"...less than 30% knew that HIV could be transmitted sexually."
Knowing that AIDS has been with us for *almost 30 years*, this statistic just breaks my heart. It's beyond inexcusable for any government to let their people be this uninformed.
I would like to know how sexual EDUCATION is considered pornography?
Surely if you search WebMD you're not expecting to find NC-17 material. Shouldn't everyone have a right to know about their own bodies? Because the last time I checked, when i was in sex ed we learned about STDS, menstration, semen, etc. No where in there did we learn anything found in the Kama Sutra.
Did anyone read in the article how cheap it is to get an abortion in China? It's roughly $88. I can't even replace my Chi hair straightener for that price. It's amazing how widely available and affordable it is.
@dummyfakeroller: Cheap for Americans, not Chinese women. That's over a week's salary for a person in China. Also, "widely available" can't be confused with "often forced upon women."
@schweppes: Very true. I should've clarified that I meant in American culture, it is cheap and available. Being forced into abortion is just as horrible as being forced into giving birth and that happens in areas where people have to travel 7 hours to obtain an expensive procedure.
@vanka-vstanka: I've read articles regarding giveaways encouraging procreation in Russia. One in particular mentioned that people could get half a day off work to go home and try to make babies and if the couple had a baby within a certain time frame, would win cash or a car. It shocks me to learn that abortion is free in Russia after knowing that.
@dummyfakeroller: There's a big push to OMG MAKE BABIES because of the demographic crisis, this is true. I think United Russia even had a babymaking camp thing for its youth group. I think sometimes you have to pay due to healthcare funding issues, but abortion is supposed to be free.
@dummyfakeroller: But it's not cheap for Chinese people. It's still expensive for them to choose to have an abortion. Abortions are common because they are forced by the government to have abortions, but abortions of a woman's own choosing is not cheap. That's a lot different than legitimate logistical difficulties of obtaining an abortion after the first trimester.
China's one-child policy is one of the most well-intentioned but poorly thought out policies in the history of thinking. When we're not all speaking Chinese in 20 years, we'll have that policy to thank.
@morninggloria: Especially when it came after a policy of rewarding families for having large numbers of children. They spiked the population, then tried in vain to contract it back.
@morninggloria: It's like the opposite of the mess CeauÅŸescu created in Romania with his "Be a good Communist, have lots of Commie babies!" plan. Lots of single moms with like 6-8 kids, no public assistance of any sort and a ridiculously strict anti-abortion law. The stories I've read about mothers there is just heartbreaking. They have nothing.
@MilointheMeadow: Communist countries usually had unrestricted access to abortion. A staunchly anti-religious government/society makes a big difference. In the USSR and Eastern bloc, abortion was often the primary means of birth control for most women. (Which sucks from a medical perspective, but at least it was available when preventative birth control was hard to get).
@stacyinbean: That's a result of the Chinese "one child" policy. You pretty much aren't supposed to have children out of wedlock, so they're existence is usually kept secret. Although the Chinese are now realizing that with their population aging rapidly, they need people to have more children to take care of the elderly population as it gets much older. Look for the policies to change.
@stacyinbean: That is why so many children with medical conditions are left for adoption. The punish the mom by denying care to the child. Cruel, and highly effective.
Any culture with lousy sex ed (or "abstinence only") is going to be a society with a high rate of unplanned pregnancies. At least in China their political leaders aren't trying to prevent them from terminating those pregnancies.
@Anna N.: Yes, thank you, I alluded to this on another thread, but this weird implication that China is somehow better than the US when it comes to reproductive freedom is just mind-boggling. The US isn't perfect, but the human rights abuses when it comes to reproduction in China is well-documented- - - and there's little to make us think that we've even heard of the half of it.
@schweppes: I think it's an outgrowth of the whole belief that women, left to themselves, will naturally choose to have as many children as possible because of some metaphor about grazing land in England. (The Tragedy of the Commons, whatev). Over the years since the first population panic of the 1970s, epidemiologists have established with numbers and facts that women who have the education and the health care will choose to have fewer babies most of the time, but China jumped right into early population-panic thinking with coercion instead of education. Which was what a lot of people were recommending for everyone everywhere in the 1970s, if you read development texts from that era, but luckily most countries just didn't have the political will to crack down like that.
