[quote]Makavali wrote:
Yeah, if you think there is a chance that you might get pregnant, then abstaining from booze would definitely be the way to go.
But what happens with accidental pregnancy where the mother has been drinking heavily?
Pro-lifers don’t consider that scenario, do they.[/quote]
Babies of alcoholics are born every day.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Babies of alcoholics are born every day.[/quote]
a survey found that over half of the women aged 15 - 44 drank while pregnant.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1998). Substance abuse and mental health statistics source book, 1998. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
There should be an epidemic of FAS. Yet it is only .3% of American Indian births, .06% of Black births, and .01% of Cracker… I mean White births.
Chavez, G. F., Cordero, J. F., & Becerra, J. E. (1988). Leading major congenital malformations among minority groups in the United States. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly, 37:17-24.
Then again it would explain all the hippies.
Seriously the purpose of the warnings are good intentioned. (Remember what they say about the road to hell.) But I have never agreed with giving faulty data. We need to accept the facts. And if we are to make intelligent decisions, we need the truth. Regardless of how we feel about it.
13 deaths during childbirth per 100,000?
That’s a roughly 1 in 10,000 chance of dying during childbirth. It’s about the same as being struck by lightning or attacked by a great white shark.
[quote]The Mage wrote:
Sifu wrote:
We can’t even take care of all the healthy children we have now. You prolifers are so full of your dogma that you are absolutely flippant about the consequences.
Blah blah blah.
As I said I was quoting a researcher.
Apparently I am ignorant.
Then again so is this research:
“A follow-up of children at 18 months of age found that those from women who drank during pregnancy, even two drinks per day, scored higher in several areas of development.”
Wait, benefits from drinking?
Or this:
“An analysis of seven major medical research studies involving over 130,000 pregnancies suggests that consuming two to 14 drinks per week does not increase the risk of giving birth to a child with either malformations or fetal alcohol syndrome.”
Or this:
“Similarly, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists concluded that ‘there is no evidence that an occasional drink is harmful. Women who drink heavily throughout pregnancy may have smaller babies with physical and mental handicaps, but women who drink moderately may have babies with no more problems than those women who drink rarely or not at all.’”
Now I am not saying people should go out and drink while pregnant. Just pointing out the reality, and the fact that this is another subject that has been blown out of proportion.
The general message was that it wasn’t just drinking, but heavy drinking that caused problems. In other words drinking a single drink a day is better then drinking 7 drinks all at once each week.
Sorry if you dislike this information, but don’t shoot the messenger. The only think I am doing is imparting information. I personally don’t care what people think, or if they do not want to hear it, or if it is politically incorrect. The truth is the truth no matter how you feel about it.
And again no I am not saying people should drink while pregnant. Just that the whole idea of FAS being caused by casual drinking is overblown.
http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/FetalAlcoholSyndrome.html[/quote]
You left out this gem of information from your resource.
[B] A review of research studies found that fetal alcohol syndrome only occurs among alcoholics. [B]
You say I am opinionated, while you of course are not.
Then you come out with this unsubstantiated resource that says drinking acohol everyday during pregnancy is not only perfectly safe, it’s a great way to have smarter kids, plus it’s only alcoholics who have to who have to worry about FAS. So having an abortion because you are worried about alcohol is completely unneccessary.
I’ll trust the Mayo Clinic over your silly resource any day.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
You left out this gem of information from your resource.
[B] A review of research studies found that fetal alcohol syndrome only occurs among alcoholics. [B]
You say I am opinionated, while you of course are not.
Then you come out with this unsubstantiated resource that says drinking acohol everyday during pregnancy is not only perfectly safe, it’s a great way to have smarter kids, plus it’s only alcoholics who have to who have to worry about FAS. So having an abortion because you are worried about alcohol is completely unneccessary.
I’ll trust the Mayo Clinic over your silly resource any day.[/quote]
That was just one resource. Did you not read the factual research I posted?
Again don’t shoot the messenger. These are simply the facts. You may not like them, but they are the facts.
Nowhere am I telling people they should drink during pregnancy. Simply that all the worries are overblown.
