Should women be allowed to take an abortion pill at home?

[el_flel]

First things first: :!: This is NOT a debate about whether or not you agree with abortion. If you want to discuss the morality of abortion then there is a closed thread here (http://www.modthesims.info/showthread.php?t=346252) to read through or you can start a new one but please don't turn this into pro-choice vs. pro-life. Thank you.
----------

The British Pregnancy Advisory Service are going to the High Court soon because they want to change laws which currently mean that women who are issued with pills to end a pregnancy have to take them at their doctor's office. BPAS want it to be legal for women to take the second pill in their own home. In some countries this is already legal but at the moment it is not in the UK.

The process (in spoilers for those who are squeamish):
The woman takes the first pill at her doctor's office and then is permitted to go home. This pill causes the uterine lining to break down and can cause some cramping and bleeding.

The woman is then required to come back to the doctor's office a few days later to take the second pill. This pill causes the uterus to contract thus causing a miscarriage. About an hour after taking this pill the woman will experience heavy bleeding and more cramping.

A check up is performed a couple of days afterwards to make sure that the procedure has worked and that there are no complications.

The current procedure means that the woman is not at the doctor's office when the pills start to work so any negative side effects which occur will do so outside of the clinic. The only change is that the second pill would be taken at home instead of at the clinic. The women would be provided with all the information about the procedure when they are given the pills.

Women would also be given a choice as to whether they complete the procedure at the clinic or at home.


FOR: BPAS' argument is that it would mean the woman can go through the process in the comfort of her home and ensure that it doesn't start whilst on the way back from her second doctor's appointment.

AGAINST: Opponents to this believe it sends a message that an abortion is basically contraception.


So, should be women be allowed to take these pills at home?


This is not a general pro or anti-abortion topic! This topic is specifically about the abortion pill taken at home vs. in a doctor's office. Any general pro or anti-abortion posts that do not relate specifically to the abortion pill taken at home or a doctor's office will be deleted by MTS staff. (This message added by HP 8/5/11 - all posts after this date that are off-topic will be deleted.) :alarm: :alarm: :alarm:

[SuicidiaParasidia]

i'm for it. as long as she's abiding by the term limits (lollicenseagreementsonlife), theres nothing wrong with what she's doing and shouldnt have to face the judgment of others. also good that she wouldnt have to risk being in the process of driving when those cramps kick in. i find those things distracting enough when im parked in front of the computer, much less operating a 2 ton mobile chunk of metal.

and as far as irresponsible use/"messages" go(es), there will always be people who abuse what they are given/allowed. always. the deciding factor would be whether or not the majority of women who use it, use it responsibly.

[el_flel]

Well the current procedure means that the woman is actually home for pretty much the whole thing anyway. They take pill no.1 at docs and then go straight home. Few days later take pill no.2 at docs and go straight home. By the time the pills kick in they have already left the clinic meaning they don't actually go through the abortion until they've left, so any negative side effects that might occur would do so when they're at home anyway. They also get a check up a few days later to make sure everything is ok. That part isn't going to change. It's just whether or not they should be allowed to take the second pill at home by themselves. I'll edit my OP to make that a bit clearer.

[wickedblue]

Well, it's essentially a miscarriage. Which happens to a lot of women without the need for doctors to intervene. So safety, while certainly a valid concern for women who may have other health issues, isn't going to be a huge factor for most women.

Doctors do allow women who they know are going to have a miscarriage to go home and wait for it to happen. I don't see how this is any different.

I think the decision on whether to stay at the doctor's office or go home should be entirely between the woman and her doctor.

[Oaktree]

While I disagree with abortion, with the exception of specific circumstances, removing my moral objections to the act and viewing this as any other medical procedure, I don't think that there's any good reason to require women to take it at a healthcare facility. I'm not familiar with the procedure, but it sounds to me like the pills cause menstruation. For most women, menstruation is not a serious health risk, so the woman wouldn't need to be in a hospital while taking the pills. The pills are likely no more dangerous than other pills that people are entrusted to take properly in their own homes, so that is no argument against taking them at home, either. The argument given in opposition to home use of the pills is a little pathetic. Anyone who knows enough to take the pills would have an understanding of what happens when they take the pills. Further, those who have a moral objection to abortion are not going to start taking the pill simply because it is accessible. Those who don't have a moral objections to abortion who take the pill would have gone to get an abortion anyway. Requiring people to report to a doctor for more than a prescription is just too much mothering.

[el_flel]

Personally I think the 'against' argument isn't really much of an argument because women still have to obtain the pills in the normal way. All that argument really seems to do is seek to punish the women.

