The April 30 issue of People magazine features stories of two women who have lost legal battles against estranged partners to keep the embryos they created together via in vitro fertilization.
In the case of formerly engaged UK couple Natallie Evans and Howard Johnston, the court ruled their embryos must be destroyed by May 8. In 2001, about to lose her ovaries after the discovery of precancerous cells, Evans underwent hormone therapy to mature several eggs and had them fertilized by Johnston's sperm, with his permission. After they broke up, Johnston changed his mind and has been waging a legal battle for five years to destroy their preborn children.
Augusta and Randy Roman divorced a few months after they had three embryos created by IVF in 2002. Augusta, now 45 and with a biological clock ticking louder by the day, has been fighting Randy's wish to keep the embryos indefinitely frozen in storage. She says she didn't realize one of the papers she signed at the time of the fertilization stated the embryos would be destroyed in the event of a split. This case is now before the Texas Supreme Court.
So many moral dilemmas. To name a few...
The Scotsman carried an interesting quote by Evans:
"Whilst a lot has been said about the rights of Mr Johnston, I was fighting for my right to be a mother and the rights of the embryos."
[Photo of Evans and Johnston in happier times courtesy of BBC News]
MOM'S HOME !!!!!!Posted by: MK at April 23, 2007 8:59 AM
Haha... :)Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 23, 2007 9:16 AM
Welcome back from your vacation, hope you and and your family enjoyed it. I emailed you recently and have joined your mailing list. Up here in liberal Massachusetts (North of Boston) our Catholic churches are having several walks for life taking place in May.
We had a good victory last week in the Surpreme court! (despite the awful coverage by the MSM, who is consistantly carring water for the pro-abortion forces)Posted by: jasper at April 23, 2007 9:18 AM
There was a Law and Order on this subject. A wife and Husband fertilized eggs and later divorced. Then the husband got remarried and the embryo's legally went to the second wife. Then of course the true Mother tried to have them all destroyed... they had to make it good for a court case!
But that did get me thinking about it. And now, here it is. Yikes. This is a mess. Like the court systems need to be more bogged down with stuff like this. ugg..
1. Whoever doesn't want the embryo's should just sign the rights over. It is not worth destroying them if someone is willing to give them a chance.
2. At the rate unmarried couples are having children I don't see that this could be stopped. Plus everyone would scream discrimination. Also, married couples are splitting presenting the same problems as unmarried couples.
3. It is taught in many religions. The end does not justify the means. Would it be okay to take people on death row and experiment on them since they are destined for death?
This is what happens when science moves to the unethical. Everything gets messed up.
Posted by: Valerie
at April 23, 2007 9:22 AM
Also - Welcome back Jill! You were missed!
Hey - Speaking of Mom.
Where's momof3?Posted by: Valerie at April 23, 2007 9:32 AM
very good article on:
In Vitro Fertilization: Ethical Implications and AlternativesPosted by: jasper at April 23, 2007 9:34 AM
Jasper, thanks for the kind words. We had a wonderful time. Thanks also for the email. FYI, I'm I'm 3,000 behind. Give me a couple days.
Valerie, thanks for the welcome back, and thanks for filling in so wonderfully while I was gone! I didn't worry about the site for a minute, thanks to you, Bethany, MK, and HisMan.
Regarding the Law and Order episode, interesting. It reminded me of this quote by Johnston in The Scotsman: "I don't think I have acted selfishly. If you turn this on its head and if I was infertile with a new partner, I wouldn't expect Natallie consenting to me using them."Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 23, 2007 9:36 AM
Not too bad this time, rather tame and non-antagonistic. A delightful tidbits though that cracked me up.
“These were born children”
I expect and can humor the stretch of vocab… calling embryos children…. As you all are no doubt pre-corpses. However, having never resulted in a pregnancy (implanted in the womb), they are not “born” by any stretch of the vocabulary.
“The tiny percentage of embryos destined for death following IVF are also used as the excuse for human embryo experimentation. Is IVF worth the havoc it has created?”
