. As Kathleen Sylvester, vice president for domestic policy of the Progressive Policy Institute, wrote: “Some studies show… as many as two-thirds were victims of rape or sexual abuse at an early age – crimes often committed by males living in the same household. ... They are easy prey for older men: young…victims of early sexual abuse often develop emotional patterns that make them vulnerable to the attentions of older men.”2 A 1995 Guttmacher Institute study suggests that almost two-thirds of the fathers of the babies are 20 or older.

The younger the girl, the more likely sex was forced. Four in 10 girls whose first intercourse was at 13 to 14 report sex was unwanted.1

Teen mothers start parenthood with few viable economic skills. Forty-one percent of mothers under 18 finish high school, compared to 61% of 20- to 21-year-old first mothers. A scant 1.5% of teen mothers earn a college degree by age 30.1

Making matters worse, in the past 25 years, the median income for college graduates increased 13%, while the median income for high school dropouts decreased 30%.1

Frighteningly, babies of high school dropouts have an eight times higher risk of being killed than those of college graduates.3

Teen mothers are mostly single parents. Eighty percent of fathers do not marry mothers and pay less than $800 annually in child support, important income for poor children.

Children living apart from fathers are five times more likely to be poor than children from two-parent homes. Children of uninvolved fathers are twice as likely to drop out of school, abuse alcohol or drugs or go to jail, and four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems.1

So, if teen mothers have no functional family of origin, no “village” to rely on, all parenting responsibilities fall on young girls who received little nurturing themselves. It’s no surprise they turn to welfare. One-half of all teen mothers and more than three-quarters of unmarried teen mothers receive welfare within five years of their first child’s birth.1

While on paper, married, two-parent families sound like stabilizing alternatives, chances of marital success are slim. Only 30% of married teen mothers stay married. Teen marriages are twice as likely to fail as marriages in which the woman is at least 25 years old.1 Plus, studies of welfare mothers suggest some teen moms may be better off unmarried for safety reasons. According to Esta Soler, president of the Family Violence Prevention Fund, “Studies consistently show that at least 50% to 60% of women receiving welfare have experienced physical abuse by an intimate partner…compared to 22% of the general population… A significant number of women receiving welfare also report a history of physical and sexual abuse in childhood.” In a California study, some recipients report lifetime abuse rates of 80% to 83%.4

While the absence of a caring father has profound consequences for children, the presence of an abusive one may be a matter of life or death. All of these factors take a toll on children. Teen parents are twice as likely as older parents to abuse or neglect their children.5 In reported incidents of abuse and neglect, 100 per 1,000 were families headed by teen mothers. The rate is less than half in families with new mothers in their 20s: 51 incidents per 1,000 families.1 Foster care placement is also significantly higher for children of teen mothers.1

Children of teenagers, then, come to school with baggage and consequently perform poorly. They are 50% more likely to repeat a grade, do worse on standardized tests, and are less likely to complete high school than if their mothers had delayed childbearing. Sons of teen mothers are 13% more likely to end up in prison; daughters, 22% more likely to also become teen mothers.1

Teen mothers are often victims of abuse. As Kathleen Sylvester, vice president for domestic policy of the Progressive Policy Institute, wrote: “Some studies show… as many as two-thirds were victims of rape or sexual abuse at an early age – crimes often committed by males living in the same household. .

Hmm...that doesn't seem to bother Laura when we're talking about sexually abused minors being forced to abort by their rapists...

. It’s no surprise they turn to welfare.

Hmm, Laura had a problem with "handouts" as she referred to them, last time I checked...

Children of teenagers, then, come to school with baggage and consequently perform poorly. They are 50% more likely to repeat a grade, do worse on standardized tests, and are less likely to complete high school than if their mothers had delayed childbearing. Sons of teen mothers are 13% more likely to end up in prison; daughters, 22% more likely to also become teen mothers.1

So, teen pregnancy is bad because your child might not measure up to everyone's standards of normalcy.
I see.

And I'd like to see the studies referred to in this article.

not again with that ridiculous list of teen percentages of percentages.