I think all the previous posters make good points. Like wickedblue said: if women are permitted to miscarry at home and the only difference between that and this is that this is purposely induced, then why shouldn't women be able to take them at home? I think if it were me I'd rather do it at home.

[crocobaura]

Well the current procedure means that the woman is actually home for pretty much the whole thing anyway. They take pill no.1 at docs and then go straight home. Few days later take pill no.2 at docs and go straight home. By the time the pills kick in they have already left the clinic meaning they don't actually go through the abortion until they've left, so any negative side effects that might occur would do so when they're at home anyway. They also get a check up a few days later to make sure everything is ok. That part isn't going to change. It's just whether or not they should be allowed to take the second pill at home by themselves. I'll edit my OP to make that a bit clearer.


Well, don't know how traffic is where you live, but in Bucharest it takes about 1 hour to get anywhere, even outside of rush hours. Taking the pill at the doctor's office and then going home is pretty risky, you could get the contractions, which are painful, plus bleeding even before you reach home. If you're driving then you're an accident waiting to happen.
As long as they had a doctor's check-up and been prescribed the pill, I think they should be able to take both pills at home, not just the second one. Taking the pill at the doctor's office, especially when they don't need to keep you there under observation just seems unnecesary.

[Phoeberg]

If I were going to have an abortion, personally I'd much rather do it at a clinic, just in case something does go wrong. I'd just feel safer knowing that there were nurses and doctors around. Plus, to go with the point above, I usually walk to and from my doctors, and it takes me about an hour either way. But I suppose if a woman isn't so concerned about that, then why shouldn't she take it at home? She would still have to visit her doctor to obtain the pill, so it would be regulated and safe.

As for the argument against, is this really so different from the morning after pill? You can go to any pharmacy/drugstore to buy the morning after pill without even having to see a doctor. While there are probably some people who end up using it like contraception, for a majority of women buying it is a one time thing. If you have to visit a doctor to get this abortion pill, then I don't really see how somebody could end up viewing abortion as contraception anyway...I'd like to think that if a women made frequent visits to her doctor for this pill then the doctor would say something.

[Lily__XD]

To be honest, I think I'd say I'm against this one. For one thing there is cause for concern over the woman's safety. You didn't specify whether, under the new regime, the patient would have to go back to the clinic to collect the secnd pill in order to take it home.

What if, per chance something goes wrong with the first pill but the woman doesn't realize, as she's not a professional Doctor, this is her first abortion and she has nobody else to ask, she feels the situation might be a little iffy but doesn't really know what to is supposed to happen so plows on with taking the second pill, without having to visit the Doctor's and ends up in hospital with serious bleeding?

Another question is "what next"? Right now women have to take both pills at the Doctors, soon they may be able to take one pill at home, the next step would be both pills at home (obtained from the Doctor) but would I be wrong in thinking the final step (maybe many years from now) would be to make both pills available from the chemists?

Yes, it would probably be nice to be in the comfort of your own home, but is safety not an issue?

[TUN3R]

It's a free country. Mostly.

[~Dee~]

They are already too many restrictions placed on women who want an abortion, it's her body, it should be her choice.
If I were in a situation like that I would take the pill at a clinic for safety reasons, better careful now then sorry later.

[Elyasis]

From what I understand you have to go home after the pill is taken anyway so you might as well be allowed to take it there. Not that I think you should be completely alone when you do decide to abort. Having a close friend or family member nearby would help.

[TheCrossfireX]

There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with our society. an abortion pill? are you joking? I know everyones all crazy on rights of all sorts, like for women and gays and all, but a pill is way too far. Little girls who have gotten pregnant can slip the pill without their parents knowing and deal with the emotional effects all by themselves. partners may slip the pill to their wives or girlfriends if they dont wish to be fathers quite yet. It's a step too far in the wrong direction, in my opinion

[pinketamine]

There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with our society. an abortion pill? are you joking? I know everyones all crazy on rights of all sorts, like for women and gays and all, but a pill is way too far. Little girls who have gotten pregnant can slip the pill without their parents knowing and deal with the emotional effects all by themselves. partners may slip the pill to their wives or girlfriends if they dont wish to be fathers quite yet. It's a step too far in the wrong direction, in my opinion

So you think that doctors are going to give the pills to everyone who goes there and asks for one, like a sweet.
"Might I take a couple abortion pills for my neighbour? I think that she is pregnant and a baby would be too noisy so... I'll just get rid of it." "Oh yes, feel free, it is not like you need a recipe and medical supervision for these."