You know, we will never know if China would otherwise have suffered from decades of debilitating famines. Education takes longer than getting things done at gunpoint.
Jenloveshercurves promoted this comment
purpleshoes reminds everyone to take typing breaks and stretch, ow was starred
purpleshoes reminds everyone to take typing breaks and stretch, ow was unstarred
i feel like if the cost of the baby was the reason for the abortion, the woman should have eaten the cost of the earlier abortion. a comparison would call it a bargain... and i'm not saying that to be inflammatory, but i think the way things unfolded may have had to do with the woman's struggle with whether or not to get the abortion on some level. it is truly sad when something like the economy forces women to make these decisions, when otherwise they might happily have a baby.
@hippichx sez PEACE PLEASE: Uh. She tried to get a first-trimester abortion but couldn't afford even that.
I've also seen medical professionals schedule abortion-related appointments with absolutely no apparent sense that time is an issue. A friend of mine went in about six weeks pregnant to make the necessary ultrasound appointment for an abortion. The nurse at the clinic, knowing perfectly well my friend wanted an abortion STAT, scheduled the ultrasound for four months later. Really. One wonders, sometimes.
(My friend pitched a hissy fit and got an ultrasound a week later.)
'Most of these women aren't the stereotypical single girls who need to get back to their carefree lives, but rather women with families who "are really having to make thoughtful decisions whether now is the right time to get pregnant or not"'
This is ALREADY the case. The majority of women who get abortions have already given birth to at least one child. They know what's in store for them and choose to go a different route.
"Women are also turning to other options besides abortion. A Chicago adoption agency has seen a 30 percent rise in pregnant women asking about adoption"
what? this makes no fucking sense. A child is a child is a HUGE expense regardless of popping it out of your own uterus or acquiring from a third party.
And if one is considering an abortion NOW - shame on you for even allowing yourself to get pregnant when the economy has been in the shitter for a year!
BIRTH CONTROL PEOPLE!!!!! yep, I just Cubby Selby'd
@Scout: Yeah, but popping it out is a lot cheaper than popping it out and then taking care of it for 18 years, and many adoption programs make arrangements for the potential adoptive parents to pay for all expenses. If you were morally opposed to abortion but couldn't figure out how to pay for your pregnancy, it's a good solution. You don't have to have an abortion *or* go broke.
Most of these women aren't the stereotypical single girls who need to get back to their carefree lives
sorry, but i really don't like this sentence. the "stereotypical single girls"!!??
as a woman who terminated a pregnancy during my freshman year of college, it frankly offends me. i did not get an abortion so i could go back to drinking and having wild parties. i did it because i knew it was the wrong time in my life and that i would be unable to care for a child.
i'm sure the sentence wasn't intended to be offensive, Anna, but it really caught me off guard.
Not only are these statistics sort of terrifying, but even more to realize that, upon quick investigation, my own insurance (provided through a women-centric non-profit) doesn't cover abortions, IUD, or home-births. Basically, it doesn't cover what would take me and my deductible $$ outside the mainstream medical view of what is normal/acceptable.
@thevickinator: I'm not surprised by them not covering abortion or home birth, but why not cover an IUD? It seems like it would be cheaper in the long run than the pill, patch, nuvaring or depo.
@Brandi G. Hasty: A LOT of insurance providers don't cover IUDs, partly because it's more expensive upfront, and also because they can get away with it (demand is lower, and it's contraception).
@greengrey: Well, I doubt people who refer to themselves as "pro-life" are suddenly changing their minds and getting abortions as the economy tanks.
Instead, I'd guess the women seeking abortions are among those who'd already classified themselves as pro-choice, and that the circumstances leading them to this decision are linked to the economy.
@saintbernadette: Or they thought they were pro-life as in "generally not in favor of abortion" but realized when they found themselves in the situation themselves that they had to make a hard decision.
@Flackette Goes Retro: Maybe. I'd just be real surprised if the "pro-life" identifiers in that recent poll are the exact same ladies who are now seeking abortions.
@greengrey: In her 15+ years of clinic escorting, my mother has seen a woman protest one week, get an abortion the next, and then be right back on the street protesting the third. People can talk about their ideals as much as they want, but for a good portion of women who claim they'd never get an abortion, once they're in that place they never thought they'd be, things change.
