Maternal Healthcare and funding for Abortions

[Molly]

( Just soak up the feeling of this:

" Sure. So when a boy does or doesn't wish for his wife or partner to have an abortion...well, these are important consideraitons, and he should have to go "talk to somebody" about it first." )

Edited May 7, 2010 by Molly

[DrGreenthumb]

I think it smacks of elitism and eugenics. The socialist elite want less black babies so they want to kill them through abortion. This approach seems awfully racist to me. I wonder how the socialists are getting away with this while no one says a word about it. The white socialists are targeting the black African nations and demanding they have abortions en masse. This is no different then killing blacks by firing squad. How are they getting away with this racist agenda?

Just when I thought you'd never come up with a more stupid theory than flying bodily fluids at parades.

[Moonbox]

Just when I thought you'd never come up with a more stupid theory than flying bodily fluids at parades.

One of the few occasions that I'd have to agree with you 100%

[bloodyminded]

( Just soak up the feeling of this:

" Sure. So when a boy does or doesn't wish for his wife or partner to have an abortion...well, these are important consideraitons, and he should have to go "talk to somebody" about it first." )

Ah! You're right, a more accurate analogy, and more explanatory about how damnfool the original was in the first place.

[DFCaper]

you would presume to equate regulated legal abortion consultations with legislated laws against illegal rape? Seriously? Molly's logic seemed to me that an underage girl is mature enough to make up her mind about about such a serious issue, that I was questioning if she is also responsible enough to decide who she should be able to have sex with is all. Maybe I just don't take abortion as lightly as others here.

within the context of the rarest of the rare abortion scenarios (6 month+ gestation), for a problem that you presume exists, where does your reference to, as you say, "Doctors morality" come forward? Do you maintain morality exists across the gestation timeline - from conception... or do you reserve a specific point in time that you apply a morality attachment... at 3 months?... at 4 months?... at 5 months?... at 6 months? When exactly? Not sure... but before the first breath

[Keepitsimple]

Personally, I don't think men should have any say on rules, regulations and laws regarding abortion. I wish we could get all the women in the country over to one side of the room and let THEM decide what's needed and what's not needed. I'm sure they'd quickly come up with a position and put the whole issue to rest . But I guess things will just stay as they are and that's fine with me.

[Muddy]

Speaking as a former fetus, I sure am glad abortion was not part of birth control in the old days as it is today! I was not a welcome thought at the time because of the hard ships my family was enduring. But my Mom soldiered on and I was loved and cherished by my much older siblings.

[bloodyminded]

Speaking as a former fetus, I sure am glad abortion was not part of birth control in the old days as it is today! I was not a welcome thought at the time because of the hard ships my family was enduring. But my Mom soldiered on and I was loved and cherished by my much older siblings.

Oh, there were plenty of abortions. All kinds of them. But they were illegal, and dangerous.

[DFCaper]

Speaking as a former fetus, I sure am glad abortion was not part of birth control in the old days as it is today! I was not a welcome thought at the time because of the hard ships my family was enduring. But my Mom soldiered on and I was loved and cherished by my much older siblings.

I have 2 close friends with the same story and feel the same as you as a result...

I wonder as an alternative, leave the current laws as they are and offer good money for the pregnant money for her child if she carries it to term. There are a lot of couples who would like to adopt. Try that course of action, and reduce the need for Immigration to keep our population numbers.

I think this may workout to be a good move for Harper in some ways. The highly offended, probably never would have voted for hi. And this is the first carrot he offered to the social conservatives of his party since he has been in power. Thus guaranteeing their loyalty for years in voting. Without actually doing anything for them here in Canada.

Edited May 7, 2010 by DFCaper

[waldo]

I think this may workout to be a good move for Harper in some ways. The highly offended, probably never would have voted for him. And this is the first carrot he offered to the social conservatives of his party since he has been in power. Thus guaranteeing their loyalty for years in voting. Without actually doing anything for them here in Canada.

it's refreshing to read a Conservative supporter openly acknowledging Harper placating his evangelical base component, over and above actual concerns for maternal healthcare within developing nations.

[waldo]

from the Lancet Medical Journal:

... around 350 000 women die during childbirth every year. 9 million children younger than 5 years also die every year. Most of these deaths are preventable. Canada's health plan to address this situation is still thin on details but it promises to include training and support for frontline health workers; better nutrition and provision of micronutrients; treatment and prevention of diseases such as pneumonia, diarrhoea, malaria, and sepsis; screening and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS; family planning; immunisation; and clean water and sanitation.

However, a few key elements are missing from the framework. For example, there is no talk of emergency obstetric care. This omission is likely to be an oversight and should be rectified. Improving access to safe abortion services is also absent from the plan. Sadly, this omission is no accident, but a conscious decision by Canada's Conservative Government not to support groups that undertake abortions in developing countries.

This stance must change. 70 000 women die from unsafe abortions worldwide every year. The Canadian Government does not deprive women living in Canada from access to safe abortions; it is therefore hypocritical and unjust that it tries to do so abroad. Although the country's decision only affects a small number of developing countries where abortion is legal, bans on the procedure, which are detrimental to public health, should be challenged by the G8, not tacitly supported. Canada and the other G8 nations could show real leadership with a final maternal health plan that is based on sound scientific evidence and not prejudice.

[Uncle 3 dogs]

It should also be noted that most reasonable people would probably consider abortion services in Africa, in particular, to be defensible in view of the fact that sexual violence and rape are such a common occurrence in some countries on that continent.