[Miko09]

So you think that doctors are going to give the pills to everyone who goes there and asks for one, like a sweet.
"Might I take a couple abortion pills for my neighbour? I think that she is pregnant and a baby would be too noisy so... I'll just get rid of it." "Oh yes, feel free, it is not like you need a recipe and medical supervision for these."
Even though I dont really agree with TheCrossfireX, he did make me think about something. What's keeping this pill from ending up on the black market? There are already several pills that people buy off the record(Adderall and Percocet come to mind). If a take home version of the pill, which means it doesnt have to be taken under supervision, is made it could potentially mean that a lot more people will have a chance to get it. I have a question: is there a difference between the first and second pill? The first appears to break the lining and the second seems to actually induces the labor.

[TheCrossfireX]

There's no morality, even when involving doctors. I don;t think they'd see any issue in giving a girl of 16 the pill (i dont care if its thye age of consent, girls of that age are still very sensitive). It's just a disturbing thought. Sitting at home, watching tv, and then taking a pill to get rid of the baby inside of you. does this not worry anyone else? It's almost as though the child is an after thought. That abortion is considered so normal that it can be done while having breakfast. That just doesnt settle with me. It's something that IF it MUST be done, the entire process should be done with a doctor present.

Also, i'm a she :) haha

[el_flel]

There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with our society. an abortion pill? are you joking? I know everyones all crazy on rights of all sorts, like for women and gays and all, but a pill is way too far. Little girls who have gotten pregnant can slip the pill without their parents knowing and deal with the emotional effects all by themselves. Currently they can go and take it at the doctors already or have an operation to terminate a pregnancy. Why is a pill that makes the whole process far less invasive - a pill which already exists and has been in usage for some time - any worse than an operation?
partners may slip the pill to their wives or girlfriends if they dont wish to be fathers quite yet. It's a step too far in the wrong direction, in my opinionI doubt any doctors office is going to prescribe a man an abortion pill.
Even though I dont really agree with TheCrossfireX, he did make me think about something. What's keeping this pill from ending up on the black market? There are already several pills that people buy off the record(Adderall and Percocet come to mind). If a take home version of the pill, which means it doesnt have to be taken under supervision, is made it could potentially mean that a lot more people will have a chance to get it. Well, the first one is taken at the doctor's office under their supervision, so people could only get hold of the second one. But really, the argument of the black market could be made for any kind of termination procedure. Backstreet abortions are more common in countries where abortion isn't legal, however they still occur even where it is legal.
I have a question: is there a difference between the first and second pill? The first appears to break the lining and the second seems to actually induces the labor.You just stated the difference. They both play a part but do different things.
There's no morality, even when involving doctors. I don;t think they'd see any issue in giving a girl of 16 the pill (i dont care if its thye age of consent, girls of that age are still very sensitive).It's going to be a harrowing experience for anyone, regardless of age. This pill isn't the only option either.
It's just a disturbing thought. Sitting at home, watching tv, and then taking a pill to get rid of the baby inside of you. does this not worry anyone else? It's almost as though the child is an after thought. That abortion is considered so normal that it can be done while having breakfast. Do you know anyone who has had an abortion? Not just 'know of' them, but actually had a conversation with someone who has had this done? If you haven't then I can assure you that it's nothing like what you are portraying here.

[Miko09]

Well the second pill could be sold to people who dont have a lot of knowledge about it as the only pill they need. It's definitely a thought provoking issue in a world where the trafficking of drugs has become so..universal. I never stated I was against the bill. Just something to think about. There's not much I can even say on the subject because this is basically female territory. Looks el_flel brought the claws out early! Rawr!

[rcranger9]

its the woman's body, let her do what she wants.


Little girls who have gotten pregnant can slip the pill without their parents knowing and deal with the emotional effects all by themselves.


how many little girls (under 16) do you know that have gotten pregnant? most kids aren't interested in sex until they are 16.



Edit: sorry i wasn't more clear. i mean that if a woman wants to take a pill at home instead of at a clinic so she will feel safer, then let her do it.

[el_flel]

No claws! And just because you're a guy doesn't mean you can't participate. :)

It is a good point about the whole black market issue and is possible that the second part could be sold (never underestimate people's stupidity) but I don't think it would occur often at all because it likely wouldn't be very effective. The woman would have to be pregnant in order to get prescribed it in the first place and thus would have already taken the first part (because it's taken under Dr's supervision) so they'd risk either terminating a pregnancy they want, or risk not terminating a pregnancy they wish to terminate, because it's possible that just taking the one pill wouldn't work. And whoever buys the second part puts themselves at that same risk, although it's likely that a person considering an illegal abortion probably isn't considering the whole 'safety' aspect. Why go to such risks when you could have it done safely?