FF must never have take a math class.

Let's see

"Babies of teen mothers have 21% higher probability of low birth weight"

Instead of 4 in 1000, 5 in 1000.

Good reason for abortion? NO

next

"Forty-one percent of mothers under 18 finish high school, compared to 61% of 20- to 21-year-old first mothers. A scant 1.5% of teen mothers earn a college degree by age 30."

According to NOW 25% of working moms have college degrees.

The real problem is the ridiculously low minimum wage. After a few years they get job skills or get married. Also a large number of these people are non English speaking immigrants who weren't going to graduate anyway. This ignores the fact that these women are happy with their choice although FF is not.

Good reason for abortion? NO

next

median income for college graduates increased 13%, while the median income for high school dropouts decreased 30%

This is a social justice problem.
killing a baby will not increase social justice.

Good reason for abortion? NO

next

The younger the girl, the more likely sex was forced. Four in 10 girls whose first intercourse was at 13 to 14 report sex was unwanted.

Why can't we punish the rapist instead?

Good reason for abortion? NO

next

"Frighteningly, babies of high school dropouts have an eight times higher risk of being killed than those of college graduates."

Frighteningly, FF has not figured out this is simple geography. This is due to the fact that this child is eight times more likely to live in an urban area where death by accident or violence is eight times higher than in the suburbs or rural area.

Geography as a good reason for abortion? NO

next

Dad is not married to Mom.

That is a reason to promote marriage not abortion.

next

“Studies consistently show that at least 50% to 60% of women receiving welfare have experienced physical abuse by an intimate partner…compared to 22% of the general population… A significant number of women receiving welfare also report a history of physical and sexual abuse in childhood.” In a California study, some recipients report lifetime abuse rates of 80% to 83%

this is a strong argument for abstinence.
No partner means no abuse.

Abortion won't stop the abuse.

next

Only 30% of married teen mothers stay married. Teen marriages are twice as likely to fail as marriages in which the woman is at least 25 years old

Just because some fail, doesn't mean they all do. Most marriages fail due to financial pressure and interference from inlaws. Abortion won't fix that.

next.

" Teen parents are twice as likely as older parents to abuse or neglect their children. In reported incidents of abuse and neglect.

Note this is based on reporting. Teens often live with family so when they abuse it is more likely to be noticed and reported than if a man and his wife colaborate to cover up abuse. This is why agencies are always urging folks to report abuse if suspected, because so much is unreported. Also reported cases are not confirmed cases. And finally, the abuse is in the home but note, not attributed to mom herself.

Virtually all of this is about men failing to care for their families.

But of course it is slanted to blame the women.

Sources?
Here ya go:
Sources:

National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy. www.teenpregnancy.org

“What to Do with Those Teenage Mothers,” Kathleen Sylvester. www.ppionline.org

“A Horror Called 'Neonaticide'," Charles Downey. http://sks.sirs.com

Testimony, Family Violence Prevention Fund, Esta Soler. http://endabuse.org

University of Georgia. www.county.ces.uga.edu

wooo hooo i'm safe too..baby by 20..no breast cancer for meeeee. lol.

Posted by: Elizabeth at January 29, 2008 2:56 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Actually, if your genetic markers carry certain types of characteristics, your risk of breast cancer could be 100%
http://www.breastcancer.org/risk/genetic/

Posted by: FetusFascist at January 29, 2008 4:49 PM

Sorry Elizabeth, you still have risk.

FF, absolutely right genetic risk is the biggest risk, but you can't change it. Avoiding breast cancer is a stupid reason to get pregnant, but I have a big problem with not telling people the truth about the risks. I don't think pro life folks want to hear that either, but hey it is true.

Anonymous, you go girl!

(that was referring to the 7:27 post, and my apologies if you're actually a guy. :D)

"Avoiding breast cancer is a stupid reason to get pregnant,"

That would be my first guess... :)

but I have a big problem with not telling people the truth about the risks. I don't think pro life folks want to hear that either, but hey it is true.