It’s not a tiny percentage destined for death. Typically one or two embryos are selected from 10-15 that have been fertilized. A tiny percentage of left-over embryos are used for stem cell research, per the consent of parents, while most are frozen indefinitely till they die (non-viable). Also, unlike the embryos destined to cryo-non-viability, the research embryos go on living as stem cell lines… potentially indefinitely, so they are not, technically speaking, they are alive.
You sure that's not Cameron in the photo?
I think you meant to say "IF these were born children".
Males who use twists in the words of a post or a contract to renig on a moral responsibility are not men, these are wimps. Should that surprise us of any male pro-deather?
In a way, this case is not much different than the Terry Schiavo case. A male abandoning the relationship and doing whatever it took the deny the responsibility of the committment. It's the ultimate wimp thing to do.
It is my opinion that God will hold males responsible for the holocaust of abortion and there's simply no excuse.
The rulings dont make any sense. In the US, if a man donates sperm, the sperm is used to create an embryo, just as this mans sperm was - without ANY possibility of being held responsible as a father. If he had simply decided to change his status to sperm donor rather than father, she could have kept the embryos, and he could have gone along on his merry way, and everyone would have been happy.
This seems more like a case of a bitter, vengeful, jerk trying to make his ex's life miserable than anything else.
And of course unmarried couples should be allowed to have IVF. They are just as likely to end up splitting up as a married couple. My aunt had some eggs frozen prior to having her ovaries removed (she also had precancerous cells), and they had considered having them fertilized by her partners brother, so the child would have been biologically related to both of them. But unfortunately, she ended up needing a total hysterectomy a year later.Posted by: Amanda at April 23, 2007 10:47 AM
Amanda - I'm sorry to hear about your Aunt. That had to have been painful for her.Posted by: Valerie at April 23, 2007 11:03 AM
"This seems more like a case of a bitter, vengeful, jerk trying to make his ex's life miserable than anything else."
In this particular case I wouldn't go so far as to assume anything about either partner within the couples. It sounds like they signed paper work in advance stating that the embryos would be destroyed should the couples seperated. Also, it's just as likely that the women are jerks, and the men can stomach the idea of these women raising their children without his involvement. Considering that they would be liable for child support, and/or perhaps interested and entitled to some parental rights, using the embryos opens a can of worms with respect to further litigation, legal burdens, not to mention the added stress it places on the pre-babies once they are children trying to understand what the hell happened.Posted by: Cameron at April 23, 2007 11:06 AM
Hi all.I was out giving birth to my 3rd child [screen name momof3]- [I counted her as a person while she was in my womb.] Anyways,my real name is Heather. I think I am going to start using that. Sorta like The Artist Formerly Known As Prince-lol. I am happy to report that everything went well.She is healthy,and so am I.Hope you guys are all doing okay!!Posted by: momof3 at April 23, 2007 11:09 AM
Ah, yes, needed an "If." Thanks HisMan. And yes, I thought of Terri Schiavo, too.
Cameron, I think you need a vacation. It does wonders for one's negativity.
Amanda, you're wrong on ummarried couples being just as likely to split up as married couples:
As quoted from www.leaderu.com/critical/cohabitation-socio.html:
A Columbia University study cited in New Woman magazine found that "only 26% of women surveyed and a scant 19% of the men married the person with whom they were cohabiting."
A more comprehensive National Survey of Families and Households, based on interviews with 13,000 people, concluded, "About 40% of cohabiting unions in the U.S. break up without the couple getting married."
Those who live together before marriage have higher separation and divorce rates.
Psychology Today reported the findings of Yale University sociologist Neil Bennett that cohabiting women were 80% more likely to separate or divorce than were women who had not lived with their spouses before marriage.
The National Survey of Families and Households indicates that "unions begun by cohabitation are almost twice as likely to dissolve within 10 years compared to all first marriages: 57% to 30%."
