Another Phony E-mail Refuted

[green 6]

green...

I'm so sorry you had to go thru this. Doctors, for some reason, are willing to perform vasectomies on young, single men virtually upon request, but treat women as if they don't have the good sense to know whether or not they want children. They think, since a woman "might" change her mind later, that they have a responsibility to protect her from herself. What arrogant macho BS!

Thanx, Carlene. You always make thoughtful and gracefully expressed comments. green

[Wheetsin 714]

They think, since a woman "might" change her mind later, that they have a responsibility to protect her from herself.

I don't know if this is a state thing, or just a line of BS, but when I looked into having my tubes tied several years ago I was told that a married woman could not have her tubes tied without her husband's consent. The situation that kept coming to mind was a separated couple, still legally married... if it was not an amicable separation, that man would have some degree of control over that woman's body until the divorce was finalized... and you know there's someone somewhere out there who would exploit that.

Apparently they have completely different forms for single and married women. Regardless of age they required counseling. Regardless of age they would do it if you already had at least one child.

So if you're 24- you're SOL. *Unless* you've already had a child.

If you're 25+ and married you can, but only with your husband's signature.

If you're 25+, unmarried, and have no kids, they pressure you to wait until you're 30 or you get married.

This was a while ago, so things may have changed. This was also just one conversation at one clinic, so it may be incorrect. And I probably haven't done a good job of stating the criteria clearly. But the jest is there.

[lisah25 3]

I've heard people say that a married man couldn't get a vasectomey without his wife's permission as well.

[green 6]

Interesting info, Wheetsin. In those days when I was seeking to have my tubes tied I was much younger and so was the world - this was during the 1970s-80s. One thing I did discover was that sterilization of men or women in France was illegal. At the time I was having my abortion the medical folks involved were concerned that I wouldn't become a regular. They wanted to talk birth control methods with me. I thought that this was good management on their part and I suggested that while they were moseying aroung the neighbourhood they might take the time to sterilize me.

"Mademoiselle!" They were shocked and I later discovered that what I was asking them to do was illegal in France. I learned all about it in my Systeme Juridique class. I was shocked. Sterilization is illegal in France.

"Even for guys?" I squawked. My prof was amused. She couldn't imagine any macho French man voluntarily submitting to sterilization.

I ended up living in France for three years and during that time I met a married French woman who had had two children with great difficulty. She had followed this by two abortions because her birth control failed her and she was not able to be legally sterilized. I guess I find myself noting all of this because this issue of women's rights and the question of how one should react in face of our fecundity seems to be a loaded question.

[Carlene 12]

I've heard people say that a married man couldn't get a vasectomey without his wife's permission as well.

That is true. Or at least it was in Texas in 1974.

[Carlene 12]

The same groups who oppose abortion in the USA, also usually oppose birth control and sex education that teaches responsible sex. These groups believe that sex can be controlled by teaching abstinence, although through out history, sex has never been curtailed by either law, schools or the church.

Most anti-abortion groups do not take a stand on birth control or abstinence or sex ed. Most anti-abortion groups direct all their energy toward preventing abortions - period.

If you had the Catholic Church in mind, as one of those "groups", you would be incorrect. The official Church position on birth control (at least in the USA) is that it is strictly between a woman and her parish priest. Therefore, there are millions of Catholic women in the US who use BC with the full knowledge and consent of the Church. As for non-Catholics, the Church has never held them to a no-birth-control standard, any more than we would expect a Baptist to pray the Rosary.

Abstinence, as a religious teaching, is pretty universal. I don't know of any mainstream Christian religion which DOESN'T frown on sex outside of marriage, do you? The idea that if you abstain from sex, you won't need birth control is accurate, but absurd. Churches have to know this. They have been in business for 2,000 years. So they preach abstinence, but they aren't surprised when it doesn't work very well. The Mormons and the Amish have had better luck with it than anyone - probably because they have as little as possible to do with the rest of us. The really, really hardcore, ultra-conservative, no-sex advocates home school their kids, by the way. They are afraid that we will corrupt their children because we DO teach sex ed in public schools, and we DON'T teach abstinence.

Finally, I want to say that I am not defined by the church I attend or the party I vote for, as most people are not. I am an individual. I think for myself and I take full responsibility for my actions. I am a strong advocate of birth control - just not after the fact birth control. I deplore abortion for the sake of convenience. That doesn't mean that I think you should be prohibited by law from having one. (My God! That would make me....GASP....a REPUBLICAN!) It just means that I find it personally repugnant. And I'm allowed to feel that way. And I'm allowed to say so. Because this is the United by God States of America. :usa2:

LONG MAY SHE WAVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Carlene 12]

I don't know if this is a state thing, or just a line of BS, but when I looked into having my tubes tied several years ago I was told that a married woman could not have her tubes tied without her husband's consent.