[Miko09]

because it's possible that just taking the one pill wouldn't work. And whoever buys the second part puts themselves at that same risk, although it's likely that a person considering an illegal abortion probably isn't considering the whole 'safety' aspect. Why go to such risks when you could have it done safely?

That's what I'm hoping because it would certainly squash a part of the black market angle. It could still be sold under that pretense and I'm pretty sure taking a pill meant to force a miscarriage is not so good for the body :wtf:. I agree that someone who is considering taking the pills from someone who isn't accredited may not have safety on the brain at the moment.

I wonder...do insurance companies cover abortions? I'm assuming they wouldn't cover you or help pay if you choose to do it at home and not under the doctor's supervision.

[wickedblue]

I know everyones all crazy on rights of all sorts, like for women and gays and all

Simmer down women and gays, we don't want you getting all crazy about being treated equally!


Little girls who have gotten pregnant can slip the pill without their parents knowing and deal with the emotional effects all by themselves. partners may slip the pill to their wives or girlfriends if they dont wish to be fathers quite yet. It's a step too far in the wrong direction, in my opinion

I'm a firm believer that you should know the facts before you state an opinion, wild thought there right, especially if your opinion is one that supports restricting the rights of others.

It's really not as easy to get hold of this pill as you seem to be suggesting. And in most places, a young woman who is under the age of consent (your use of little girls is tacky and condescending) needs parental permission for an abortion. If they are going to do it illegally to try to bypass that restriction, they are going to do it regardless of whether they are allowed to take the second pill at home or not. If the pill isn't available then they will seek an abortion that may be unsafe in that it's performed by someone unqualified and in unsanitary conditions. That's what people do when you restrict their rights, they find other means.

And about fathers "slipping" the pill to their unsuspecting partners: already, all over the world, abusive men are hurting pregnant women to force a miscarriage.

The problem is with the people who would do this, not the pill. If someone gets hold of a pill illegally and forces it upon their unwilling partner, they are a criminal and an asshole at that.

[el_flel]

I wonder...do insurance companies cover abortions? I'm assuming they wouldn't cover you or help pay if you choose to do it at home and not under the doctor's supervision.I guess you're referring to medical insurance? I have absolutely no idea. In the UK (where I'm from) we have free healthcare thus don't need insurance in order to get medical treatment.

[wickedblue]

In the U.S., it is not covered by insurance. Most insurance here won't even cover birth control.

That's a rant for another time.

[el_flel]

That is appalling (the birth control bit especially). We have to pay for prescriptions but contraceptive are free to everyone (you generally have to buy condoms but most GPs will give you free ones).

[wickedblue]

Yes it is appalling.

Fortunately we have places like Planned Parenthood that provide vital health services to women for free, or for very cheap. Unfortunately, they are now the target of a government that is going to end their funding because they also provide abortion services. Even though there was already legislation in place that forbid any government money to be used for abortions. They have provided low cost health services to the most underprivileged in our country for a very long time and our government is essentially shutting them down. I can't even put into words how much rage I feel over this.

[whiterider]

Regarding the black market angle, I don't think allowing the second pill to be taken at home would make any kind of impact, really. If you look at the drugs that are already available on the black market - things like Ritalin - they're not procured by going into a doctor's office and faking it to get a prescription, or getting a legitimate prescription then selling the pills instead of using them. They're procured at the point of manufacture - illegal factories creating generic drugs that do the same thing, or even legal factories which manufacture enough to fill the drug companies' orders, and then some to sell on to a black market dealer. Compared to that, hawking out pregnant women leaving surgeries and buying their second pills off them is a waste of time and effort.

[Mistermook]

Furthermore I just don't see there being a huge market on the black market anyplace except places where abortions are illegal. Unless they also get you high how many women are pregnant enough that they need a large supply of these? If you're having that much bad luck then maybe you should just...use rubbers or lay off with the sexing for a while. And if you are the dude that's stocking up on these, maybe you're just gonna have to be the creepy dude example tossed into prison for weird headline day - giving people controlled substances without consent is still illegal and this one is sure to make you real, real popular.

[TheCrossfireX]

Simmer down women and gays, we don't want you getting all crazy about being treated equally!

I didn't at any point indicate that i was AGAINST this. What I simply meant was that rights for all types of people will always be very topical and treated seriously, Sometimes to the extent in which thinking ethically is undermined by the majority who think humans should be entitled to do whatever they want, regardless of the emotional and mental consquences, like in this instance. Please don't jump to conclusions, and make things out to be something they arent. I'm actually quite passionate about this topic.