In a Canadian study at the University of Western Ontario, sociologists found a direct relationship between cohabitation and divorce when investigating over 8,000 ever-married men and women (Hall and Zhoa 1995:421-427). It was determined that living in a non-marital union "has a direct negative impact on subsequent marital stability," perhaps because living in such a union "undermines the legitimacy of formal marriage" and so "reduces commitment of marriage."Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 23, 2007 11:11 AM
Thank you all for all your well wishes!!Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 11:12 AM
Heather! Congrats! Height, weight, and how labor went, please!Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 23, 2007 11:12 AM
I agree with your descrpition of the wimps as bitter, vengeful, and jerks.
I also think their lawyers told these wimps that they could be held responsiblie for supporting these children in the future. Why else spend money fighting it? It's hard for me to believe these asses were fighting for some type of principle, they have none.
With most wimps their decisions are usually made with regards to their penis or their pocketbook.
Look at Mr. Schiavo. Rather than stay faithful to his wife, what does the coward do, he builds a case to have her murdered so he can marry his current vagina/babe. And the government stood behind it. God is not happy with this coward and if I were him I'd be real scared at my last breath.
If males would keep their committments to women, I believe the vast majority of women would not have abortions.
That's why I brought up my sons to above all respect women. So far, they've done well.
Sorry for my French, however, what else can you call this stuff other than what it really is?Posted by: His Man at April 23, 2007 11:15 AM
Thanks Jill. Name Madison Ruth. Wt.7lbs.10 oz. 20 1/2 inches.Labor? Let's just say thank God for drugs. No,honestly like 4 hours.Piece a cake.Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 11:17 AM
I second Jill's post...I wanna know more!
Oops I posted right with you, momof3...Wow, that's great! 4 hours...mine have never been that long! lol That is wonderful!
Madison Ruth...that is soooo pretty!
Oh and I mean, mine have never been that SHORT, not long. I had a 48 hour induced labor with my first, 24 hour induced with my second, and 6 hour induced with my third.
Thanks Bethany. The first two were not quite this short.Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 11:22 AM
Let me also say this. When I looked @ my daughter,I really realized what a beautiful work of art she is. God's art.Every finger and toe. Birth is amazing!Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 11:25 AM
Oh isn't that first look at them so amazing? That moment when you see how "real" they are? Even though you know they're real logically, when you actually see it, it's breathtaking. I still remember gaping in awe when I saw each of my three babies.
By the way, Jill it is soooo good to have you back posting again!
And as for the story you posted, it is so sad.
WOOHOO!!! It is going to be weird not calling you Mom though!
My first labor was only 4 hours from time water broke to him being born. But then again I was in the hospital for a week getting meds to stop contractions. That one wasn't so bad. My daughter was 12 hours from loosing the plug to her being born. My water just leaked, never broke. oh - and no epidurals for me. That sucked! I was given some really cool pain killers before heavy labor hit. It was cool. I couldn't stop laughing! It made me feel funky!
I can't wait to hear baby stories!!! I love babies!! and since I can't have anymore, I will live vicariously through you..... ;-)Posted by: Valerie at April 23, 2007 11:30 AM
You guys are the best!! Jill hope you had a great vacation! Did you go to Fla.or Callie? Valerie,if you want to e-mail me,Jill has my permission for release.Bethany,so true.The day I left the hospital,there were RTL's standing by the hospital.They were holding up the pics.of baby Malachi.I think the hospital may perform abortions. Anyways,as we rounded the corner in the car,I laid on the horn to show em some love!RTL's rock!Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 11:38 AM
Heather, love the name! Glad the labor was quick. My three went 8h-4h-2h. Never had time for an epidural. :(
Went to Disney FL.Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 23, 2007 11:42 AM
Congrats Heather!!Posted by: prettyinpink at April 23, 2007 11:43 AM
I am sure others will read your story of life and decide not to have an abortion.
Already you have given purpose to Madison Ruth. She is a child of destiny.
May God anoint your life with the Holy Spirit. May you honor and obey your parents that your life may be long and go well with you. May you be found in Him. God Bless you precious one.Posted by: His Man at April 23, 2007 11:44 AM
Thanks for reporting on this.
The couple had signed paperwork stating that the embryos should be destroyed if the couple were to split. However, Johnston's distinct assurance to Miss Evans, specifically emphasised at the time of the creation of the embryos, was that a relationship split would never occur.
