Is 11 abortions too many for one guy?

[Coco]

I posted in response to the bolded. The end of my post, which you didn't quote, says that one way to change his behavior would be to refuse to have sex with him unless he used a condom. If that happened, he'd either get better acquainted with his hand or he'd agree to use protection. That was the focus of my response.

I will say, however, that a lot of the language I see, not only here but other places as well, seems to absolve the woman of responsibility. Too much "HE got/made her pregnant." "HE could have used contraception," and so on. No HE didn't do any of this his own. He had an apparently willing partner each time. I'm not in any way, shape or form defending him and I think that the apparent pride he takes the 11 abortions he was a party to is disgusting but I still can't condemn him for his irresponsibility without condemning his equally irresponsible partner, both of whom risk not only an unwanted pregnancy but their lives as well.

My daughter, who's 24, was raised with the firm belief that she should never rely on chance or the other party when it came to having sex, meaning protecting against conception AND STDs. She's been on BC since her late teens and, good little AIDS peer educator that she is, she also insists that her partner uses a condom as well, otherwise they ain't gettin' any. Any man that wouldn't respect that request obviously wouldn't respect her either.

That is exactly true. This guy isn't one to respect that. He brags about abortions he caused. He sounds like one of those guys who would also brag about "breaking" or hurting his partner, like some guys have in the past. (i don't know how to explain that but i hope it makes sense for the others who have heard of it, it's too disturbing to try to get sources. i heard about this on a news program.)

This guy is not going to put on a condom and could become abusive if his partner insisted. This guy is dangerous. i'm hoping that he and other guys like him give off such a douche-dude vibe that women flee from him and warn all their friends.

[artdecades]

I'm not the person you asked, and I think the literature at the moment suggests none -- after a single surgical abortion. There is a whole lot of pro- life misinformation out there, of course. This article debunks most of it. http://www.glowm.com/section_view/headi ... n/item/440

However, I think the OP was referring to multiple abortions. IIRC, there is a seemingly reputable Scandinavian (possibly Finnish) study that suggests there is an increased risk of long-term health effects (one being breast cancer), secondary infertility, and complicated pregnancies after multiple surgical abortions. Multiple being defined as 3 or more abortions. As the first article I linked points out, it is really hard to prove causation and/or that these issues wouldn't also exist with spontaneous miscarriages. There are probably a lot more studies out there too, but sorting the objective wheat from the pro-life chaff is really difficult for lay people like me.

There is no validity to the claim that abortion and breast cancer are linked. This is something that is claimed by anti-choice activists in order to shame and intimidate women. Less than 1 percent of abortions result in medical complications. Abortions aren't dealing with vital organs. You aren't going to puncture a lung accidentally while getting an abortion. That is safer than childbirth. Medical abortions are even safer than surgical ones. Post-abortion Syndrome has also been proven to be a myth of the anti-choice movement.

Either way, this discussion is exactly the problem I have stated originally. If you support a woman's right to make her own decisions with regards to her body, then you support her right to choose. Snarky comments and slut shaming serves to undermine and stigmatize abortion. It insidiously creates the same environment that leads to anti-choice laws by defining what is an isn't an "acceptable" abortion. Abortion isn't used as birth control. Half of all pregnancies that end in abortion are conceived with some sort of contraception. However, even if it is being used as birth control, its not anyone's business to tell a woman she is wrong or should be shamed for it. Even if it does cause complications, that is the choice of the woman.

BTW, is some articles on the breast cancer myth

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/breastcanc ... ast-cancer

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/fact ... ve-history

[Mama Mia]

I think it's pretty patronizing to act like any possible long term effects or complications of abortion can never be discussed. It's so condescending to say to people about ANY medical situation. Whether it's prescription drugs or something more invasive like a surgical abortion or cosmetic surgery or a heart transplant - there are risks.

To me, it's saying, well gee these little women wouldn't understand all these complicated statistics, and it might make them change their political or personal stance if they knew there were increased risks of infertility, prematurity and maternal death after multiple abortions -- so let's just not talk about it. They can't possibly comprehend that elevated risk is not the same as a sure thing. :roll:

These all reference legitimate studies:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22933527q

http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/conten ... 7.abstract

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jul/09 ... h-20130710

And really, how is it even surprising that having your cervix artificially dilated multiple times ( more invasively than for an IUD ) , might cause scarring that could lead to difficulty carrying to term? That seems like kind of a no- brainer. Or that abortion carries a risk of infection, which can lead to scarring of the tubes, making conceiving more difficult. Common sense. It's like people can't discuss any possible down sides of any human action or belief because it might be construed as promoting the " other" side. Very very few things in life are 100% without a downside. It's okay to discuss downsides.