I'm a firm believer that you should know the facts before you state an opinion, wild thought there right, especially if your opinion is one that supports restricting the rights of others.

It's ironic that you claim my calling underage girls getting pregnant, "little girls", whilst you've only gone and patronised me yourself.
I'm only 17 years old, I'm glad I dont know all that needs to be known about this subject. That doesnt make my thoughts on it any less relevant however, and it's unfair to indicate that that's the case. Abortion is a terrible experience, no matter how it's carried out. And regardless of what many people may think, there are hundreds, maybe thousands of women, who put little thought into it and act too quickly. Thats why i feel it should be completely done in the presence of a doctor, with someone there constantly to reassure you, answer last minute questions, and to allow you to feel as though things are being done properly. Issueing a pill, even if the second is only taken at home, doesn't offer that same assurance.

It's really not as easy to get hold of this pill as you seem to be suggesting. And in most places, a young woman who is under the age of consent (your use of little girls is tacky and condescending) needs parental permission for an abortion. If they are going to do it illegally to try to bypass that restriction, they are going to do it regardless of whether they are allowed to take the second pill at home or not. If the pill isn't available then they will seek an abortion that may be unsafe in that it's performed by someone unqualified and in unsanitary conditions. That's what people do when you restrict their rights, they find other means.
I know it's not that easy but Little Girls is exactly what the girls are that im referring too. In britain, 13 year olds are having babies and i know 16 year olds who have had abortions. They are still little girls, however I was mainly referring to girls under the age of consent, which im sure varies in other countries. Backstreet abortions are a terrible means in which to carry out an abortion, and im aware that many women dont have an option, however this will happen regardless of a pill, although I do think its extremely valid reasoning.

Of course, my opinion is coloured by my views. I won't deny that, it's natural. but it unsettles me to think that the latter part of this process could be done without a doctor present.

And about fathers "slipping" the pill to their unsuspecting partners: already all over the world, abusive men are hurting pregnant women to force a miscarriage.
That's true, but why would we provide them with another means to do it in which they would never be found out? I know this is only a small implication and that men probably would not be issued with the drug but we'd be naive to think that it would not happen.

The problem is with the people who would do this, not the pill. If someone gets hold of a pill illegally and forces it upon their unwilling partner, they are a criminal and an asshole at that.

I don't disagree entirely with you. There will always be advantages to advancements in medical procedures, just like this one. But i don't think abortion should be considered so normal, as to require a handy little second pill to take at home. Some women will find it easier than others, and I don't think thats right. Life is to important to swoon over (and I am referring to women who abuse this right, rather than women who have carefully thought their decision through) My argument is aimed moreso at women who view the pill as an easy way to make a huge, life altering decision.

[el_flel]

I think you're making a lot of unfair and incorrect assumptions about this method of termination and the women who use it. You don't have to like abortion (and as I said in my original post, I would prefer the for/against abortion debate to be kept out of this thread) but I kind of find it a little sadistic that you'd prefer women suffer unecessarily just to make a point.

[TheCrossfireX]

I think you're making a lot of unfair and incorrect assumptions about this method of termination and the women who use it. You don't have to like abortion (and as I said in my original post, I would prefer the for/against abortion debate to be kept out of this thread) but I kind of find it a little sadistic that you'd prefer women suffer unecessarily just to make a point.
I stated that I was referring to women who would abuse this method of contraception because it is lesss invasive than having a doctor carry it out. That is not an assumption, it is a fact, as MANY women get pregnant over and over, using abortion as a means of contraception. Women who use the pill having considered the pros and cons, I dont see a problem with although I do think the very implementation of such a method of abortion, is a little worrying. It's there, in the presence of a doctor if women needs it. I don't think a pill is entirely neccessary.

Just because I dont agree with a pill, it doesnt mean i want women to suffer? It's not as though I want abortion to be banned. It doesn't make me a cruel person ,and I don't like what you're implying.

[HystericalParoxysm]

That is not an assumption, it is a fact, as MANY women get pregnant over and over, using abortion as a means of contraception.

Do you have a citation for this fact? I find it a little difficult to believe that any significant percentage of women getting abortions (say, over 5%) are using it instead of other methods like condoms, hormonal contraceptives, spermicides, etc., considering the pain, expense, and difficulty in obtaining it in comparison to those other methods.

[TheCrossfireX]

Do you have a citation for this fact? I find it a little difficult to believe that any significant percentage of women getting abortions (say, over 5%) are using it instead of other methods like condoms, hormonal contraceptives, spermicides, etc., considering the pain, expense, and difficulty in obtaining it in comparison to those other methods.