At the announcement of the European Court of Human Rights decision, Howard Johnston was pictured close to tears on UK TV.
Through his obvious effort not to weep he said that "he understood if people thought he was heartless."
Nathalie revealed that together, her and Jonathon had named the embryos.
(Of course this is entirely presumptuous and irrelevant of me, but my own speculation is that the desire to destroy the embryos came from Howard Johnston's new partner.)
Posted by: Sarah (uk)
at April 23, 2007 11:56 AM
It just goes to show you, no matter how young the children are, when the break up is bitter, the kids always get stuck in the middle. Wonder if they think it's their fault...Posted by: MK at April 23, 2007 11:57 AM
Thanks Pip,His Man and all of you.I didn't want to take away from Jill's post. I just wanted to let you guys know where I've been.Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 12:01 PM
1. Cam - I see what you're saying, but knowing the poor woman's ovaries were removed and she literally had NO chance of ever having her own children with anyone else, no matter what they'd agreed on before, unless he was really bitter about the breakup, Id think any decent person could come to a compromise to sign over parental rights, or do what many divorced parents have done successfuly - raise the child together but separate. I dont know - I just cant think of anything more awful than wanting to have your own child, having your own fertilized embryos ready, and having them destroyed after you'd lost your ovaries. That would be a nightmare to me. And Im Pro Choice - this woman didnt get a choice.
2. Jill - I know the stats say cohabitating couples are more likely to separate or divorce after they're married. And sure, plenty of couples rush in to living together and realize it was a mistake fairly quickly. But if you look at couples who've been together for a long time, live together, and just dont want to be married for any number of reasons, or the law prohibits them from marrying - they are not represented by those statistics. My boyfriend and I have been together for almost 4 years and lived together for 2. We have no plans to get married anytime soon, but we're buying a condo together in the Fall. Meanwhile, we know of 2 couples our age who are already getting divorced. My aunts aren't married because they can't be. They've been together for 15 years.
3. Mom - Congratulations! Im glad everything went well. I just saw a blurb on TV the other night that the name Madison didnt even exist in name books until the movie Splash came out, and its been popular ever since. I like it =)Posted by: Amanda at April 23, 2007 12:15 PM
Amanda, you're buying a house with a guy with whom you're living but not married? I know it's as cool as Susan Sarandon to do so, but you're fighting both the odds and common sense. Get back to me in five years. I've not only cited you statistics but also know two women - a sister-in-law and cousin - who would counsel you not to make that step sans a wedding ring. As you'll likely ignore that, they would secondarily tell you to make sure the house contract is solid.Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 23, 2007 12:31 PM
Sarah, 11:56a: Thanks for the additional information.Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 23, 2007 12:34 PM
Thanks Amanda. I found the name on a site called stork-net. I had forgotten all about Splash. When I told everyone about the name,they mentioned the movie.One week ago,the movie came on TV. HMMM.Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 12:36 PM
Well Jill - between my trips to Africa, paying for grad school, and the shrinking middle-class housing market, it is far more important to us to own property than get a legal certificate that says we love eachtother officially. I don't need jewelry to legitimize it either. I'd rather spend that money on one of my trips.
Even if we were married, what difference does it end up making? If we decided to split up, its a mess either way. Its not like Id stay married to someone I was unhappy with just because we owned a home together.Posted by: Amanda at April 23, 2007 12:38 PM
Oh gosh Jill,speaking of Susan Sarandon... I really love her as an actress,but she went and pulled a "Tom Cruise" in my opinion. Remember when she went to the pro-choice rally 8 months pregnant? I just thought that was tacky.Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 12:40 PM
A cool thing about Sarandon...
A big supporter of heifer international, one of my favorite charities! I always hand out a few donations in others' name come christmas time. Check it out: http://www.heifer.org/Posted by: prettyinpink at April 23, 2007 12:46 PM
I think Jill is right.
All relationships, cohabitation or marriage run into difficulty. It's human nature. You're foolish if you think there will never be conflict and I know you are smart enough to know that.
Marriage forces a couple to work out the problem before splitting. So, at least theres a chance of survival.