How can Canada justify dictating policy in the rest of the world that it does not enforce at home?

Guess again, scriblit

Make no mistake. itIS dictating policy since no organization that includes abortion as one of the options will be able to get funding.

Edited May 8, 2010 by Uncle 3 dogs

[Sir Bandelot]

Personally, I don't think men should have any say on rules, regulations and laws regarding abortion. I wish we could get all the women in the country over to one side of the room and let THEM decide what's needed and what's not needed. I'm sure they'd quickly come up with a position and put the whole issue to rest . But I guess things will just stay as they are and that's fine with me.

I don't think I agree with that. It's still an emotional issue for men, too. Although I think the the final decision should rest with the woman.

[Muddy]

I don't think I agree with that. It's still an emotional issue for men, too. Although I think the the final decision should rest with the woman.

There are those that seem to think that anyone of the female persuasion that gets pregnant are women and should not be counselled by men,sperm donater, Father ,brother grandfathers should all keep their collective wisdom to themselves. It is my conclusion that girls get pregnant too. This does not make them a women. They can still be little girls . Mentally! I think kind and loving family can give better advice for the childs future mental health than some abortion rights fanatic who thinks they know better than family. It is imperative that young women ,girls, know the long term repercussions of abortion before committing themselves.This is not a tooth being pulled. I am not completely against abortion but I certainly think counselling and knoledge is imperative. .

[Argus]

it's refreshing to read a Conservative supporter openly acknowledging Harper placating his evangelical base component, over and above actual concerns for maternal healthcare within developing nations.

I wonder if we'll ever see a Liberal supporter honest enought to admit that Ignatieff keeps bringing up abortion as a desperate appeal to his own party's supporters, and that this sudden fixation on what we pay for abroad has nothing whatsoever to do with maternal health either. No, probably not.

Edited May 9, 2010 by Argus

[Molly]

and that this sudden fixation on what we pay for abroad has nothing whatsoever to do with maternal health either. No, probably not.

The accusation of outright hypocrisy over it is a double-edged sword. Perhaps the LPC is using it to suck up votes- that's what political parties do- but we also know for a certainty that the CPC is milking it as hard as they can, as well. The right wingnuts have been clamouring for a sop, and now they have one.

The issue itself... well, while we are well aware that you don't give a tinker's damn about it, others do.

[Muddy]

For many years under Liberal Rule ,why was this not as big an issue as it is now? Why now?

[Smallc]

For many years under Liberal Rule ,why was this not as big an issue as it is now? Why now?

What are you talking about? It wasn't an issue because Canada funded groups that provided abortions.

[Muddy]

What are you talking about? It wasn't an issue because Canada funded groups that provided abortions.

Well if thats true then I thank you for correcting me. I think money would be better spent fighting female circumscion and forced marriage. But thats because I believe in freedom of real choice.

[Molly]

Well if thats true then I thank you for correcting me. I think money would be better spent fighting female circumscion and forced marriage. But thats because I believe in freedom of real choice.

It is true

... and if you have a problem with the priority, take it up with Mr. Harper. He's the one who selected this initiative to champion.

[scribblet]

The initiative was Harper's but not the abortion discussion, that was introduced by Ignatieff as a wedge issue some time back.

I do agree that total maternal health package for third world countries should include access to safe abortions but where is it written that Canada has to provide it, not to mention it's contrary to the U.N. position.

Not providing abortion clinics does not mean that the initiative is useless and women will be denied health care, abortion is only a very small part of a maternal health package. There are many, many other health problems for both mother and child, which I would bet is the first thing they would want help with.

Actually, I'd doubt that Canada has any influence or say over how abortions are provided in foreign countries, or who gets them.

Edited May 10, 2010 by scriblett

[Argus]

The accusation of outright hypocrisy over it is a double-edged sword. Perhaps the LPC is using it to suck up votes- that's what political parties do- but we also know for a certainty that the CPC is milking it as hard as they can, as well. The right wingnuts have been clamouring for a sop, and now they have one.

I disagree. The Conservatives were reluctant to even address the issue. They skirted around it and tried to avoid it, but the Liberals spent question period after question period demanding assurances Canada would fund abortions for anyone in the world who wanted one. The Conservatives finally said now and the Liberals screamed and wailed and gnashed their teeth and cried crocodile tears for the african mothers while eagerly printing up new donations requests.

[Molly]

I see.

Changing long-standing policy is not - according to you two- raising the issue. Changing it in secret is ducky, but asking about those changes is not.

You ask the opposition to simply allow the uncomfortable bits of the CPC agenda to remain hidden...

[M.Dancer]

Funding foreign abortions is a cunard...the topic is a wedge issue and nothing more because there ain;t a hope in hell that women who want or need abortions and can't afford/get access to them will ever get help, funding or no funding.

Abortion is illegal or restricted in 90% of Africa...and where it is legal, they don't need the funding.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/g8-g20/africa/africas-deadly-backroom-abortions/article1564162/

[Argus]

I see.

Changing long-standing policy is not - according to you two- raising the issue. Changing it in secret is ducky, but asking about those changes is not.

You ask the opposition to simply allow the uncomfortable bits of the CPC agenda to remain hidden...

You can't have it both ways. Either they're exploiting the issue to please their rabid right wing base or they're trying to change the policy in secret. Which is it now?