Perhaps not in countries like Britian and America, but even 5% is too many. And listing other contraceptives isnt much use considering that abortion is a result of neglecting those or them not working. It's like an afterthought contraception, in a sense. I'm not an expert, I can't list facts and figures although i do remember reading that using abortion as a contraception is common in areas of Romania. I can't say whether this is suprising or not, but from a logical point of view, any abortion is equivalent to contraception which would make that 5% a lot higher. The figure would be hard to determine, considering that any woman getting over 2 terminations probably isn't too keen to express that it's simply because she was too lazy to use contraception. Thats the kind of woman i'm speaking out against.

[el_flel]

I think we can all agree that the small number of women who have multiple abortions because they don't want to use contraception or whatever are stupid, but the overwhelmingly vast majority of women who have abortions don't do that, so I fail to see why we should allow their behaviour to be the guiding point.

You've repeatedly said that you think this pill makes abortion seem 'normal' and that the foetus is an afterthought - you didn't say that this only goes for the sorts of women mentioned above. You don't know how the people who use this method are feeling therefore that is an assumption, and unfair one at that if you're labelling them as uncaring and making out that they don't really 'get' what they're doing.

The whole point of this pill is to make the actual process of terminating a pregnancy less traumatic for the woman. Your posts make it clear that you object this pill on moral grounds because you think it's too easy and normalises the process. Thus, it comes across as though you would prefer a woman to have a more traumatic procedure because you want to make a point that abortion isn't 'normal' or 'easy', even though you have no idea how the women feel about it.

Contraception is a means of preventing pregnancy. Abortion is terminating a pregnancy. Therefore, abortion is not a form of contraception.

ETA: Some actual statistics from the Department of Health: http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/documents/digitalasset/dh_099714.pdf.

- 33% of women in 2008 who had an abortion in England and Wales had previously had one or more abortions.

[Bodhie]

This is my opinion personaly , but since humans being don't know how to not abuse something...I'll say...I'm against it :(

[el_flel]

Care to elaborate? How do you think this could be abused?

[pinketamine]

This is my opinion personaly , but since humans being don't know how to not abuse something...I'll say...I'm against it :(
Then you are also against sleeping pills, anti depressants and a whole lot of medication I guess, because I've seen those medications being sold and I've know people who have developed an addiction to them.. or those abuses just don't worry you?

The figure would be hard to determine, considering that any woman getting over 2 terminations probably isn't too keen to express that it's simply because she was too lazy to use contraception. Thats the kind of woman i'm speaking out against.
So just because a small percentage of people MIGHT abuse this measure, it is better to punish all the women who abort in totally different conditions. I don't know if you guys think that aborting is a sleepover party, abortion is a painful process (at least psychologically) and MOST women out there don't abuse it. People don't abort for fun. If you have numbers that prove that in your country people consider abortion a contraceptive measure, show them to us, because personally I don't believe this is happening.

[Bodhie]

I think we can all agree that the tiny number of women who have multiple abortions because they don't want to use contraception or whatever are stupid, but the overwhelmingly vast majority of women who have abortions don't do that, so I fail to see why we should allow their behaviour to be the guiding point.

This is what I had in mind actually when I said I was against it . As long as there are no laws that can controle some stupid peoples behavior , I rather be against it then allow something to be put on the market .

It's the guiding point , because peoples don't feel responsible for others actions . And that's why , I'm against it . If tomorrow , I vote for X thing and somebody miseuse it , or say my daughter mise use it , well it is my freaking responsability no matter how old is my kid . And THAT Most peoples ignore or don't want to take responsability for . And I say , as long as peoples act carelessly , why put the majority in deep shit ?

[wickedblue]

I don't disagree entirely with you. There will always be advantages to advancements in medical procedures, just like this one. But i don't think abortion should be considered so normal, as to require a handy little second pill to take at home. Some women will find it easier than others, and I don't think thats right. Life is to important to swoon over (and I am referring to women who abuse this right, rather than women who have carefully thought their decision through) My argument is aimed moreso at women who view the pill as an easy way to make a huge, life altering decision.

You are making a lot of assumptions about the women who choose to take this pill. We are subjected to all sorts of scrutiny from doctors and society in general over our reproductive choices. There's nothing easy about going to get an abortion, even if it is with a pill.