Besides, from God's point of view, cohabitation is wrong and will never recieve the blessing God intended for the relationship as a married couple.
From a man's point of view, not marrying a woman is a sign of weakness and insecurity in one's own ability to be a leader.
A woman should question being in a realtionship with such a male.Posted by: His Man at April 23, 2007 12:47 PM
Well,I've got to give her credit there.Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 12:47 PM
The only good thing about some of the hollywood multimillionairs, they can direct us to charitable causes.
I like the work that Angelina Jolie has been doing with her adoptions and getting the word out that these kids need homes. These children are enriching her days and giving her happiness. Unlike other unwanted children who are decaying in our garbage dumps.Posted by: Valerie at April 23, 2007 12:52 PM
I'd also proceed with caution Amanda. I was engaged to a man for 2 years. I had a ring,a wedding date,and I was over the moon with excitement. As soon as he graduated from medical school,he dumped me. Ouch!Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 12:52 PM
Just a thought, and I know it's not going to change your minds on the issue, but...
My boyfriend and I live together, and it's only served to strengthen our relationship. Whether you believe me or not, it doesn't matter, and it doesn't matter what you think of our relationship.
After all, you don't know him and you don't know me. You don't know anything about our relationship or what we've been through together.
Just thought I'd put my two cents in. If you want to jump all over me for it, go ahead.Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 12:54 PM
HisMan - I obviously know we're going to have conflicts. Considering how easy it is these days to get a divorce (theres an 800 number advertised on the subways now...7 days divorces), I dont see why being married would force us to get through a bad time any more than the fact that we love each other would.
As far as God's point of view goes, we are monogamous, we're true to each other, and we're good to each other. All we're missing is some jewelry and some pieces of paper and 10k or more in credit card debt because if I had a small wedding and left any of my family out, they'd be furious with me for years.
and no, he isn't insecure about his future, our relationship, or any of that. We've sat down and looked at the numbers and looked at the real estate market. If we got married, it would be another year or so before we had enough savings to buy a house. If we buy the house first, we start building equity and could actually afford a wedding (a wedding for us involves flying most of his family in from Ireland - so no matter how bare-bones it is, it wont be cheap). And he asked my dad about buying me a ring, so my dad asked me how I felt about it, and I told him if he bought a ring, I'd pawn it - because at the time I was saving up for a VERY expensive trip to Africa and was pretty much ready to sell my kidney to make it possible.Posted by: Amanda at April 23, 2007 12:55 PM
To add to what you said Valerie,that is sadly how an abortionist, that I was reading about,referred to aborted children. He called them "garbage" Unbelievable.Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 12:57 PM
OOPs I forgot there was another Heather. I'll go by Heather L.Posted by: Heather at April 23, 2007 12:58 PM
The wedding is for your family.
The ceremony is for you.
Elope and experience the joy of the ceremony. Deal with the reception and family later. And a ring doesn't have to be expensive. A friend of mine got her engagment and wedding ring from a pawn shop. It is the symbol that counts, not how much it costs..Posted by: Valerie at April 23, 2007 12:59 PM
"OOPs I forgot there was another Heather. I'll go by Heather L."
Haha. I didn't even notice at first. Nice to meet you, other Heather.
And just to make everything simpler, I'll go by Heather B.Posted by: Heather B. at April 23, 2007 12:59 PM
Valerie - thats true. My half brothers mom (my dad was married prior to meeting my mom - they're still married) is a jewler, and I gave her a piece of Tanzanite that I recieved as a gift in a village in Africa and told her when we were ready, I wanted my ring made out of that.
Its more just logistics really. My whole family is in Massachusetts, his mom is in New York, but the rest of his family is in Ireland. And I'll be balancing work, internship, grad school, and my involvement with the NGO I've been going to Africa with. So its like...ok, when could we even DO this?? My dad had said he's retiring in 2 or 3 years, and will give us his retirement package money to spend on a wedding... but thats a ways away.Posted by: Amanda at April 23, 2007 1:05 PM
PS - just so you all know A. who you're talking to, and B. why I talk about Africa so much... and C. just so I can shamelessly plug the charity I volunteer for:
if you scroll down to the bottom you will see a tiny picture and blurb about yours truly.Posted by: Amanda at April 23, 2007 1:14 PM
My only wish for you is blessing.
