zamarons-for-choice

[zamarons-for-choice]

Abortion was decriminalized in Canada 35 years ago this Saturday, January 28. 36 years ago, if you wanted an abortion, it meant sitting in front of a panel of doctors, usually men, who would decide if your abortion was “necessary.” That is, if you could access such a hospital. Not all hospitals created those committees, effectively refusing to provide abortion care at all. If such a committee did deem your story good enough to warrant an abortion—many did not—delays could span weeks.

Today, the legal hurdles are gone, but access is still a privilege not everyone in Canada has, and another question looms: Could what happened in the U.S. happen here too?

The answer is no, and yes, and it’s more complicated than that.

In Canada, abortion is treated as health care. We do not have an equivalent law that could be repealed to simply snuff out our right to what is a very common and essential medical procedure. We can take a deep breath. [...]

And it is complicated because, while we focus on which laws protect the right to abortion, the real everyday issue is: Can I access one if I need one? [...]

Continue Reading.

Tagging: @politicsofcanada

[zamarons-for-choice]

A new group of health professionals hopes to make abortion care more accessible to New Brunswickers.

The New Brunswick Abortion Care Network, whose 20 founding members are in nursing, obstetrics, family practice, pharmacy and health administration, launches Saturday — the 35th anniversary of the Supreme Court of Canada's Morgentaler decision, which decriminalized abortion.

The group aims to train more professionals and to raise awareness, said spokesperson Martha Paynter, a researcher and associate professor of nursing.

"The number one problem with access in New Brunswick is information," she said.

Despite provincial restrictions that limit Medicare coverage of surgical abortions to three hospitals, New Brunswick has had some "incredible advancements" in recent years, said Paynter, citing the introduction of self-referral in 2014 as an example.

No referral required, abortion pill covered

"So for almost 10 years you haven't needed to speak to a family doctor … [or] go to a walk in clinic, to be referred.

"You just call the [the two hospitals in Moncton or the one in Bathurst] and get an appointment. And people do not know that, so we want people to know that," said Paynter.

In 2017, New Brunswick also became the first province to offer the abortion pill Mifegymiso free of charge. So unlike other prescription medications, people don't have to put it through their insurance or pay for it out of pocket, she said. [...]

Continue Reading.

Tagging: @politicsofcanada

[zamarons-for-choice]

I believe abortion should be free, on demand, and no questions asked because you can debate philosophically all you want but at the end of the day, there is no way to restrict and regulate abortion that does not result in humiliating, traumatizing, harming the health of, and even killing people who are pregnant on a mass scale. There are very real, tangible, measurable harms abortion restrictions do to vulnerable populations and the only possible benefit in return is to placate the palate of the morally squeamish.

[zamarons-for-choice]

late stage symptoms of a decaying democracy

[zamarons-for-choice]

Photo By Ann E. Zelle 1986

[zamarons-for-choice]

[zamarons-for-choice]

Yeah like that… 👆🏻

[zamarons-for-choice]

This is a genuine question. I’m not even going to get into a choice argument here because obviously we disagree. I’m purely sticking with the hypothetical of someone experiencing complications during a wanted pregnancy.

Do you think that people who experience these complications should be hospitalized until birth? Will you then support mandatory sick leave so they don’t lose their jobs?

What about the six figure hospital bill that would result from getting the care needed to “save both”? Who’s going to pay that?

Are you pushing for adequate parental leave so this person can heal properly before they go back to work?

Like I said, genuinely curious what the thought process is here. Because it SEEMS like the cruelty is the point and people celebrating the decision today haven’t thought through the ripple effects.

When you see headlines like this, know that they are lying to you.

She did not have an incomplete miscarriage.

As of the writing of this article, her baby was still alive with a heartbeat. They say in the article that they can’t remove the baby because the baby is still alive.

She is receiving care and being monitored for signs of infection.

Her baby is still alive, which means there’s a chance to still save both her and the baby. If she is not currently experiencing an infection and her bleeding is controlled now that she’s in the hospital, she is not in immediate danger.

[zamarons-for-choice]

“May” and “probably” are the load-bearing words here. This “abortionist” (OBGYN) has no business speaking on anyone but their own patients.

Try harder.

“If a woman with a serious illness… gets pregnant, the abortion procedure may be as dangerous for her as going through the pregnancy…The idea of abortion to save the mother’s life is something that people cling to because it sounds noble and pure—but medically speaking, it probably doesn’t exist.”

— Don Sloan (abortionist) and Paula Hartz, Choice: A Doctor’s Experience with the Abortion Dilemma (New York: International Publishers, 2002), 45-46.

[zamarons-for-choice]

You don’t by any chance mean Lauren Handy, who was keeping fetuses in her home, do you?

Please pray for my friend Lauren. She is a pro-life activist dedicated to peaceful direct action in defense of the preborn. This commitment has landed her in trouble with the law on more than one occasion as she puts morality above legality.