[artdecades]

I think it's pretty patronizing to act like any possible long term effects or complications of abortion can never be discussed. It's so condescending to say to people about ANY medical situation. Whether it's prescription drugs or something more invasive like a surgical abortion or cosmetic surgery or a heart transplant - there are risks.

To me, it's saying, well gee these little women wouldn't understand all these complicated statistics, and it might make them change their political or personal stance if they knew there were increased risks of infertility, prematurity and maternal death after multiple abortions -- so let's just not talk about it. They can't possibly comprehend that elevated risk is not the same as a sure thing. :roll:

These all reference legitimate studies:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22933527q

http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/conten ... 7.abstract

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jul/09 ... h-20130710

And really, how is it even surprising that having your cervix artificially dilated multiple times ( more invasively than for an IUD ) , might cause scarring that could lead to difficulty carrying to term? That seems like kind of a no- brainer. Or that abortion carries a risk of infection, which can lead to scarring of the tubes, making conceiving more difficult. Common sense. It's like people can't discuss any possible down sides of any human action or belief because it might be construed as promoting the " other" side. Very very few things in life are 100% without a downside. It's okay to discuss downsides.

I also have a problem with shaming women for getting other elective procedures, but that isn't the point of discussion so I didn't go into detail. These sorts of discussions are almost always targeted at women and are about objectifying and claiming public ownership over a woman's body. With regards to plastic surgery, our society puts so much value on youth and beauty and then shames women who try to conform as shallow and engaging in risky behavior. That said, an abortion is a hell of a lot safer than a tummy tuck.

Its one thing to talk about potential risks involved with procedures, its another thing to judge and try to impose your beliefs on others using so-called risks as your means. This is the same mentality that is creating laws that require abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at local hospitals and it is, more or less, nothing more than scaremongering.

Your first two links did not work for me, but did you read the third? The LA times article explains how these long term effects have all but vanished with better technology and wider access to medical abortions. Again, medical abortions (IE the ones where medicine is used) are extremely safe

"The take-home message from this is that abortion as it's being currently provided is very safe and not associated with the risk of subsequent preterm birth," said Dr. Dan Grossman, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at UC San Francisco who was not involved in the study.

[DGayle]

"All but vanishing" doesn't mean gone. ANY time you have ANY medical procedure done, whether it's something as simple as Botox or something more invasive like abortion, there will be risks. They may be less now, but they will never be completely gone, and it's extremely dangerous to try claiming that something is so safe that there are no risks.

The ARE risks, and part of all this is trusting women to be able to look at the risks versus the benefits, and to decide for themselves, instead of trying to get people to ignore them for personal and political agenda. That gives the other side ammo. So you really want fundies and people like them to have the very valid point that there are pro-choicers who can't handle the truth about risks, and so ignore them, or would you rather be able to say that pro-choicers are secure enough to trust women to make appropriate educated decisions?

[RosyDaisy]

This is why abortion should be legal. It would allow doctors to give accurate medical information based on actual scientific facts. This would allow a women to make a truly informed decisions.

[Mama Mia]

I also have a problem with shaming women for getting other elective procedures, but that isn't the point of discussion so I didn't go into detail. These sorts of discussions are almost always targeted at women and are about objectifying and claiming public ownership over a woman's body. With regards to plastic surgery, our society puts so much value on youth and beauty and then shames women who try to conform as shallow and engaging in risky behavior. That said, an abortion is a hell of a lot safer than a tummy tuck.

Its one thing to talk about potential risks involved with procedures, its another thing to judge and try to impose your beliefs on others using so-called risks as your means. This is the same mentality that is creating laws that require abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at local hospitals and it is, more or less, nothing more than scaremongering.

Your first two links did not work for me, but did you read the third? The LA times article explains how these long term effects have all but vanished with better technology and wider access to medical abortions. Again, medical abortions (IE the ones where medicine is used) are extremely safe

Yes I read the studies, I don't know why the other links didn't work, but they reference large scale studies of women in Finland and Denmark and link the number of abortions to increases in a variety of negative future outcomes. Yes, I know, correlation is not causation, and I'm sure there may be significant lifestyle issues at play - but really, this isn't a topic that lends itself to some sort of double blind control group study - because you can't keep women in cages and control them like lab rats.

One problem with giving a blanket statement like " less than 1% of abortions have any complications" is that it doesn't take I to account any future impacts on subsequent pregnancies. An issue specific to abortion and medical follow up questions is that the procedure is generally not carried out by the patients primary care physician - so non-immediate complications like PID are not likely to be recorded by the abortion provider, because they simply won't know. There is also a general problem with much information regarding ANY medical procedure/ medication/ implant etc... Studies of complications and risks very rarely follow patients long enough to get any accurate information.