I really hope, as Joy stated, you can tell me in five years that all is well.
I know God loves you and your boyfriend. I also know that His ways are the best ways.
I wouldn't tell my daughter or sons for that matter anything different than what I've told you. Fortunately and thankfully she shooses to follow dad's advice because I have faithfully demonstrated to her over 17 years that I love her with all my heart. That's hard to argue with.Posted by: His Man at April 23, 2007 1:15 PM
HeatherMom, yes, Sarandon is a flaming pro-abort. Don't know how those Hollywood moms say what they say about abortion with their own kids in the house watching them.
Valerie, I also admire Angelina Jolie, except for co-adopting with Brad Pitt, with whom she is not married. I see a huge mess in all their futures.
Amanda, I agree with Valerie. Just elope and do the big wedding later. Except before you elope I'd add to move apart and stop having sex and see if your relationship can survive.Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 23, 2007 1:17 PM
Nathalie's itelligibly distraught state of mind, was a worry to myself, but it seems she may now have found a potential egg donor for her and her new partner.Posted by: sarah (uk) at April 23, 2007 1:25 PM
Congrats Heather, Love the name.Posted by: LG at April 23, 2007 1:27 PM
Good for you! What a great charity to volunteer for.Posted by: Valerie at April 23, 2007 1:30 PM
I thought I would put in another 2 cents.
My husband and I lived together before we got married.
When we were living together we almost split up. We didn't work on the relationship very much, but things worked out anyway. Now that we are married, it reminds us that we can't just walk away. We can't just find someone else that we claim to 'love' more. To say you are in love is very very good. But to say that being married isn't much of a difference from living together is not accurate. I've been there, done that.
And HisMan - to answer the question that I'm sure is going on in your head - My father was not a happy man when I lived with him w/out being married. He didn't raise me that way! You can't get more Catholic than my Dad!Posted by: Valerie at April 23, 2007 1:36 PM
You guys all know me well enough to know that I confuse easily. I even remembered to take my meds this morning.
Which is Heather is Mom? I'm lost.Posted by: Valerie at April 23, 2007 1:37 PM
"Which is Heather is Mom? I'm lost."
It's not me. To avoid so much confusion, I'll be posting under my first name (Heather) and my the initial for my last name (B).Posted by: Heather B. at April 23, 2007 1:38 PM
I am going to go by Heather 4life. Isn't that ironic that the other Heather posted at the same time I did??Posted by: Heather4life at April 23, 2007 1:39 PM
"Isn't that ironic that the other Heather posted at the same time I did??"
It is kind of amusing. By the way, congratulations on the baby. Good luck with everything :)Posted by: Heather B. at April 23, 2007 1:41 PM
1 min. apart this time Heather. This is getting weird. LOL *Twilight zone music plays *Posted by: Heather4life at April 23, 2007 1:41 PM
You've got a good Dad. Thank God for him regularly.Posted by: His Man at April 23, 2007 1:42 PM
"*Twilight zone music plays *"
Haha, I love that show! I used to watch it with my mother when I was little. We used to watch old black and white movies together, too, and drink tea on those days.
Good times.Posted by: Heather B. at April 23, 2007 1:43 PM
Heather4life, MAJOR congrats on the baby, and her name is really pretty. My cousin just had a baby girl and I'm going nuts buying baby clothes. She's absolutely BEAUTIFUL. She has the LONGEST black hair already. It's unbelievable. Beautiful name, too (Janelle). :DPosted by: Alyssa at April 23, 2007 1:47 PM
Sarah, I also read in the same issue of People that William and Kate split. Too bad. I don't know why I find the royals so interesting!
They split? Did it say why?
Heh. Sorry. Curiosity, you know.Posted by: Heather B. at April 23, 2007 2:05 PM
Yes. Kate was shown on TV the other day looking pretty miffed at being hounded by the press.