To all of the people who have mentioned that an abortion would be more cost effective for the insurance company than the pregnancy and birth, you are forgetting that after the birth that child becomes another person who will most likely be insured through the parent's insurance carrier. So really, it is a better business strategy for them to made it more likely that their clients will have babies.
@Heidiismyrealname: But aren't most insurance premiums the same no matter how many children you have? There's usually a single, single + partner, and a family rate. This has been my experience with company-provided insurance. For those families who already have kids, the insurance company wouldn't be getting increased revenue, just increased expenses.
@peachplum: Every insurance plan I've ever dealt with had a single rate, a single + partner, and a family rate that was basically the single + partner + X amount for each kid. At my previous employer, the X amount was *$175* a month per kid, in addition to single + partner. When our new insurance rates came out, there were people who only got one paycheck a month instead of being paid biweekly. Their insurance ate up the rest.
Women who live in RED states -- listen up! This isn't advertised, but Planned Parenthoods in red states were given a HUGE amount of money by a private anonymous donor to provide subsidized abortions. So if you need one, and live in a red state, and can't afford the $300-$600 cost (or more if it's late trimester and your state allows them), you should ask about funding -- though more than likely they'll offer it to you without asking.
@Zombies make the heart grow fonder: I'm not sure about that actually -- I know the fund was set up when Bush was still in office and since I'm no longer privvy to insider information, I can't say. It's worth asking though.
07/30/09
Knowing that AIDS has been with us for *almost 30 years*, this statistic just breaks my heart. It's beyond inexcusable for any government to let their people be this uninformed.
07/30/09
Surely if you search WebMD you're not expecting to find NC-17 material. Shouldn't everyone have a right to know about their own bodies? Because the last time I checked, when i was in sex ed we learned about STDS, menstration, semen, etc. No where in there did we learn anything found in the Kama Sutra.
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
@vanka-vstanka: I've read articles regarding giveaways encouraging procreation in Russia. One in particular mentioned that people could get half a day off work to go home and try to make babies and if the couple had a baby within a certain time frame, would win cash or a car. It shocks me to learn that abortion is free in Russia after knowing that.
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
Also, I had no idea that China legalized abortion before the US.
07/30/09
07/30/09
So if you have a child out of wedlock, it basically doesn't exist? WTF?
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
You know, we will never know if China would otherwise have suffered from decades of debilitating famines. Education takes longer than getting things done at gunpoint.
05/20/09
05/20/09
I've also seen medical professionals schedule abortion-related appointments with absolutely no apparent sense that time is an issue. A friend of mine went in about six weeks pregnant to make the necessary ultrasound appointment for an abortion. The nurse at the clinic, knowing perfectly well my friend wanted an abortion STAT, scheduled the ultrasound for four months later. Really. One wonders, sometimes.
(My friend pitched a hissy fit and got an ultrasound a week later.)
05/20/09
This is ALREADY the case. The majority of women who get abortions have already given birth to at least one child. They know what's in store for them and choose to go a different route.
05/20/09
what? this makes no fucking sense. A child is a child is a HUGE expense regardless of popping it out of your own uterus or acquiring from a third party.
And if one is considering an abortion NOW - shame on you for even allowing yourself to get pregnant when the economy has been in the shitter for a year!
BIRTH CONTROL PEOPLE!!!!! yep, I just Cubby Selby'd
05/20/09
05/20/09
sorry, but i really don't like this sentence. the "stereotypical single girls"!!??
as a woman who terminated a pregnancy during my freshman year of college, it frankly offends me. i did not get an abortion so i could go back to drinking and having wild parties. i did it because i knew it was the wrong time in my life and that i would be unable to care for a child.
i'm sure the sentence wasn't intended to be offensive, Anna, but it really caught me off guard.
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
Hermmm? Again, I guess it's just semantics and people who are "pro-life" aren't really anti-abortion.
05/20/09
05/20/09
Instead, I'd guess the women seeking abortions are among those who'd already classified themselves as pro-choice, and that the circumstances leading them to this decision are linked to the economy.
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
This has been my experience with company-provided insurance. For those families who already have kids, the insurance company wouldn't be getting increased revenue, just increased expenses.
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09