As a side note: even when the baby is already dead, we are subjected to some ridiculous scrutiny over the choice to have the procedure done rather than waiting to miscarry naturally. Ask me how I know. :(

My experience is limited to that of being in the U.S., so I don't know if this is the way it is in the UK or elsewhere, but here at least, they make us jump through many, many obstacles to terminate a pregnancy, even when that pregnancy is no longer viable, including a waiting period. Believe me when I say this: they make sure we are absolutely certain we want this and then still try to restrict our access to the procedure. Women are generally treated like incompetent children who are unable to make our own choices, concerning our own lives. So your concern about it being too easy to make that choice is coming off as concern trolling.

The woman who is at the doctor for the second pill in this process has already thought this choice out, considered her actions and the consequences, knows what she is doing and is carrying out her right. The only thing this proposal will change is that she won't be taking the pill at the doctor's and then driving home while the termination is in progress.

[Bodhie]

Then you are also against sleeping pills, anti depressants and a whole lot of medication I guess, because I've seen those medications being sold and I've know people who have developed an addiction to them.. or those abuses just don't worry you?

No I'm not against those , and I do worry but the system has so much failur . What I'm supposed to do ? Ethicaly or moraly I feel responsible but the system is shitty . So should I be condemned for others making a crappy system ?

I go with my morale ethic , and I urge peoples to take their responsability . But you cannot move the masses and such product touch the masses . And the free will come into play and complicate everything .

[el_flel]

Ok, I want to reiterate because this seems to have been overlooked: this topic is about taking the second pill at home. It's not about whether this pill should be used at all.

This is what I had in mind actually when I said I was against it . As long as there are no laws that can controle some stupid peoples behavior , I rather be against it then allow something to be put on the market .

It's the guiding point , because peoples don't feel responsible for others actions . And that's why , I'm against it . If tomorrow , I vote for X thing and somebody miseuse it , or say my daughter mise use it , well it is my freaking responsability no matter how old is my kid . And THAT Most peoples ignore or don't want to take responsability for . And I say , as long as peoples act carelessly , why put the majority in deep shit ?How are they being put in deep shit?

You can't criminalise stupidity. If we banned everything that people abused... well, the world would be a lot emptier. Banning things because there is the possibility they could get abused would cause a lot more problems than just the abuse. Remove the welfare system because some people claim fraudulently would have much worse implications than keeping it the way it is with a small number of people take advantage. You're allowing the wants of the minority to overrule the wants of the majority and that's unjust.

[Bodhie]

I'm not trying to be unjust , far from it . But like I said , that's my opinion , it may sound unfair but as long as it can be badly used , I rather be against it .

And the world work usually that way , the majoritee win over the minorite and that's why even today in 2011 we are still fighting for equality .

And I'm thinking about the minoritee when I make my choice ? sure , why not ? everyone stand somewhere , and I stand right there even if it sound as if I'm penalising the majoritee .

[el_flel]

It doesnt sound as if you're penalising anyone: you are penalising.

And I ask again: when this topic is about whether women should be allowed to take the second pill at home rather than at the doctor's office, how could this be abused?

[pinketamine]

That is exactly what I didn't understand. The pill is already being used, the debate is not about "should this pill be allowed" but "should it be possible for women to go to the doctor, get the pill and take it at home if they prefer it?"

[Mistermook]

how many little girls (under 16) do you know that have gotten pregnant? most kids aren't interested in sex until they are 16.
At least a dozen, including my grandmother and a girl I dated in high school after she dumped the bozo who impregnated her. I understand things have changed in the intervening twenty-ish years since the 1980s, but I was intensely interested in sex by about 11 and I didn't (and don't) consider myself atypical.

I'm not sure how I feel about giving minors medication like this, but to imply that it's inconceivable they'd have a use for it is just not giving teenagers credit for being teenagers.

[TheCrossfireX]

I'm done debating this because no one seems to be allowed to speak out against abortion when justifying why they dont agree with the use of such a pill, despite havig stated over 3 times that what i've said is not relating to ALL abortion cases. If one bad word is said, it's an assumption and you're branded sadistic. I'm sorry that I cant personally believe the use of such a pill is neccessary. It's my belief, and i'm sticking to it.

[pinketamine]

This debate is not about if abortion is right or wrong, or about if that pill is right or wrong. It is only about if a woman can take a pill at home instead of at a doctor's office.

[el_flel]

Firstly, I didn't say you were sadistic. Secondly, the point that I am debating is your belief that it normalises the process, not that people would abuse it; are you saying that women who abuse the right to abortion are the ones for whom the process will feel 'normal'? Because so far it seems as though you are saying that anyone who takes the pill will feel as though it's normal.

[Mistermook]

Because so far it seems as though you are saying that anyone who takes the pill will feel as though it's normal.
I obviously can't speak from personal experience, but I've been with girlfriends and friends who were female who've experienced miscarriages. While they're "normal" in the nominal sense, I don't think anyone would likely judge them so normal as to seek them out as a preference.

