Abortion: Why teenage mothers should have babies they can't afford?

If they can and I'm sure many can... that's great and there's no reason to abort... but what if a teenage mother is left to have her baby with no father support, no financial support? Unable to provide the needed stable family environment... should she have the baby even though she doesn't want it? And seriously... Adoption... who's going to take care of all the extra kids... there's no way we can flood the adoption agencies with more unwanted babies who aren't garunteed a family.

Just want your opinion thanks.

There are years long waiting lists at adoption agencies. Lots and lots of people willing and able to take care of the babies.

Because a lot of people have religion factors tied into it. Same thing goes into stem cell research, why dnt we save lives and pursue stem cells?? Because people believe that the moment the sperm enters the egg it has a soul. If a zygote has a soul, then of course an unplanned pregnancy is horrific because that zygote has a soul too. And if you abort..."you're killing your own child." Money is not a factor considered in this. Also, there is a lot of help for young girls,

It's so sad!!

I have thought about this quite a bit over the years. The wide spread of opinions is incredible, matched only by the passion of the activists on all sides. This is an issue that few people are even able to have a civilized discussion about. Complicating it further is that there are few that hold a black-and-white few of the issue. The majority of people in the US see abortion as a giant grey area with varying degrees of abortion considered acceptable. Very few people hold the position of unlimited abortion access or no abortion under any circumstances. Below is the process I went through to come up with my position on the matter.

First, I asked myself the question at what point does a human being obtain "personhood" and as such gain all the legal and moral protections that status entitles them to? There are some who say that the point of personhood is 28 days AFTER birth, at which point you still should be allowed to abort. In fact, there is a professor of ethics at Princeton University that actively advocates this position. This is the position that spurred 鈥淏orn Alive鈥?legislation that says if a woman has an abortion and the baby survives, that doctors cannot withhold care and let the baby die on the operating table. Others say up to the point of birth. These folks would hold that partial birth abortion is a reasonable procedure. Or perhaps just before while the mother is in labor. Or 6 months of gestation or 3 months or three weeks. I wrestled with this for a long time.

Then I looked at the issue a different way. Does human life have an imputed value or an intrinsic one? If we say that it is imputed, meaning the value is derived from something else, some outside criteria, then any one of the above positions would be equally valid. We as a society would decide what criteria to select. My problem with this is what criteria do you use? On what basis is a baby at 6 weeks more valuable than a baby at 5 weeks? Is a baby that has not yet developed a heart still a baby? This hit really hard on my wife and I when we lost one of our children. Lynne had a miscarriage a few years ago. When people with strong pro-choice sentiments gave us their condolences, they referred to the fetus as a child, even though she (we named her Grace, even though we do not know for sure if she was a she or a he. It made it easier to explain to the children what happened and easier for Lynne and I to grieve our loss) was at the same gestational point, 9 weeks, that they believed abortion was merely removing some unwanted tissue of the mother. So, the criteria used is whether or not a child is wanted. If that is so, then why?

By similar logic, if the value of human life is imputed, it can also be taken away, depending on what some person or group of persons believe that life is worth. So if you happen to be mentally retarded or black or Jewish, it would be perfectly reasonable for you to be killed off for the good of the community if they believe it. I have a friend who is paralyzed from the neck down. There are some in the world who would look at her and say that she has no quality of life or that the money and effort to support her would be better used on others. They would have her die due to her handicap. But knowing her the way I do I find the notion that she is without a quality of life to be ridiculous on its face. She is a writer, a painter, a social worker, and heads up an international charity. I鈥檇 call that a pretty good quality of life. So would her husband who married her years after her accident put her in the wheelchair. Thus, the imputed value logic is shown to me to be completely arbitrary. Following any of the 鈥減rior to this point it is not human but at this one on it is鈥?positions is likewise arbitrary and does not answer the question of personhood.