Posted by: hippie at January 29, 2008 7:40 PM

"FF, absolutely right genetic risk is the biggest risk, but you can't change it. Avoiding breast cancer is a stupid reason to get pregnant, but I have a big problem with not telling people the truth about the risks. I don't think pro life folks want to hear that either, but hey it is true."

Posted by: hippie at January 29, 2008 7:40 PM

hippie, What don't pro-lifers want to hear? I don't follow.

ehhh...we're all gonna die of something anyway...I'm not going TO have or NOT have kids based on whether it helps me out in the long run. That's not what it's about anyway.

While the absence of a caring father has profound consequences for children, the presence of an abusive one may be a matter of life or death.

This is true...all the more reason I kicked his be-hind to the curb. :)

1. Poverty
- Children in father-absent homes are five times more likely to be poor. In
2002, 7.8% of children in married-couple families were living in poverty,
compared to 38.4% of children in female-householder families.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Children's Living Arrangements and Characteristics: March
2002, P20-547, Table C8. Washington, D.C.: GPO 2003.

- In 1996, young children living with unmarried mothers were five times
as likely to be poor and ten times as likely to be extremely poor.

Source: "One in Four: America's Youngest Poor." National Center for children in Poverty. 1996.

- Almost 75% of American children living in single-parent families will
experience poverty before they turn 11 years old. Only 20 percent of
children in two-parent families will do the same.

Source: National Commission on Children. Just the Facts: A Summary of Recent information
on America's Children and their Families. Washington, DC, 1993.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census.Statistical Abstract of the United States 1994. Washington, DC: GPO 1994.

2. Drug and Alcohol Abuse
- The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states, "Fatherless children are at a dramatically greater risk of drug and alcohol abuse."

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Center for Health Statistics. Survey on Child Health. Washington, DC, 1993.

- Children growing up in single-parent households are at a significantly increased risk for drug abuse as teenagers.

Source: Denton, Rhonda E. and Charlene M. Kampfe. "The relationship Between Family Variables and Adolescent Substance Abuse: A literature Review." Adolescence 114 (1994): 475-495.

- Children who live apart from their fathers are 4.3 times more likely to smoke cigarettes as teenagers than children growing up with their fathers in the home.

Source: Stanton, Warren R., Tian P.S. Oci and Phil A. Silva. "Sociodemographic characteristics of Adolescent Smokers." The International Journal of the Addictions 7 (1994): 913-925.

3. Physical and Emotional Health
- Unmarried mothers are less likely to obtain prenatal care and more likely to have a low birthweight baby. Researchers find that these negative effects persist even when they take into account factors, such as parental education, that often distinguish single-parent from two-parent families.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics. Report to Congress on Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing. Hyattsville, MD (Sept. 1995): 12.

- A study on nearly 6,000 children found that children from single parent homes had more physical and mental health problems than children who lived with two married parents. Additionally, boys in single parent homes were found to have more illnesses than girls in single parent homes.

Source: Hong, Gong-Soog and Shelly L. White-Means."Do Working Mothers Have Healthy Children?" Journal of Family and Economic Issues 14 (Summer 1993): 163-186.

- Children in single-parent families are two to three times as likely as children in two-parent families to have emotional and behavioral problems.

Source: Stanton, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Center for Health Statistics."National Health Interview Survey." Hyattsville, MD, 1988.

Source: Zill, Nicholas and Carol Schoenborn. Child Developmental, Learning and Emotional Problems: Health of Our Nation's Children. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Center for Health Statistics. Advance Data 1990. Washington, DC: GPO, 16 Nov. 1990.

- Three out of four teenage suicides occur in households where a parent has been absent.

Source: Elshtain, Jean Bethke."Family Matters: The Plight of America's Children." The Christian Century (July 1993): 14-21.

4. Educational Achievement
- In studies involving over 25,000 children using nationally representative data sets, children who lived with only one parent had lower grade point averages, lower college aspirations, poor attendance records, and higher drop out rates than students who lived with both parents.

Source: McLanahan, Sara and Gary Sandefur. Growing up with a Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994.