William's a sweet lad, I think, Harry can be a bit of a rotter.
The Royals popularity really plumeted for a while, but most of them seem to be down to earth and in touch with the public especially in recent years.
Theyre not to be confused with this Royle family
Off for my tea now, take care
Thanks Alyssa.Posted by: Heather4life at April 23, 2007 3:54 PM
You've got a good Dad. Thank God for him regularly"
I know and I do!
How many men do you know that will stand by his wife as she is loosing her mind? My Dad went through hell and was still refering to her as "my beautiful bride." They were married 39 years before she died. I admire him greatly. Even the priest commented that he was surprised that he didn't leave her.
Your Dad leaving your mother would not have been consistent with a pro-life stance. I mean it would have been convenient for your Dad to just get on with his life and he would have been able to find much justification from the pro-aborts on ths site.
Let me say this....your Dad is a Real Man...willing to deny himself for another. Pro-aborts just can't stomach that.
For the last twenty years of her life my mom was afflicted with Lupus. My Dad cared for her faithfully until his death. Abortion was a word I don't think they even know existed. How different things are today.
Could you imagine Cameron being in the same situation as your Dad or my Dad? No, don't.
Posted by: His Man
at April 23, 2007 6:56 PM
"Could you imagine Cameron being in the same situation as your Dad or my Dad? No, don't. "
That would be very sad for the woman! Constant care of a spouse is difficult, but something that you commit to when you take your vows.
Good for your Dad. It is good to learn there are real men in this world. Sometimes it is hard to find. I had to wait until I was 29 before I finally met one! And believe me, I held on tight and refuse to let go.Posted by: Valerie at April 23, 2007 9:44 PM
Valerie,you did have a terrific dad!Posted by: Heather4life at April 23, 2007 9:58 PM
I hate to take this fellow's side (even as a pro-life adovcate), but he's simply exercising his "right to choose" as outlined in the legal contract.
After all, nowadays, unborn children (and many times born children) are considered "posessions", something that we either want or don't want rather than gifts from God to be lovingly accepted.
you know, HisMan, we've been through this half a dozen times now, so I dont know why I bother repeating myself.
How can you honestly expect me to accept your apology for your rudeness when you continue to indulge in shameless pot shots and low blows?
You and Cameron disagree on politics and issues. You have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA and right whatsoever to make assumptions as to how Cameron would handle the illness and caretaking of his wife or his mother - and for you to pretend you do is disgusting. Let me indulge your assumptions of him for a second - even if he is the horrible person you seem to think he is, having worked in a hospital atmosphere for years now, I can tell you that you NEVER KNOW who ends up being the best caretaker and most loving family member in a time of crisis. I've seen felons and drug addicts snap in to immediate action to care for ailing loved ones, I've seen people who could have cared less about their family and moved away years ago suddenly return and unflinchingly take the role of caregiver when someone they love is in need. How could you POSSIBLY make such a gross generalization about something so sensitive and insult a man you've never met, simply because you have different views about some things in life? For all you know, Cameron spends hours a day with a sick family member. How silly would you feel if you found out that was true?Posted by: Amanda at April 23, 2007 10:53 PM
My fiancee and I live together and we have for the past seven months. I am currently going through some medical issues where I may have endometriosis. If this is the case my chances of conceiving and then carrying his child are lowered than that of a "healthy" woman. We have already spoke about this as a couple and have decided that if we cannot conceive children together we would use IVF. I completely believe in it 100%, and even more so now considering what we could be going through.Posted by: Lindsey at April 23, 2007 10:59 PM
For all you know, Cameron spends hours a day with a sick family member. How silly would you feel if you found out that was true?
When your whole life is based on "what makes me feel good" and not around concern for others besides your self, it only makes sense that your entire life would be consistent with this.
Cameron's concern for other people ends where his discomfort or inconvenience begins. By his/her own admission.
I'd be VERY surprised, if not completely skeptical, if Cameron claimed to be taking care of a family member, and inconveniencing him/herself each and every day for the well being of another.Posted by: Bethany at April 24, 2007 7:18 AM