My daughter had her tubes tied in 2000 (in Texas) and my DIL had hers tied in Ohio in 1995. They both said that their husbands did not have to give consent. Maybe the world is becoming a more female friendly place?????

[BJean 16]

Green: You continue to bring a different perspective to this discussion that is incredibly helpful and appreciated.

Your personal experiences are a testament to how important it is for people not to make reproductive decisions for others. No one can truly know what is in one's heart and soul.

And it only helps to solidify my very strong belief that legislators do not have any business making laws that control women's reproductive rights.

Btw, when I was a legislative aide in Richmond, many years ago, I met a brilliant young female attorney who was working as a lobbyist (not too many females equipped to compete with the men at the time) in Washington. We frequently had lunch together and discussed topics of the day. Women's rights, the ERA, abortion and many other things were hot items in the media and on the Hill where she worked when Virginia's legislature wasn't in session.

One day as we broached the topic of abortion rights, she told me her story. When she was young and in college, a college football player who was headed for the pros, took her to a party. She was a young Freshman, totally enamoured with this fine looking big man on campus. During the party, he (or a friend of his) slipped some kind of substance in her non-alcoholic drink. Later, in the front seat of his car, he forceably took advantage of her condition. She was helpless to stop him - couldn't even feel her limbs, or face.

It won't surprise you to know that she became pregnant. Her story isn't all that unique. But she was a young woman who knew better than to be alone in the car with someone she didn't know well, and totally beat herself up emotionally over it. She had to take time off from school to have the baby. But she did. Afterall, abortion was illegal. She gave the baby up for adoption since there was no way she could take care of him on her own. She lost her scholarship since she interrupted her studies for more than a semester.

She had to work to get back in school and back on track with her plan to be able to take care of herself as an adult. She subsequently found that she could not allow herself to become serious with any man because she knew she would have to reveal her "unfortunate" past. She sure couldn't lie, even had she wanted to. Her stretch marks would never allow that.

She told me over and over that day, how much she wished she had been able to have an abortion. She had all the scars and emotional trauma from going through 9 months of pregnancy and the painful delivery, with nothing positive to show for it, only the emotional trauma of having allowed herself to be taken advantage of by a man she barely knew. She was extremely unhappy because she had to live with the fact that she had a child out there somewhere, whom she did not know, but who could show up on her doorstep anytime in the future, expecting her unconditional love.

I also had a friend in high school who got pregnant, her boyfriend abandoned her, and she went to Illinois to finish her pregnancy and deliver the baby, whom she gave up for adoption. She was only 17. Later, she went to nursing school, got a B.S. degree and married a sweet young man. They had their first child and unfortunately he had Down's Syndrome. So she gave up her first totally healthy child, only to find herself raising a Down's Syndrome child. She always blamed herself for giving up the first child - thought it was God's way of punishing her. She was very active in the Baptist Church in our hometown. However, she and her husband subsequently divorced.

She and I had another friend when we were just out of our freshman year going into high school, who became pregnant at age 15. This friend was a cheerleader, beautiful and from a wealthy family. Her father took her to Dallas (we lived in OK) for a quick abortion. She didn't miss a day of school or one cheerleading practice. She went on to get her Master's Degree and is a school administrator after 10 years of a successful teaching career. She married her childhood sweetheart (father of the aborted fetus) and they had 3 children and basically have lived happily ever after.

So I've come by my feelings about this topic via listening to friends and acquaintences' experiences and seeing the torture that they have experienced and knowing that no one but the people immediately involved should be making a decision of whether to have a baby or not. Sometimes an abortion can cause untold mental trauma for a woman, sometimes having a baby and giving it up for adoption can cause unquestionable mental trauma. Sometimes things are not so traumatic and there is peace in everyone's heart. But these are not things that can be achieved just because some lawmaker says they must happen by their rules.

When you've lived through the age of illegal abortions, you realize that this is a very complicated and generally strident topic. I haven't thought about these things for years. But with the current administration and Supreme Court appointees, it has resurfaced its' ugly head. I just wish it wasn't a relevant debate today.

[green 6]

Thanx for your kind words, BJean, and for your always thoughtful comments, Carlene. The man who pioneered freedom of choice in Canada was Dr. Henry Morgentaler. He is a little munchkin of a man, and is someone who survived the Holocaust. He opened an abortion clinic when it was still illegal because he felt that every child should be a wanted child and that unwanted children were more likely to go on to commit attrocities as adults. I don't know whether I agree with his theory but that is his philosophy and that is what drove him to challenge the system up here. He was charged with breaking the law a couple of times, spent time in the slammer, and the law was eventually changed so that freedom of choice became legal.