- Fatherless children are twice as likely to drop out of school.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Center for Health Statistics. Survey on Child Health. Washington, DC; GPO, 1993.

Source: McLanahan, Sara and Gary Sandefur. Growing up with a Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994.

- After taking into account race, socioeconomic status, sex, age, and ability, high school students from single-parent households were 1.7 times more likely to drop out than were their corresponding counterparts living with both biological parents.

Source: McNeal, Ralph B. Jr."Extracurricular Activities and High School Dropouts." Sociology of Education 68(1995): 62-81.

- School children from divorced families are absent more, and more anxious, hostile, and withdrawn, and are less popular with their peers than those from intact families.

Source: One-Parent Families and Their Children: The School's Most Significant Minority. The Consortium for the Study of School Needs of Children from One-Parent Families. National Association of elementary School Principals and the Institute for Development of Educational Activities, a division of the Charles f. Kettering Foundation. Arlington, VA 1980.

5. Crime
- Children in single parent families are more likely to be in trouble with the law than their peers who grow up with two parents.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Center for Health Statistics. National Health Interview Survey. Hyattsville, MD, 1988.

- In a study using a national probability sample of 1,636 young men and women, it was found that older boys and girls from female headed households are more likely to commit criminal acts than their peers who lived with two parents.

Source: Heimer, Karen. "Gender, Interaction, and Delinquency: Testing a Theory of Differential Social Control." Social Psychology Quarterly 59 (1996): 39-61.

Source: Ryan, Gail et al."Trendis in a National Sample of Sexually Abusive Youths." Journal of the American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry 35 (January 1996): 17-25.

- A study in the state of Washington using statewide data found an increased likelihood that children born out-of-wedlock would become a juvenile offender. Compared to their peers born to married parents, children born out-of-wedlock were:

1.7 times more likely to become an offender and 2.1 times more likely to become a chronic offender if male.
1.8 times more likely to become an offender and 2.8 times more likely to become a chronic offender if female.
10 times more likely to become a chronic juvenile offender if male and born to an unmarried teen mother.
Source: Conseur, Amy et al. "Maternal and Perinatal Risk Factors for Later Delinquency." Pediatrics 99 (1997): 785-790.

6. Sexual Activity and Teen Pregnancy
- Adolescent females between the ages of 15 and 19 years reared in homes without fathers are significantly more likely to engage in premarital sex than adolescent females reared in homes with both a mother and a father.

Source: Billy, John O. G., Karin L. Brewster and William R. Grady. "Contextual Effects on the Sexual Behavior of Adolescent Women." Journal of Marriage and Family 56 (1994): 381-404.

- A survey of 720 teenage girls found:

97% of the girls said that having parents they could talk to could help reduce teen pregnancy.
93% said having loving parents reduced the risk.
76% said that their fathers were very or somewhat influential on their decision to have sex.
Source: Clements, Mark. Parade. February 2, 1997.

- Children in single parent families are more likely to get pregnant as teenagers than their peers who grow up with two parents.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Center for Health Statistics. National Health Interview Survey. Hyattsville, MD 1988.

- A white teenage girl from an advantaged background is five times more likely to become a teen mother if she grows up in a single-mother household than if she grows up in a household with both biological parents.

Source: Whitehead, Barbara Dafoe. "Facing the Challenges of Fragmented Families." The Philanthropy Roundtable 9.1 (1995): 21.

"Pro-Choicers are not for women being coerced, either way."

Plenty of pro abortion groups oppose laws that require abortionists to allow women to see ultrasound pics if they ask.

Well, Hippie, I think that's pretty stupid.

Thank you Doug. :) It may not be the Pro Choice position to ignore me...why the struggle for some PC's to believe that abortion hurts women?

Carla, that some women are hurt by it is not really at issue. I'd argue just as hard as you with somebody who said no woman ever regretted having an abortion.

But as far as "abortion hurts women," that is not true, or at least as false as saying abortion never hurt any woman.

Doug, any woman who is glad her baby is dead has something fundamentally wrong with her and ought not to be held up as a role model of womanhood.

