Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Martin_1962]

With interest.

Not too happy though.

Good to see the egg research bit go through, but for IVF - I have always thought that a marriage certificate should be required, may be old fashioned but there is a limited pot of NSH money/

As to abortion - that should be lowered, premature babies that age can survive. My personal thoughts are different to what I would support if that makes sense, BTW I am thinking rationally not emotionally.

My twins were premature!

[mantahatch]

Question, why is it ok to use technology to save premature babies. But not ok to use technology to end pregnancy ?

I personally have no real opinion either way, would lust like to how people justify this.

BTW my wife was premature in 1966 if it was not for incubators/technology of the time she would not be here.

Mike

[Martin_1962]

Question, why is it ok to use technology to save premature babies. But not ok to use technology to end pregnancy ?

I personally have no real opinion either way, would lust like to how people justify this.

BTW my wife was premature in 1966 if it was not for incubators/technology of the time she would not be here.

Mike

Simiply I think due to that babies get fully formed quite early - until then they are a bunch of cells, and doctors look upon the task as wrong.

My opinion is it should be earlier but I do not know by how much, but it should be enough that there would be absolutely no chance of survival. I'd go for something like 3 months.

At least we will get a sensible discussion without rants here

[Debs.]

I find it very interesting that it is mostly the male politicians whom become so exercised concerning matters of women`s reproductive fertility and such moral issues generated by reproductive technology.

My personal feelings are that such matters (and that includes abortion) are entirely and solely the concern of the individual woman.

The State should tread carefully and beware of micro-managemental 'tinkering'; lest the moral-maze of gender, personal and medical issues, lead to the raising of the spectre of societal Eugenics.

[mantahatch]

Question, why is it ok to use technology to save premature babies. But not ok to use technology to end pregnancy ?

I personally have no real opinion either way, would lust like to how people justify this.

BTW my wife was premature in 1966 if it was not for incubators/technology of the time she would not be here.

Mike

Simiply I think due to that babies get fully formed quite early - until then they are a bunch of cells, and doctors look upon the task as wrong.

My opinion is it should be earlier but I do not know by how much, but it should be enough that there would be absolutely no chance of survival. I'd go for something like 3 months.

At least we will get a sensible discussion without rants here

Certainly won't get a rant out of me on this one. I think it is very emotive subject. I suppose it is about playing god in some small way.
I think I would like to see a lot more education/research on the subject before any new laws/rules are passed.

Mike

[mantahatch]

I find it very interesting that it is mostly the male politicians whom become so exercised concerning matters of women`s reproductive fertility and such moral issues generated by reproductive technology.

My personal feelings are that such matters (and that includes abortion) are entirely and solely the concern of the individual woman.

The State should tread carefully and beware of micro-managemental 'tinkering'; lest the moral-maze of gender, personal and medical issues, lead to the raising of the spectre of societal Eugenics.

Debs, I really wish I had your command of the English language.
Few people have it, I would not like to have an argument with you. You would so win easily.

Mike

[Martin_1962]

I think I would like to see a lot more education/research on the subject before any new laws/rules are passed.

Mike

That is the thing - I don't think that politians as a breed are that knowleagable, definitaly not of the science and technology side.

[Andy B]

.....

Debs, I really wish I had your command of the English language.
Few people have it, I would not like to have an argument with you. You would so win easily.

Mike

Did you not already know that women, no matter the subject, are always right?        

[Martin_1962]

My personal feelings are that such matters (and that includes abortion) are entirely and solely the concern of the individual woman.

There are always multiple sides and for a pregnancy there is always at least 3 sides Mother Father Child(ren).

There is a point when the unborn baby changes from a bunch of cells into a person - when is that point?

We did have a miscarriage 2nd time. It upset my wife a lot more than me - I had seen the scan - just the foetal sac and a small pin head sized lump, no development, (normally would have been a lot bigger) a few days later it was no more. I found it easy to cope as there was no baby, it was a non viable. We then later had the twins.

The State should tread carefully and beware of micro-managemental 'tinkering'; lest the moral-maze of gender, personal and medical issues, lead to the raising of the spectre of societal Eugenics.

There is too much government tinkering on all aspects of our life, they seem to spend all the time inventing laws and adding restrictions to life.

[mantahatch]

I think I would like to see a lot more education/research on the subject before any new laws/rules are passed.

Mike

That is the thing - I don't think that politians as a breed are that knowleagable, definitaly not of the science and technology side.

Agreed, they seem to have studied politics and little else. As unfortunate as it may seem I would like to put a minimum age limit for politicians, and these people must have worked a minmum of 10 years in the private sector. Not as it seems now 5 years at uni, 5 years in local council offices and then they become political.
These people have no idea of real life. And then these people try to tell us how we should live our lives.
But I fear I am drifting of subject here.

Sorry

Mike

[Martin_1962]

I think I would like to see a lot more education/research on the subject before any new laws/rules are passed.

Mike

That is the thing - I don't think that politians as a breed are that knowleagable, definitaly not of the science and technology side.

Agreed, they seem to have studied politics and little else. As unfortunate as it may seem I would like to put a minimum age limit for politicians, and these people must have worked a minmum of 10 years in the private sector. Not as it seems now 5 years at uni, 5 years in local council offices and then they become political.
These people have no idea of real life. And then these people try to tell us how we should live our lives.
But I fear I am drifting of subject here.

Sorry

Mike

No problem with thread drift - where else can we all chat like adults?

[mantahatch]

.....

Debs, I really wish I had your command of the English language.
Few people have it, I would not like to have an argument with you. You would so win easily.

Mike

Did you not already know that women, no matter the subject, are always right?        

I asked for that really  

[Marks DTM Calib]

Its a difficult one, I feel that clearly the abortion limit needs to be tied into the standard scan/test dates (22 weeks if I remember correctly) plus some thinking time.

I suspect that most abortions which are carried out at such a late stage are on medical grounds following the results of the late scan/tests (although as usual, we wont ever hear the truth I suspect).

Remember also that offically the cells are considered an embryo from 4 weeks on and the heart starts to beat at around 5 weeks!

[Martin_1962]

Its a difficult one, I feel that clearly the abortion limit needs to be tied into the standard scan/test dates (22 weeks if I remember correctly) plus some thinking time.

I suspect that most abortions which are carried out at such a late stage are on medical grounds following the results of the late scan/tests (although as usual, we wont ever hear the truth I suspect).

Remember also that offically the cells are considered an embryo from 4 weeks on and the heart starts to beat at around 5 weeks!

There is already no limit on medical matters, there have been cases of abortions at 38 weeks for missing limbs.

This is the social rather than medical limit.

[Marks DTM Calib]

Trouble is that its not nearly as clear as this because the law states that terminations beyond 24 weeks can only be carried out for series mental and physical disabilities and hence its open to a large variation in standards.

There have been cases where for instance a fetus with a cleft lip and pallet has been aborted yet one with Downs was refused.

Plus, the chances of a sub 24 week fetus surviving has not increased at all in the last 15 years so why should it suddenly change now?