My brother, a doctor, and one of his daughters were skiing at the same time and place as Morgentaler was. My niece commented on his appearance - he really is a little shrimp of a man - and my brother told her that she was looking at the best friend that Canadian women have ever had. (I have heard that he is, like many idealists, not a pleasant person to be around.)

[Carlene 12]

Sometimes an abortion can cause untold mental trauma for a woman, sometimes having a baby and giving it up for adoption can cause unquestionable mental trauma.

Everything you said is true, but as the mother of a now-grown adopted child, I have to say that sometimes having a baby and giving it up for adoption can result in priceless, unbelievable joy and a lifetime of blessings.

Had abortion been legal in 1967 I would not have my Tommy, and of course, if I had never had Tommy, I would not have Nicholas, my first grandchild, either. I am fairly confident about this because Tommy's birth mother was married, but not to his birth father. Her husband was in Vietnam, she was young...and lonely. It was a tragic story, all too indicative of the times. My son - the son she would have aborted - is a fine man and an outstanding husband and father. It was a privilege to raise him, and I will forever be in her debt.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

This not a complaint, but only posted to marvel at how forum threads may be a new kind of life-form.

I started this thread 10 days ago to debunk an e-mail about Iraq, 911 and the Qur'an and today there is an intelligent discussion on abortion taking place.

I could not have planned that to happen in a million years.

[green 6]

Everything you said is true, but as the mother of a now-grown adopted child, I have to say that sometimes having a baby and giving it up for adoption can result in priceless, unbelievable joy and a lifetime of blessings.

Had abortion been legal in 1967 I would not have my Tommy, and of course, if I had never had Tommy, I would not have Nicholas, my first grandchild, either. I am fairly confident about this because Tommy's birth mother was married, but not to his birth father. Her husband was in Vietnam, she was young...and lonely. It was a tragic story, all too indicative of the times. My son - the son she would have aborted - is a fine man and an outstanding husband and father. It was a privilege to raise him, and I will forever be in her debt.

Ah, Carlene, I think that there will always be women who will elect to see their pregnancies through and then make sure that there is a child who is there for you and for folks like you. That abortion is one of the choices available does not mean that it will be the option that all women will choose. Many fine women will elect to continue with their pregnancies.

I knew a woman who was working for women to have the right to choose and yet was hoping to adopt her brother's ex-girlfriend's child. The irony was not lost on her and she did adopt the baby! He is now pushing 30 and has a family of his own.

Indeed the irony is not lost on me. My kid brother, the sweetest of us three sibs, was an accident and might have been aborted had this been readily available at that time.

[BJean 16]

Interesting to read about your wonderful adoption of Tommy. I am so happy for you and him and your grandson. It really warms my heart.

My son, Zack, was born in 1967 when his father was serving in Viet Nam. I was just over 1 month pregnant when my husband was shipped out. We had been in college and he got drafted, sent to boot camp and infantry school and then on to Nam. I was 21 yrs. old.

It was a troubled time for many Americans back then. If it weren't for my parents and sister, and many caring friends, I don't know how I would have been able to come through it emotionally healthy after 9 months of worrying whether my baby's father would make it home alive. His entire platoon, with the exception of him and an Korean-American soldier, was wiped out.

It really does make me feel good to know that something so good, the adoption of Tommy into a loving home, happened during 1967.

[*susan* 1,709]

I have a 20 year old stepdaughter. She got pregnant with her first child when she was just 16. At the young age of 20, she now has 3 children. The children all have the same father and she is very lucky as he himself is just 20 but is a very responsible young man. He works 3 jobs so she can stay home and care for their children. When she was due to have her 3rd baby six months ago, my husband and I went down to visit them and have a talk with her. They cannot afford the cost of birth control, they do not have insurance and they cannot afford to have any more children. Both of them talked it over and agreed that they have 3 children and neither want anymore. We offered to pay for her to have her tubes tied and they accepted. Well, she was not allowed to have her tubes tied because of her age. I found that ridiculous.

[Carlene 12]

They cannot afford the cost of birth control, they do not have insurance and they cannot afford to have any more children. Both of them talked it over and agreed that they have 3 children and neither want anymore. We offered to pay for her to have her tubes tied and they accepted. Well, she was not allowed to have her tubes tied because of her age. I found that ridiculous.

Unbelievable! Was this the doctor's "rule", or the hospital's? Does she qualify for Medicaid? They will pay for BC, also for having her tubes tied. Would a doctor perform a vasectomy on your SIL? It's done in the office and the cost is less than female sterilization.

I truly do not see what the age thing is all about. If you have 3 children and don't want 4, it should not matter.