But consider the proposition that human life has an intrinsic value. That it is valuable simply because it is human life and no other reason. No measure or quantification of the value of it, it is and that is enough. It is sort of like gold. Gold is valuable because it is gold, not because we as a society stood up one day and said, 鈥渨e are going to make gold valuable鈥? Gold has an intrinsic value as opposed to an imputed value, such as paper currency. Paper currency is worthless in and of itself. It has value only because we say it has a certain value.

This position then would support a clear line between human life and not human life. With this position, you are a human at the point that you have a unique genetic code. In other words, at inception. Prior to inception, there was no 鈥測ou鈥? The male and female reproductive components in and of themselves are not a unique genetic code, but merely parts of the donors. It is only when they combine to create new life do 鈥測ou鈥?begin to be a person.

The notion of intrinsic value also carries forward throughout life. My mother-in-law was on dialysis for several months before diabetes finally took her life. There are many who would have said that she should just die and not burden the rest of us. If those persons held the position that human life has imputed value, I can understand. I however, believe that human life is intrinsically valuable and worth preserving and protecting for as long as possible. Thus, we should protect life at the beginning and at the end and at all points in between.

So, we come full circle back to the question of abortion. Should it be outlawed? My answer, since I believe in the intrinsic value of human life, is that for the most part it should. Why only 鈥渇or the most part鈥? Because there are times when you have to weigh the life of two humans and pick one to live and one to die. My sister-in-law faced such a problem once. She got pregnant from her husband and it turned out to be a tubal pregnancy. Had the child been allowed to grow inside of her, it would have killed her before the baby would have been able to survive on its own. Thus, in weighing these two lives, one would have to conclude that the baby would have to die in order to save the mother鈥檚 life. What about cases of rape or incest? I have 5 daughters (yes, that was no typo) and the thought of one of them being raped is always lurking in the back of my mind. If one of them should get pregnant as a result, the hard decision would be to let that child live. Pregnancy is not the extremely dangerous event of the past. Rarely do people die from giving birth. Many more die as a result of complications after an abortion. But the bottom line is that the child is innocent of any crime, so why punish it? I鈥檓 not saying it is an easy choice and I can certainly sympathize with those who have had to make it. Perhaps they even made the wrong choice. But, God is a loving and forgiving God, who can even forgive the taking of a human life. Which is what abortion is.

I think the choice belongs with the mother. People say "a lot of people want to adopt", but adoption is never a sure thing. If it was there would be no foster homes. Mind you most of the "pro-life" folks would be the first to tell a woman not to abort, but the last to offer her any help if she decided to keep the child rather than putting the child up for adoption.

Besides all of that - why should a child have to grow up in an environment such as a teenage mother who doesn't want the kid. Quite frankly, I think that most are better off dead. I see some horrid things happen to kids whose mothers and/or fathers just don't want them but had them anyway. I see it every single day. I also think that sterilization should be FREE for any who choose it for themselves. It took me 11 years to get a hysterectomy that was medically NECESSARY - not just something I wanted. It was all because of rabid conservatives who think all women were made to breed, regardless of their health or feelings about it.

How about taking precautions against getting pregnant? How about using a few morals? If you are not ready to be a mother or father, then damn it! Use a condom or birth control. Abortion as birth control sickens me.

http://www.deathroe.com/As_Seen_On_Lifet...
http://www.deathroe.com/As_Seen_On_Lifet...
Let the child live. Don't worry about anything else.

Wow, you must be either really young, or really uninformed. First, abortion should be considered a last resort for birth control. There are many other options out there that are less controversial. Second, if a teenage mother is left to raise the baby on her own, she is eligible for financial aid. She could qualify for free housing, free food, free money, free college, free medical....(footed by our tax dollars of course...)
And adoption? Are you kidding me? Do you know how many people are trying to adopt babies? More people try to adopt babies than babies are born.

Abortion has a place in society, but using it as birth control is crazy.

condoms~!!!

First, there are actually many more families that want to adopt than there are babies for them.

Second, abortion is an option for individuals in this situation.

Third, there is a lot of programs available for teenage mothers who find themselves in this situation.

A lot of people want to adopt.