Your statement about medical abortions being much safer than surgical abortions actually proves my point. If women are basically told non-stop that abortion is a very minor procedure and nothing ever goes wrong and anyone saying otherwise is trying yo slut shame them and making things up -- then why would they look into having a medical abortion instead of surgical? They might decide based on pros and cons of at home but taking longer, multiple pills etc vs. at a clinic, but over more quickly etc....and assume they are equally safe. Because God forbid any risks are ever discussed.

[Terrie]

By that logic, we need to caution women that their current pregnancy can have future impact on later pregnancies.

[Mama Mia]

By that logic, we need to caution women that their current pregnancy can have future impact on later pregnancies.

People do. All the time. If you have a group of women talking on- line about their pregnancy experiences or childbirth or fertility no one is going to bat an eye if someone says that they saw a study that says that having multiple c-sections very close together might lead to the uterine scar rupturing. If someone else says that they experienced increased post-patum depression after the birth of their second child it's just part of the discussion. If another woman says that she knows women who became infertile after the birth of their first child, or had bladder leakage after the third kid or developed an incompetent cervix after the fourth, it's talked about. If one woman decides not to have her bladder leakage problem fixed because she's read studies that show the fix can cause worse problems - that's just people getting information. Sometimes people will disagree, but no one is telling women to never talk about any pregnancy risks, or risks or problems that are more likely if you have more than one child. No one even expects women to always portray childbirth as a completely risk free activity. But if any risks regarding abortion are ever mentioned suddenly it's " slut- shaming" ? How does that make any sense?

[polecat]

By that logic, we need to caution women that their current pregnancy can have future impact on later pregnancies.

They do. At least ime.

[Firiel]

By that logic, we need to caution women that their current pregnancy can have future impact on later pregnancies.

We, in fact, do that here all the time when we speculate about how 10-15 pregnancies/deliveries affect a woman's health and the potential viability of her later pregnancies.

[longtimelurker6]

You'd think he'd have learned how to use a condom at some point during all those abortions.

Well, he's not the one having them.

[halcionne]

Perhaps he was confusing the two but I rather think not considering the original premise was sterilizing those who had more than X number of abortions.

I've no idea how realistic it is for him to find that many partners who are unaware of his prior history. I don't know how long he's been sexually active but if he is mid-20's it realistically could be ten years or more.

The more I think about it, the more I think he is a yucky guy. Yep I'm passing judgment on his 11 abortions.

I think he's lying in order to support his argument that number of abortions is irrelevant. Which doesn't make much sense, since lying ruins his credibility and damages his whole platform, but there it is. I'm pretty grossed out by the notion of two men debating abortion and thinking their role in an abortion is equivalent to a woman's, but of course I don't know whether either of them has acknowledged that fact.

If you just want to shut him down, ask him how many children he has. The Guttmacher Institute says 40% of unplanned pregnancies end in abortion, so statistically speaking, he should have 16.5 children to go with those 11 abortions.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

[DGayle]

By that logic, we need to caution women that their current pregnancy can have future impact on later pregnancies.

I'm going to be blunt. What are you smoking to have managed to miss all the many, many times the risks of pregnancy are brought up? Even in THIS VERY THREAD, it's been brought up that pregnancy can be riskier than an abortion. In other places on this forum, the high number of pregnancies and their increasing risks is talked about all the time, especially with regards to Michelle. Hop over to any pregnancy group, and woman talk all the time about the risks of this or that, about the negative effects some of them still suffer, like continued pain or numbness months or years after a c-section, or 4th degree vaginal tearing from a vaginal birth, or spasms for years after their lest epidural. Half the talk or more is about what the risks are to this or that. If anything, pregnancy is made out to be this life-threatening medical emergency instead of a normal, natural body function most women will go through and come out pretty much fine and in one piece with no major lasting effects unless they have individual risks factors (close-together pregnancy, obesity, extremely young age, etc.). No one is in the dark about the risks. If anything, the risks are blown up and magnified many, many times.

Yet so many women think there are absolutely no risks at all to abortions because we're not supposed to acknowledge them. We're definitely supposed to make sure pregnant women know they're risking their lives every chance we get though.

I got sick and tired of hearing about how deadly pregnancy is my first one that I told everyone I know that if they even started in on that crap my second time, I was cutting them out of my life because I know there are very small risks that something could go wrong, up to and including the tiny, tiny chance of death, and I was fine taking them. But abortion? Heaven help the people who acknowledge there are risks involved to everything.