Upcoming Babies 23: More and More Fundies

[ToriAmos]

I'm so sorry for all of you who live in the USA. Let's hope this hurts the batshit fucking crazy Republicans in the mid-terms and beyond, and you can even up the Supreme court and get back on track. 

Or you can form a breakaway and start fighting the republic of Gilead? I've long thought civil war might be your best option. 

[WannabeHistorian]

We have to fight fire with fire at this point. If they want to subject women to forced birth, then we should force them to learn about what can happen to those unwanted children. The Old Bailey has a database of old court transcripts (1674-1913). There is an entire section for infanticides. I suggest that those of us with a strong stomach should go through this database and pick out some cases to show to conservative friends and family members.

TRIGGER WARNING. These documents contain some very graphic details in them. Please be careful when reading. 

This barely represents a fraction of the infanticide cases in England. It was very difficult to prove murder, so these women were often charged with concealing a birth instead. Apparently that was a crime back then. 

I know this is a Hail Mary, but maybe we can shock some of these pro-forced birthers into some sense. This is the world they want, so we should make sure they are fully educated on what that means.

[Dandruff]

14 hours ago, WannabeHistorian said:

I know this is a Hail Mary, but maybe we can shock some of these pro-forced birthers into some sense. This is the world they want, so we should make sure they are fully educated on what that means.

I'm not wishing an ectopic pregnancy on anyone, but if the universe demands a certain number of ectopic pregnancies then I hope they all occur among pro-forced birthers.

[Wolf in Sheeples’ Clothing]

17 hours ago, WannabeHistorian said:

We have to fight fire with fire at this point.

And call them out on their hypocrisy. Justice Clarence Thomas wants to completely overhaul the Fourteenth Amendment. And he believes that the courts should “reconsider” cases such as:

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) -  rights to conception

Lawrence v. Texas (2003) - same sex relationships

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) - marriage equality 

HOWEVER, also included in the Fourteenth Amendment is Loving vs. Virginia (1967), which legalized interracial marriages. 

Justice Thomas is married to a white woman. 

If he wants to overhaul the Fourteenth Amendment - there will be courts  wanting to “reconsider” a case that he benefits from. 

Thomas… you want these cases to be state based and not law of the land… prepare to have it backfire on you. 

Edited June 25, 2022 by Wolf in Sheeples’ Clothing

[JMO]

On 6/24/2022 at 3:51 PM, Bluebirdbluebell said:

I think it's a mistake that hospitals try to keep men from seeing women after they had a c-section. A lot of men definitely need a wake-up call about what pregnancy can do to a woman's body.

Where does this happen? No hospitals that I've been to and I regularly care for newborns in hospitals.

[Bluebirdbluebell]

1 hour ago, JMO said:

Where does this happen? No hospitals that I've been to and I regularly care for newborns in hospitals.

Read the posts above mine.

[dairyfreelife]

19 hours ago, Dandruff said:

I'm not wishing an ectopic pregnancy on anyone, but if the universe demands a certain number of ectopic pregnancies then I hope they all occur among pro-forced birthers.

Every state allows exceptions to abortions for health of the mother. Of course, the specifics of what that could mean would be open to interpretation. There are moron doctors out there (TAM's ex-husband for one) who think ectopic pregnancies don't need aborted. Leaving it up to someone's interpretation of "risk to mother" is asking for serious problems to arise. They opened a can of worms here. Even IVF could be affected by any life at conception laws. This is such a crazy mess. Right now my state is okay, but it could change in the future. I never expected such a law would be overturned in my lifetime and it's not okay. We turned the clock back 50 years for women's rights the other day in the US. 

[Wolf in Sheeples’ Clothing]

This is so freaking sickening! I live in a state where abortion is now banned even in cases of rape and/or incest. This all sucks so much! What is wrong with this country? 
 

 

[PlentyOfJesusFishInTheSea]

On 6/24/2022 at 3:51 PM, Bluebirdbluebell said:

I think it's a mistake that hospitals try to keep men from seeing women after they had a c-section. A lot of men definitely need a wake-up call about what pregnancy can do to a woman's body.

It's more they prevent the partner seeing the surgery itself. Too high a risk of fainting, no doubt!

[Smee]

On 6/22/2022 at 6:24 PM, SorenaJ said:

He wouldn't have had to be a preemie. I believe the earliest you can ovulate is 3 weeks after giving birth. That would make her ovulate on 10 January 2002, making her due on 3 October 2002. If Gabriel was born 19 September, he was born at 38+0, so "early term". 

My period came back 5 weeks post the birth of my second child so every time I read something like this I shudder at the possibility.

My ex didn’t DEMAND sex soon after birth, he just sulked and whinged and cried about how sexually frustrated he was and how I wasn’t considering his “needs” by not offering fellatio or something.

[medimus]

12 hours ago, dairyfreelife said:

Every state allows exceptions to abortions for health of the mother. Of course, the specifics of what that could mean would be open to interpretation. There are moron doctors out there (TAM's ex-husband for one) who think ectopic pregnancies don't need aborted. Leaving it up to someone's interpretation of "risk to mother" is asking for serious problems to arise. They opened a can of worms here. Even IVF could be affected by any life at conception laws. This is such a crazy mess. Right now my state is okay, but it could change in the future. I never expected such a law would be overturned in my lifetime and it's not okay. We turned the clock back 50 years for women's rights the other day in the US. 

The problem with abortions only for saving life when there is a risk of imprisonment for the doctor is that it is rarely clear cut when something becomes lifethreatening. Ectopic pregnancy is fairly straightforward. A threatened miscarriage that is turning septic is not at all. The illegality of abortion means you doubt yourself whether now is life threatening enough, maybe wait and try some more antibiotics, which can end up being too late. When it is not illegal it is much easier to go right this is the what needs to happen the quicker the better.

