The National Post recently ran a story on the reduction of multiple births. I hadn’t really thought of the concept before, if I’m honest. Of course, I always have been Pro-Choice as far as I can remember, without thinking. When I was little, I didn’t even know that people would object to the notion. (And me going to catholic schools, oh ho ho ho…)
Hangin' out with the fun crowd. Oh yeah...
But when confronted with this new info, not a single thought of “Is this a bad idea..?” ran through my head, because of course it’s a fine idea! If you want one kid, find out you’re having two, then terminate the other. It IS just a useless blob of jelly and cells you know… Tch. (All these mental people wailing about it being a life… if you found it on your kitchen floor, you’d puke.)
The article starts like so:
Like so many other couples these days, the Toronto-area business executive and her husband put off having children for years as they built successful careers. Both parents were in their 40s — and their first son just over a year old — when this spring the woman became pregnant a second time. Seven weeks in, an ultrasound revealed the Burlington, Ont., resident was carrying twins.
Stop. You need not explain yourself – You are a working mother and your partner also works. You already have a child who is basically still a baby himself and you’re pregnant. Not one baby, but two more. Three babies under two for a working mother. That’s horrifying. Who will look after them when you both need to work? What will happen to your career while you’re on maternity leave? Will your children resent you in later life for not being as involved? But you’ve got to work. You have a career ladder to climb. (Yes, I do in fact believe that a woman is entitled to pursue a career Shock, Horror). So the woman decides on a reduction. Good for her. I would have too.
Although, experts claim speculate on the “morality” or “ethics” of a woman deciding to reduce on account of how she feels the child will impact on her lifestyle, rather than medical implications for the birth or the other fetus. (re: NOT A BABY/CHILD.)
How fucked up is that?
“I don’t want twins. It will cripple my life and ruin my career,”
“Tough chips, missus.”
Although, “experts” claim that reduction has been detrimental for marriages and has cause long term angst.
I’ll tell you what would cause me long term angst – having some kid I don’t even want for eighteen fucking years! Counselling can help you with any sense of loss or grieving process you may have after a reduction or termination, but it won’t make your unwanted burden go away.
And if this decision breaks down your marriage, then maybe it just wasn’t right. Maybe your partner doesn’t want the best for you. Breaking up is probably best, you know.
National Post gets the totally neutral opinion from a totally on the fence type:
Lynda Haddon, who counsels couples over fetal losses for the support group Multiple Births Canada, said she has heard from a number of people in the past several months who were seeking twin reductions to lessen their burden as parents, something she had never encountered before. Though she strives to help them in a nonjudgmental way, she admits the trend “saddens and scares” her. “Is this a healthy thing? We have to ask these questions: Where does it stop? When do children become a commodity?”
Ayep. That looks like fun. I want five of them. All doing that at once
What a brilliant counsellor, eh? She’s totally non-opinionated about this – no wait, it SADDENS and SCARES her. These are negative reactions, yes? And she wants to know WHEN DO CHILDREN BECOME A COMMODITY?!!?!?!?!
Well Lynda, I don’t know if you’ve ever had a kid before, but as much as they are chubby, pink, gurgling angels, they also take up quite a lot of your time and can be a pain in the arse. I mean, you know, you’ve got to take out time to raise the thing, you’ve got to spend A WHOLE FUCKING LOT ON THEM. You’ve got to struggle through damning sleepless nights, any kind of awful illness they could have at any given point, bear their fall-outs with you when they get a bit older, clean their rooms, their clothes, their dishes and their stinking arses.
And I invite anyone who thinks this is all a part of the ‘beauty’ (or whateverthefuckyouwanttocallit) of raising a wean – take off your rose tinted glasses and stop lying to yourself.
However, the woman from Burlington puts it no truer than anyone could:
“I’m absolutely sure I did the right thing,” she said. “I had read some online forums, people were speaking of grieving, feeling a sense of loss. I didn’t feel any of that. Not that I’m a cruel, bitter person … I just didn’t feel I would be able to care for (twins) in a way that I wanted to.”
The reason this woman knows she did the right thing is because she did exactly what she wanted to do. She did not allow herself to be swayed by opinions which in no way related to her life, her situation or her feelings. She looked at her life and saw no room for twins, so she opted for only having one baby. I don’t want to harp on about the time-old feminist rant about it being our bodies, our lives and our choices, but bear it in mind.