Most commonly this looks like a “Red Rose Rescue,” where she and other activists enter an abortion facility with roses and pregnancy help information. They distribute the literature and flowers, and often other small care package-type items, and talk to women about their options. Many of these women end up thanking the activists for their support and leaving the facility without an abortion. In many cases, Lauren will work one-on-one with mothers in crisis, helping them find housing, get away from abusive partners, and find work or other financial support.

Lauren was the one who got me involved in the pro-life movement, and I’ve spent a lot of time working with her (on First Amendment-protected protests). From what I’ve seen and the stories she’s told me, I’ve always said that she is the “one-woman case for the providence of God” - because it’s the only reason she’s still alive.

She’s facing some very serious legal challenges right now (involving the DOJ), and she needs all the prayers.

[zamarons-for-choice]

In the case of a pregnancy that someone doesn’t want to carry to term, it’s actually NOT possible to prioritize “both.”

Either people have the right to reproductive autonomy, or they don’t. Either a fetus has a right to gestate in someone’s body against their will, or it doesn’t.

If your goal is helping people in abusive situations, that’s great. Forcing them to birth their abuser’s baby doesn’t accomplish that in the slightest.

Legalized abortion helps abusive and irresponsible men exploit women for sex.

[zamarons-for-choice]

If she’s in a state of psychiatric crisis that would meet the criteria for intervention, that would have to be addressed first and foremost.

If an wanted/unplanned pregnancy is the CAUSE of the distress, my sincere hope would be that she has access to a support system (through loved ones or community programs) that allow her to feel supported enough to make whatever decision she feels is best (including abortion if that’s her preference).

Challenge:

Everyone who calls abortion bans/restrictions “forced birth,” start calling suicide prevention “forced life.”

[zamarons-for-choice]

I’m pretty sure this is aimed at me so I’ll take the bait.

Someone contemplating suicide due to extreme mental/emotional distress is NOT making a rational decision of sound mind. They deserve interventions that keep them safe and help them stabilize (don’t get me started on all the ways our system fails the mentally ill, we’ll be here all day).

A person facing a terminal diagnosis who makes the decision to discontinue care or even die with dignity (physician assisted suicide) is not remotely the same thing. In this instance, prohibiting them from taking these decisions into their own hands IS absolutely “forced life.”

The topic can get pretty murky, and I’m not going to pretend to be an ethical scholar on the ins and outs of the issue, but to me it’s a pretty clear distinction that’s fully aligned with being pro-choice.

Challenge:

Everyone who calls abortion bans/restrictions “forced birth,” start calling suicide prevention “forced life.”

[zamarons-for-choice]

Forced pregnancy and forced birth occur any time someone is forced to do either when they don’t expressly consent to do so. This includes rape (via force  or coercion, OR via birth control sabotage),  lack of agency in healthcare/birth settings, and other other nuanced but harmful realities people face in our society. They also occur when politicians with business degrees decide that they’re more qualified to make medical decisions for an individual than that individual is for themselves, such as banning abortion or creating ridiculous hoops to jump through in order to access birth control and emergency contraceptives.

Yes - a zygote/embryo/fetus is alive. Always. It develops from sperm and egg cells that are also alive, that come from two people who are also alive. Life is a continuum that begets more life, so on and so forth. There’s no magic moment when it “comes to life,” and there’s no magic moment where it begins to supersede the rights of the person carrying it.

Rape and abuse didn’t begin with abortion, and restricting abortion won’t solve them. All people deserve the right to decide if/when/how they become parents, just like all people deserve to live free from harm and abuse. That’s really all there is to it.

Legalized abortion helps abusive and irresponsible men exploit women for sex.

[zamarons-for-choice]

"trans men, and AFAB non-binary people" dude, those are still just women. You can call a rock and apple but that won't make it true and you'll break your teeth biting into it. people born with vaginas, XX chromosomes, and have ova are woman no matter how many woke words you use to erase them.

It’s bizarre to me that you can look at a random person on the street and know what their genitals look like and what chromosomes they have 🤔 very bizarre indeed

[zamarons-for-choice]

That’s great for them! Many people also feel empowered by the ability to terminate unwanted/forced pregnancies.

Being forced or coerced to have an abortion is wrong for the same reason being forced or coerced to be pregnant and give birth is wrong.

Also no it doesn’t - but I’m glad you’re admitting that you actually don’t care about the pregnant parent trapped in an abusive situation.

Legalized abortion helps abusive and irresponsible men exploit women for sex.

[zamarons-for-choice]

Making abortion illegal traps women, trans men, and AFAB non-binary people in abusive relationships.

Men will continue to be abusive and irresponsible with or without legal abortion.

Legalized abortion helps abusive and irresponsible men exploit women for sex.