[Sarcastically spinster]

On 6/25/2022 at 12:19 AM, WannabeHistorian said:

There is an entire section for infanticides. I suggest that those of us with a strong stomach should go through this database and pick out some cases to show to conservative friends and family members.

Most anti-abortion advocates consider abortion to be infanticide.  Their question in response would be why you're horrified by that, but not when it's done to an unborn baby.  This is why many of them are fine with standing outside clinics with graphic posters, etc.  

There are few, if any, that would be deterred by this.  

[NachosFlandersStyle]

1 hour ago, Sarcastically spinster said:

Most anti-abortion advocates consider abortion to be infanticide.  Their question in response would be why you're horrified by that, but not when it's done to an unborn baby.  This is why many of them are fine with standing outside clinics with graphic posters, etc.  

There are few, if any, that would be deterred by this.  

Yeah, there is no One Weird Trick that is going to make antis suddenly realize their hypocrisy. Perhaps people whose lives have been deeply impacted by abortion could, over a long period of time, have difficult personal conversations with people close to them and help them to understand their perspectives. But if you think you've landed on a rhetorical device that's going to make all your old classmates and second cousins on Facebook see the error of their ways -- you absolutely have not. They do not care and they cannot be made to care. You are talking at a brick wall. I cannot stress this enough.

[dairyfreelife]

14 hours ago, medimus said:

The problem with abortions only for saving life when there is a risk of imprisonment for the doctor is that it is rarely clear cut when something becomes lifethreatening. Ectopic pregnancy is fairly straightforward. A threatened miscarriage that is turning septic is not at all. The illegality of abortion means you doubt yourself whether now is life threatening enough, maybe wait and try some more antibiotics, which can end up being too late. When it is not illegal it is much easier to go right this is the what needs to happen the quicker the better.

We are not in disagreement.

[RebeccaRay]

Brynleigh Noel Bontrager was born Today

[sleepygirl1]

That name. Yes, I know she is named after her mother but that name!

[JermajestyDuggar]

Two names just stuck together. Bryn Leigh seems better for some reason. But it’s better than Tucker. 

[dramallama]

Even with exceptions carved out for --insert whatever situation--, the bans will have a chilling effect on doctors. Where does a problem cross the line from "concerning" to "threat to health" to "threat to life"? How much of a threat does it have to be? 10%? 30%? 50%? And even if you want to define that, it's not a precise science where we can confidently throw around exact percentages, and even if we could, what if we quantify the required risk at 30% and the woman denied treatment because she was "only" 29% at risk dies?  

Doctors will be worried that if they accidentally wind up on the wrong side of the law in trying to treat a pregnant patient, they will lose their licenses and/or be charged with a felony, possibly all the way up to felony murder in some states. So many will choose to just play it "safe" from the law's standpoint and not be willing to do anything that could, even squinting, be construed as an abortion, because their freedom and livelihoods are on the line too.

travelingnurse on TikTok has already had a L&D nurse in a trigger ban state send her the story of a woman who came to the hospital at 11:30 pm Friday night with an ectopic pregnancy, who was left for 9 hours and whose Fallopian tube ruptured and spilled 600 cc of blood into her abdomen, nearly killing her before she could get the doctor to take action, because he was consulting with a lawyer to ensure he stayed on the right side of the law.

[anjulibai]

I wonder what Bryn's middle name is. 

[Cults-r-us]

32 minutes ago, dramallama said:

Even with exceptions carved out for --insert whatever situation--, the bans will have a chilling effect on doctors. Where does a problem cross the line from "concerning" to "threat to health" to "threat to life"? How much of a threat does it have to be? 10%? 30%? 50%? And even if you want to define that, it's not a precise science where we can confidently throw around exact percentages, and even if we could, what if we quantify the required risk at 30% and the woman denied treatment because she was "only" 29% at risk dies?  

Doctors will be worried that if they accidentally wind up on the wrong side of the law in trying to treat a pregnant patient, they will lose their licenses and/or be charged with a felony, possibly all the way up to felony murder in some states. So many will choose to just play it "safe" from the law's standpoint and not be willing to do anything that could, even squinting, be construed as an abortion, because their freedom and livelihoods are on the line too.

travelingnurse on TikTok has already had a L&D nurse in a trigger ban state send her the story of a woman who came to the hospital at 11:30 pm Friday night with an ectopic pregnancy, who was left for 9 hours and whose Fallopian tube ruptured and spilled 600 cc of blood into her abdomen, nearly killing her before she could get the doctor to take action, because he was consulting with a lawyer to ensure he stayed on the right side of the law.

So women dying and nearly dying has already started because of these laws.

[WannabeHistorian]

3 hours ago, RebeccaRay said:

Brynleigh Noel Bontrager was born Today

Marlin/Becky replied to a comment that she was actually born on Saturday. 

Hannah Bunch Reber is expecting. No due date, but I assume she's first trimester from the ultrasound pic.

[indianabones]

2 hours ago, WannabeHistorian said:

Hannah Bunch Reber is expecting. No due date, but I assume she's first trimester from the ultrasound pic.

That family has too many pregnant Hannah's to keep track of at this point...

[JermajestyDuggar]

Patience Pennington Axman is pregnant again and due in January. If any of Lisa’s kids have 9 kids like her, it will be Patience. 

[medimus]

Celeste Cruz is expecting her 11th. Announcement said almost finished with 1st trimester, so probably due in the early new year. Her youngest will be three in January and her oldest is 16.

[Bethella]

26 minutes ago, medimus said:

Celeste Cruz is expecting her 11th. Announcement said almost finished with 1st trimester, so probably due in the early new year. Her youngest will be three in January and her oldest is 16.

Who is she?