The thing is, there is little to no ethical debate over terminating fetuses if there is more than three. This is because there is an obvious risk to the health of the mother and other fetuses. So if they can do it for these reasons, why make it so demonic for the woman to make the choice of having less children to alleviate emotional pain as well as physical? Are you telling me that it’s totally cool to force women to go through years and years of horrible mental pain just some people think it’s not okay to reduce?
There is the case of IVF to think of also:
Often, those multiples are conceived because clinics transfer a number of embryos into a woman undergoing in-vitro fertilization treatment, boosting the chances of pregnancy.
“It troubles me a lot because it’s avoidable,” Dr. Jon Barrett, an obstetrician-gynecologist at Toronto’s Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre. “We are forcing people to make a terrible choice because we haven’t been sensible.”
IVF works this way because implanting many embryos gives the woman much better chances of conceiving one (or more healthy babies). Let’s not beat around the bush here, IVF is fucking expensive. In Scotland, if you meet certain criteria, your first treatment is free, but more often than not, it takes multiple treatment before a result. Then after that, you’re paying yourself. Fuck you, people in poverty. No family for you. So isn’t it simply logical to try your very best to get as many embryos as possible and then prune to a number wanted?
Well, the more misogynistic of us would argue that “She should just be grateful she’s getting any kids at all, never mind the amount!!”
As if already been through, more kids mean more money. And you’re already in debt from your IVF…
Good auld Lynda Haddon also has this to say about reductions with IVF:
“These poor parents are caught between a rock and a hard place,” she said. “They tried so hard to get pregnant and probably spent a lot of time, energy, emotion, money and now they have to kill some of them, now they have to reduce. Even though the child was lost through reduction, it lives on, in mind and fantasy.”
Women who are so deeply affected by reduction through IVF should be offered counselling on the state. This is not the fault of reductions themselves, but the fact that they HAD to exert so much energy and money in achieving pregnancy when these things should be free. Furthermore, for all the women who regret, there are women who benefit, but people seem to forget this.
What is worse? Having the option for all women to choose the life they lead, how many children they will have OR to force all women to go through with multiple births and the ones who would rather not should just live miserably?
Something everyone seems to forget when it comes to aborting and reducing – no one is forced to abort/reduce. It is the woman’s own choice. It’s beyond me why these “experts” act as though this is some kind of Nazi obliteration of all babies.
And finally, for some stupid, stupid reason, I read the comments. To be honest, I’d can’t be arsed quoting them. Instead I will illustrate:
Typical internet commenters. Godwin's Law? Check. Fake Sympathiser? Check. I'm a Feminist But-? Check. Bible Basher? Check. I'M A (insert relevant position here) BUT I FIND THIS DISGUSTING person? Check.
I had always been aware that reductions of multiple pregnancies were carried out from watching countless things about IVF on the telly, and when I heard about a young lassie from my school who just had twins I started thinking about it. Imagine going from zero babies to two! That’d be fucking terrifying.
Some people only go in for the baby-making game as a one time thing. One of my relatives has one child, and only ever wanted one child – if she had discovered she was pregnant with two or more babies when she was only mentally, emotionally, physically and financially prepared to have one, why shouldn’t she be able to reduce?
And omg I cannot believe that “counsellor” saying the bit about children/commodities. She clearly doesn’t get it AT ALL, and I seriously question her ability to perform her job if she holds views like that.
I think the principle “every child a wanted child” is the right principle, reductions in multiple pregnancies is normal for IVF indeed look how that woman in America who had the 8 babies was vilified for having so many babies at once. Women just can’t win either way. However twins and multiple births can also bring great joy too and don’t necessarily mean an automatic break down.
Some people have funny ideas about pro-choice etc, especially when there are restrictions. Often the issue of rape and incest comes into it and often the argument that atleast women who have been raped should have access to terminations however there are many very loved children brought into the world due to rape and incest and have brought happiness to their mothers and family. The issue is not that terminations should be restricted to help women who have been raped but all women need to be able to access terminations should they need them REGARDLESS of their circumstances!
Being denied the right to have a termination is a human right atrocity, being a mother should be based on consent and not coercion.
Humans experience loss quite badly as we are sociable creatures and there is good reasons why some women do need grief counselling after a termination, this isn’t about regret but about losing something that could have been part of their life, I think the resources are needed to support this grief including counsellors who understand the process a woman is going through especially when many of the pressures in society is telling her to feel guilty and selfish rather than to support restricting women’s ability to make choices about their bodies and lives.