Could you explain exactly why with over 50% of the the people drinking during pregnancy why FAS does not affect over 50% of births?
It affects 0.1 - 0.2% of births in this country. Yet I would find it unlikely that only 2 tenths of a percent of the pregnant women in this country are alcoholics. (Alcohol probably accounts for half of the pregnancies in this county.)
And yes I read the Mayo Clinic “PC” page. You don’t actually expect them to say it’s ok to drink do you?
“There is no epidemic of FAS births. Nor is ‘social’ or ‘moderate’ drinking among the almost 4 million pregnant women who give birth annually in the USA a risk factor for FAS. However, the risk is considerably greater for the relatively small number of women who abuse alcohol on a regular basis, and it is even greater for those women who have previously given birth to a child with FAS and continue to drink”
http://alcalc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/35/3/276
FETAL ALCOHOL SYNDROME: THE ORIGINS OF A MORAL PANIC
Alcohol and Alcoholism Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 276-282, 2000
ELIZABETH M. ARMSTRONG and ERNEST L. ABEL
Department of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan and Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Psychology, Wayne State University, MI, USA
There is no known safe amount of alcohol that can be consumed during pregnancy. That some have had a small amount of alcohol consumption and dodged the bullet doesn’t mean it is safe.
The levels of consumption that have been lucky enough to dodge the bullet do not reflect the consumption levels of everyone.
Yet your arguement is predicated upon a false assumption that does not reflect society as a whole. It is not everyone who has a strict limit of one drink a day and sticks to it.
I’ve known plenty of young women who could consume large amounts of alcohol and other drugs on a daily basis. The results of one of them continuing in that behaviour for several weeks or months before they found out they were pregnant is not something to take lightly.
Also it is not everyone who is happily married like you and your wife Mage. Yet again you just assume that everyone looks like you or your wife, so all can be served by a one size fits all cooky cutter approach.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
But in your book a fetus’s rights and a nozy neighbors rights supercede a womans rights to privacy, self determination and control of the most intimate part of her own body
[/quote]
I’ve developed this heroin habit, and am constantly nagged by law enforcement. Reading your posts has made me realize that I am being unconstitutionally persecuted, because I have a right to privacy, self determination, and control of the most intimate parts of my body. Can you point out for me where in the constitution those rights are enumerated so I can make a case of it? Or are these “rights” only for women, in which case I’m filing for a violation of equal protection.
Seriously now…I’m pro-choice and believe that abortions should be safe and freely available to all women in their first trimester, but there are no such things as “Abortion Rights” and you sound like a fool using the phrase. It’s frustrating having these debates when so many lack even the most basic understanding of how our system of government is meant to function. At the rate we create new “rights” for every hot-button issue I wonder if we’ll have anything left to actually vote on. Seems like certain people would prefer to be handed down holy law from “The Nine” than actually participate in the democratic process.
If the citizens of Alabama come together and democratically decide that abortion shall be illegal in that state they will have violated no ones’ constitutional rights and it is none of my business. I would passionately work to see that my state keep abortions safe and legal. Abortion (like firearms) is only a hot-button issue because we refuse to follow the constitution and our first principles.
[quote]Moriarty wrote:
Sifu wrote:
But in your book a fetus’s rights and a nozy neighbors rights supercede a womans rights to privacy, self determination and control of the most intimate part of her own body
Seriously now…I’m pro-choice and believe that abortions should be safe and freely available to all women in their first trimester, but there are no such things as “Abortion Rights” and you sound like a fool using the phrase.[/quote]
there are no such things as “Abortion Rights” and you sound like a fool using the phrase. quote]
I never used that phrase you jackass. The right to privacy was cited in the majority opinion.
The opinion of the Roe Court, written by Justice Harry Blackmun, declined to adopt the district court’s Ninth Amendment rationale, and instead asserted that the “right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” Douglas, in his concurring opinion from the companion case Doe v. Bolton, stated more emphatically that, “The Ninth Amendment obviously does not create federally enforceable rights.” Thus, the Roe majority rested its opinion squarely on the Constitution’s due process clause.