watkins@ut-ngp.UUCP (03/21/84)
----- There are many events that will happen in our lives which can cloud good judgement. When a family member dies, we can find ourselves talked into almost any burial package; when we get really angry, we can often say or do something that we will later regret. In the example of the imminent funeral, we have no choice but to make our decisions quickly, however, in the case of anger, we do have a choice. We can sit back, count to ten, and take a fresher look at the problem. When things are really tense, this often seems impossible. In many states, there are what I shall call "Smoking Gun" laws. These laws require that after a gun (handgun?) is purchased, a waiting period of days is required so that the gun cannot be bought and used immediately (I imagine it also allows for police record checks.) By forcing what may be a cooling off period, more intelligent decisions can be made. I propose we do the same with abortions. Now owning a gun isn't unlawful. You have a right in this country to own a gun, like it or not. Neither is getting an abortion, like it or not. Abortion is one of those times when strong emotions are involved. Very few people want to make poor decisions, but when faced with an unwanted child, and an immediately solution like abortion available, few or none of the options are explored. How about this? A woman finds out she is pregnant. Instead of being able to get the abortion immediately, she goes by the abortion clinic and makes her intent known. She is then given a government booklet or asked to visit a government information official who will present a package with materials supplied by numerous agencies that explain options also available to her. In this way, she can base her decision on all the facts available. She may find that solutions besides the trauma of abortion are available. Many groups exist that will help with the costs and emotions of pregnancy and many pregnant women might find these solutions easier to live with. Others may proceed with their original plan. A waiting period of at least several days seems good. To be fair. I am against the use of abortion. It is something I feel very uncomfortable with and I wish it were unheard of. I don't know what the best solutions are. But I can understand that finding out about an unwanted pregnancy is a very stressful time and that quick decistions might not be rational decisions. Morgan Watkins
betsy@dartvax.UUCP (Betsy Hanes Perry) (03/21/84)
The problem I see with your 'enforced-waiting-period' solution
is that it assumes that women coming in for an abortion
haven't considered their decisions carefully. They may or
may not have, but I doubt that an enforced waiting period is
likely to make them do so. I think that the main effect of such a law
would be to increase the anguish of a chosen abortion:
even once a woman had come to a reasoned decision,
she'd have to wait after making that decision
in the name of 'rationality'.
I also believe that the Supreme Court has ruled such
enforced counselling or waiting periods unconstitutional
in the first trimester; wasn't there a case involving that
last year?
--
Betsy Perry
UUCP: {decvax|linus|cornell}!dartvax!betsy
CSNET: betsy@dartmouth
ARPA: betsy%dartmouth@csnet-relaysaquigley@watmath.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (03/22/84)
I don't understand the point of this article. In most cases of abortion
I have heard of, there is a waiting period. This period is between the
time a woman finds out she is pregnant and the time she gets an abortion.
This usually takes at least a few days.
One thing that should be mentioned though. Throughout the article the
author assumes that the woman will make the decision not to have an abortion.
What if she does decide to have an abortion? then the longer she waits the
more dangerous the abortion will be and the more "criminal" it will be as it
will happen later in the fetus' development. I think enforcing a thinking
period would be criminal in this case. I realise that the author is only
thinking of a few days thinking period so this period hardly makes a difference
in terms of risk and/or killing, but longer periods have been suggested by
other people and I think those are dangerous for the reasons I just mentioned.
I find the suggestion of an "enforced" period very detestable because it assumes
that the woman is incapable of making her mind up in a quick period of time.
I do not think this is necessarily the case. I for one have had many "false
alerts" and have had the opportunity to feel pregnant many times and to react
to it and I have a pretty good idea of whether I would like to continue my
pregnancy or not. I know that at the time there was NO WAY I could ever have
gone through those pregnancies and I knew that straight from the start.
Whenever I am a few days late on my period I also start wondering about whether
I am pregnant or not and I do know each time whether I could carry the child or
not, so what may seem to you like a rushed decision is not necessarily so.
Many of us do consider the possibility of being pregnant and have thought about
it in a reasonnable way beforehand and I would be very insulted to be told that
I have to think longer about whether I want an abortion or not. All the women
I know are like me and I see no reason to believe that the majority of women
are different from me (their final decision might be different, but their
ability to know when they've made their decision is just as good)
In a few words I find the suggestion of an inforced waiting time paternalistic
and VERY insulting!!!!
Now, I am aware that this was not what the original poster suggested, so please
don't flame at me for misinterpreting what he said. I didn't.
Sophie Quigley
...!{decvax,allegra}!watmath!saquigleyix192@sdccs6.UUCP (03/22/84)
<] >From sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!harpo!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!watkins Tue Mar 20 18:00:19 1984 (Morgan Watkins) > In many states, there are what I shall call "Smoking Gun" laws. > These laws require that after a gun (handgun?) is purchased, a > waiting period of days is required so that the gun cannot be bought > and used immediately (I imagine it also allows for police record > checks.) By forcing what may be a cooling off period, more intelligent > decisions can be made. I propose we do the same with abortions. > Abortion is one of those times when strong emotions are involved. Very > few people want to make poor decisions, but when faced with an unwanted > child, and an immediately solution like abortion available, few or none > of the options are explored. Well, I'd hate to be picky, but getting an abortion isn't something one does on impulse. I had a friend Tanya who had an abortion, a very big decision for her and her parents. The potential father was a total jerk and neither Tanya nor her Catholic parents wanted her to be married to him, nor have an unwed child. So, they decided that an abortion was the best thing to do. They didn't just decide this in a bar after several stiff drinks - it took almost two weeks of very heavy, emotional debates. The "Smoking Abortion" law wouldn't be very useful. All it would do is stop the few timid souls that managed to get their confidences up to go through with the thing, and with your proposal they'd have to boost it up twice, with days of possible low periods where the women could call in and cancel. And try again, and again, until it becomes either too late or too dangerous. > How about this? A woman finds out she is pregnant. Instead of being able > to get the abortion immediately, she goes by the abortion clinic and makes > her intent known. She is then given a government booklet or asked to visit > a government information official who will present a package with materials > supplied by numerous agencies that explain options also available to her. In > this way, she can base her decision on all the facts available. She may find >that solutions besides the trauma of abortion are available. Many groups exist >that will help with the costs and emotions of pregnancy and many pregnant women > might find these solutions easier to live with. Others may proceed with their > original plan. A waiting period of at least several days seems good. Several days may be the difference between a relatively safe suction abortion and the much more dangerous saline-solution abortion. To put this time limit on, you are potentially endangering the life of the women who will discover their pregnancies around the third or so month. Also, you are leaving out the people who have already prepared themselves with the decision, either by being with/hearing from a friend who went through one, or by already having had one in the past. Should they go through the same harassment and intimidation from government officials who feel it is their duty to stop the abortion? I doubt civil servants can hold back from voicing any of their opinions, and a few sadistic anti-abortionist ones can spread a lot of mental and emotional damage. Best to eliminate all need for a past record, so eliminate everything a second-timer would want to skip after her first time. No delays, no government or moral-majority-BS propaganda. The clinics should be a clean, safe place where an anonymous woman could walk in, ask any questions she feels need to, get what she wants, and leave. Kenn the Kenf ...!sdcsvax!kenn ...!sdcsvax!sdccs6!ix192 ...!sdcsvax!sdccsu3!kenn