LT, did you do the cartoon at the end of the article? It’s ace. More cartoons please.
Indeed I did. I will try to do moaaar.
Let’s look at it from an objective point of view with regards to someone having more kids than they want:
No Reduction…People Harmed:
Mother – forced to give birth to, dedicate years of her life to, spend thousands of pounds on and love a baby that she didn’t want.
Father – again forced to dedicate years of his life, spend thousands of pounds, and love an unplanned baby.
Children – may have to go without due to financial implications of extra baby as well as less attention from parents. Parents’ emotional distress may also be detrimental to care of children.
Overall: Years of emotional, psychological, financial and even physical damage done to a family.
Reduction…People Harmed:
Blob of goo – Has no feelings, unaware of what’s going on.
Overall: saves a lot of distress for everyone involved.
Once again the Ssp show they are against the working man. The majority of abortions are by the poor and it is an institution to keep the nubers of working class down.
I fear your attituude to children is all too prevelant in our decadent society what is not needed is merely waste the perfection and harmony of the capilist dream. The same thoughts are both on euthnasia ah its alright its for the best grandpa see the youth want jobs and you being old and stuff and still in a job is a worry. Also don’t think about retiring cause we hate having to let you finallly rest after spending most of your life working for our benefit. Fuck Off and Die the capilist system no longer needs you.
A blob of jelly would apply if that blob of jelly as it were didn’t have the potential to grow into an adult. I do not look at a child and say oh but it never grow up to be an adult there is no scientific proof that, that child will grow up to be an adult are you crazy.
My science is poor at best but I know for a fact that if that blob of jelly is not affected in an unantural way i.e. aborting it, or suffers no defect that would lead to its natural death then that blob of jelly if we really wish hard and clip our feet together andsay ‘Theres no place like home’ will turn into a child at the miraclous birth nine months or there abouts after a man and women have had sex.
Also you care a lot about the life chances of a blob of jelly, I can just imagine you debating how your specially little blob could have travelled to America and become a hollywood star.
My point to wrap up is this you have accepted that this blob of jelly is a human life and whether resembling a fully formed adult or not will eventually become an adult. Seeing that you are socialists an ideology that promotes that every man is equal and deserves to be treated as such, that a man is not just a thing no matter how rich or how poor whether he drinks all day or is sober as a judge I believe it is deeply saddening to see people supposded to be Socialists so belittling human life. I have wrote many times on this website and I have claimed that what you have wrote already sends shivers down my neck but nothing compares to the brutal disregard of human life that this group promotes. As John Wheatley said of the Conservative Party ‘You are all muderers’
Not only on you disregard for human life are you muderes but of you mudering the ideal that was once known as socialism, Requiescat il pace
Just letting people know that that ^ is (obviously) a comment from regular blog troll Paul. I can’t be arsed dealing with him right now, but I think we should leave it up and give people a chance to flex their arguing muscles and defend our position on a woman’s right to choose.
Hello Troll. You seem like you ARE a special blob of jelly! Congrats!
Also, you might want to learn sentence construction. It makes you more convincing as a troll. Just sayin’.
“My science is poor at best”
You can say that again. The whole point of the blob of jelly thing is that it’s NOT a person. It has the potential to become a person, but that’s not the same thing as being one. That is scientific fact. It’s not belittling human life to get rid of something that is not human. Every time you ejaculate you’re getting rid of material that has the potential to go on to be a human, it doesn’t mean you’re getting rid of a person does it?
It’s interesting that among all the incomprehensible pish about film stars and the Wizard of Oz (seriously, what?), you keep referring to how we’re against the working man. This really isn’t an issue that has anything to do with men, it’s about the rights of women to control their own bodies and blobs of jelly inside their bodies, it has fuck all to do with men.
Also, can you in any way justify your bizarre conspiracy theories about abortion and euthanasia? It’s one of the major aspects of the global austerity drive to make people work LONGER into old age. Something btw that we’ve opposed (https://ssy-archive.scottishsocialistparty.org/2010/10/why-raising-the-retirement-age-is-a-spectacularly-crap-idea/) But how can you possibly conclude that abortion is a plot to keep the numbers of the working class down? Why would the ruling class even want to do that? And why make it easiest for the well off to access abortion through private health care.