No, Christina, that "wrong" is in your mind, granted, but it's incorrect to make such blanket statements. You want all "babies" but not all "babies" are wanted, and you're not the one to decide unless it's your pregnancy.
......

What kind of psychopath do you have to be to celebrate the death of any child, much less your own child?

That's really a bunch of emotional spin. "Child"? Oh come on, you know that's at least very arguable; and to compare a born child to an embryo, for example, is getting way out there in left field.

What "celebration" do you really see? I think that most if not all women who have abortions would rather have prevented the pregnancy. Ending a pregnancy may be the best thing in a given situation, but that's not to say that it's a matter of "celebration," or that it wasn't a hard decision for the woman.

Doug

Christina: Doug, in case you haven't noticed, giving birth isn't an act that inherently involves killing a helpless, innocent human being. Thus it is fundamentally different from abortion.

Sure, it's different, but nobody is saying the unborn are "guilty," in the first place. There's no capacity for guilt so it's not a big deal. The unborn are not always wanted, and that, on balance, is what makes for abortions, just as being wanted overall is what makes for people choosing to continue pregnancies.
......

You might as well compare how much satisfaction an arsonist feels watching a building burn with how much satisfaction a firefighter feels extinguishing the blaze, then call both lighting the fire and putting it out equally valid moral choices.

Interesting comparison. Your morality and desire in the matter are different than mine, so we're not going to agree on what is the greatest good.

I think some firefighters really do like the job, dangers and all - they like getting in there and fighting fire. I'd say that most women who have abortions don't really "like" it. It's that they see it as preferable to continuing the pregnancy.

Doug

Have you not read the countless countless accounts of abortion providers coming forward to admit that their main job was to talk women into the abortion???? Do you not believe these stories?

Sandy, I do believe that some of that has occurred and that it does go on. I'm not for that, just as I'm not for CPCs or anybody trying to influence the woman against what she wants.

Doug

"Pro-Choicers are not for women being coerced, either way."

Janet: Can you prove this? There IS evidence to prove otherwise.

Nope, if somebody wants women to be coerced, then they aren't Pro-Choice.

Pro life folks want teen aged women to know that abortion kills and innocent child. Just the truth.

Pro abortion folks want teen aged women to know that single parenthood is really hard. Just the truth.

So far not one person pro life or pro abortion has wanted to inform teen aged women that their breast cancer risk rises the longer they delay childbearing. Just the truth.

Women can handle the truth.

Feminism still has a long way to go in both camps.

So far not one person pro life or pro abortion has wanted to inform teen aged women that their breast cancer risk rises the longer they delay childbearing. Just the truth.

Women can handle the truth.

Hippie, yeah, but does that mean that the increased risk, if any, will mean that a given woman would want to have kids? Of course not.

The longer she delays quitting going to McDonald's increases the risk for several things...

Hippie, yeah, but does that mean that the increased risk, if any, will mean that a given woman would want to have kids? Of course not.

The longer she delays quitting going to McDonald's increases the risk for several things...

Posted by: Doug at February 1, 2008 9:33 AM

So since it doesn't matter, why not tell teens?

Are you saying yes teens should be told about the increased risk of breast cancer by delaying childbearing or not?

Do you support telling them or not?

As I said and you repeated, they may the same decisions anyway.

Do you support telling them?

So since it doesn't matter, why not tell teens?

Are you saying yes teens should be told about the increased risk of breast cancer by delaying childbearing or not?

Do you support telling them or not?

Hippie, if it's really now uncontested that childbearing decreases cancer risk, then I'm in favor of telling them that.

Same as for telling them that childbearing is much more risky for a woman than is having an abortion, especially an abortion fairly early in gestation.

I guess if there is a whole menu of all the factors, pro and con, for both choice, then I have no problem with it, and in general I'd say more information is better than less.

Still, seems to me that there would ofen be attempts to spin it one way or another, as with saying, "If you don't have kids, your risk of cancer will go up."

Or, to pregnant girls, "If you don't have an abortion, the danger to you goes up."

Doug