[wickedblue]

I'm done debating this because no one seems to be allowed to speak out against abortion when justifying why they dont agree with the use of such a pill, despite havig stated over 3 times that what i've said is not relating to ALL abortion cases. If one bad word is said, it's an assumption and you're branded sadistic. I'm sorry that I cant personally believe the use of such a pill is neccessary. It's my belief, and i'm sticking to it.

No one here has called you sadistic or otherwise implied anything about your morality. This is a debate and as such we debate our opinions.

You are entitled to your opinion and no one here is trying to force you into changing them but when you state your opinion in a debate thread, you have to expect that your opinion will be challenged because that's the point.

On a really personal note: I can't even number the times I have held strong to an opinion only to find myself in a discussion like this one here, whether it was online or face-to-face and learned something from others, which caused me to grow as a person. My opinions didn't always change right away but each time I learned something new and had more understanding of the other side. That, to me, is the point of a debate. I realize as I'm sure others do that your opinions aren't necessarily going to change from this debate but you could learn something. If you want to.

[HystericalParoxysm]

I've known several women who have had abortions (including one who had two). In no way was it used as contraception, or was it done lightly. It was a very thoroughly-considered and traumatic process that they absolutely did not want to have to do, but there was no other choice at the time. Having the ability to deal with the very emotional process in a familiar home environment likely would have been very welcome and would have made it a little bit less traumatic to deal with emotionally.

I don't think it would have made it any easier for them to make the decision to do so in the first place, or any more likely to make the decision to do so later. It's simply a matter of "am I going to have to go through this awful thing in a too-bright doctor's office with lots of strangers around" or "am I going to have to go through this awful thing at home where I can cry as much as I want without feeling embarassed."

[panther00567]

Over the years, my thoughts and opinions on this stuff have changed. In these days, I think more teaching of safe sex = less abortions, less STDs, less teenage mothers. I thought about this when wondering why there are so many teen pregnancies in this country. I can't help but think that the United States' sex education is failing miserably.

[el_flel]

Count me as another who knows women who have miscarried or had terminations and in each situation it was a horrible experience for them, so it bothers me when people try to paint women who have terminations as stupid, lazy, sluts who don't want to use precautions and don't care about what they're doing, because it's bollocks.

[rcranger9]

This is what I had in mind actually when I said I was against it . As long as there are no laws that can controle some stupid peoples behavior , I rather be against it then allow something to be put on the market .

It's the guiding point , because peoples don't feel responsible for others actions . And that's why , I'm against it . If tomorrow , I vote for X thing and somebody miseuse it , or say my daughter mise use it , well it is my freaking responsability no matter how old is my kid . And THAT Most peoples ignore or don't want to take responsability for . And I say , as long as peoples act carelessly , why put the majority in deep shit ?


but if we put too many laws on how people can behave, we are no longer a free country or free world.

[Mistermook]

There isn't some magical invisible line to cross where on one side you're free and the other side you're not. Civilization isn't free, it's an exchange of freedoms for social groupings and order.

[SuicidiaParasidia]

This is my opinion personaly , but since humans being don't know how to not abuse something...I'll say...I'm against it :(

okay, so are you against cars as well? alcohol? cigarettes? video games? how about vegetarianism--improperly introduced vegetarianism has killed children. (http://whatstheharm.net/childvegetarianism.html)
what about medicine? people abuse medicine all the time--i suppose you dont support morphine, antibiotics, sleeping pills or aspirin, either?
how about the internet? sexual predators, money scammers, all who have been known to operate via the internet, abusing this wonderful mode of communication for the chance to harm someone.
or knives? good luck trying to cut meat or bread without those, but people abuse knives for a number of different reasons. or how about just harmful things in general, including guns, pesticides, all manner of hardware tools, etc.
how about children and pets? should nobody should be allowed to have children or pets because some people misuse/mistreat them??

just...curious, really. because if thats the only reason youve got to be against something, im going to have to seriously question your input.

[fantasysims]

I totally agree on this subject. If a woman wants to take the pill at home, by golly let her do it! :] Also, a boyfriend or even husband for that matter cannot obtain these pills without their girlfriend/wife knowing about it, doctors will not just simply hand over pills to them... Clinic doctors HAVE to talk to the woman getting the abortion to get all kinds of information from her. They tell her about other options as well... Its a legal thing, duh. Their not going to give these pills to just anybody. Also, "little girls" still need the consent of a legal guardian to get these pills.