UPDATE: NO GAMBLING MATTER

According to CNN, the couple who created an online poll to decide the fate of their unborn baby boy has finally publicly declared it was a pro-life stunt.  He told CNN that he wanted to "stimulate conversation about the politically charged subject."  I will say that he probably did accomplish his goal of getting people to talk about the subject of abortion, because the articles I read about their little "project" definitely disturbed me more than I thought they would.


He said that he bought the domain name prior to getting his wife pregnant.  He was, "...mulling the idea 'for some time'."  The couple said they gave the unborn baby the name of Baby Wiggles, "...to give people more to think about."  Well, they certainly did.  I was surprised that the husband gave a statement as to why.  He said:

 That is an interesting point.  My sister is pregnant right now with her first child and I won't forget how excited she was to finally choose a name for her baby.  You could see a genuine happiness when she would refer to him by his name while inside her stomach.  Such as "Mason and I would love to go get breakfast", or "Today, I felt Mason kick for the first time!"  Let's talk hypothetically.  If for some reason (KNOCK ON WOOD) my sister had a miscarriage, I would feel so strange knowing that Mason did not exist anymore.  Giving a name to an unborn child is recognizing the reality that they are a human being that will be brought into the world once the "oven is done".  


I am relieved to know that this couple was not serious about using a public opinion poll to determine whether they are going to be parents or not.  I do think that they were successful in getting the public's attention, and quite frankly, I feel at ease that an overwhelming majority voted for them to keep the baby.  That should say something about the public opinion.  

How would it feel if you were the deciding vote on whether or not a life is taken away from someone?  It's different when you are responsible for whether someone lives or dies.  That is a MAJOR decision that people are faced with in all types of situations (loved ones in a coma, a sick family pet, etc).  These situations seem to give the decider a more socially accepted context for doing so, rather than when the decider is the pregnant woman. 

NO GAMBLING MATTER...

I haven't come across an article that has really made me feel sick to my stomach or anything like that, until now.  This article & many more have reported a couple who is leaving their unborn child's future in the hands of the public in an online poll.  The woman is 16 weeks pregnant and they have chosen to get the public's opinion on whether or not they should abort the baby because, "...they are unsure whether they want to be parents."  Well, that choice went out the window the day YOU decided to have unprotected sex.  But these people aren't teenage statistics, they are grown adults.

They even gave their unborn son a name--Wiggles.  I'm at a loss of words!  How can you leave a choice like that in the hands of whomever your sample of respondents may be!  The article says that "some websites say the couple's website is a pro-life hoax aimed at upsetting anti-abortionists."  That may be very well true, but they insist that the website's poll is genuine.  They have made statements saying that they set up the website, "...so the public 'could make a difference in the real world.'"  The poll ends December 7th, which is 2 days before the 20 week deadline for a legal abortion.  

As of today, 104,000 say they should birth the baby while 25,207 say they should abort it. 
What do you think?  Is this a publicity stunt?  If not, what do you think about their choice to get the public's opinion on a private matter?  Is this shocking?

THE PROBLEM WITH CHINA...

I was a little disappointed when we found out today that all of our research papers lacked proper research.  But, I did question myself whether I chose the right countries to analyze.  I really liked the idea of using China, because China is basically our nation's evil step sister.  China has vast problems with population and reproductive controls.  It was difficult to find information that would be comparable across country lines. This made me question why this information is so scattered and not readily available for the public.

I came across this article called "The Incidence of Abortion Worldwide." The author made clear that government councils that deal with population development need information surrounding abortions.  However, "...in many countries where abortion is legal under broad conditions, statistics on abortion are collected and are of reasonable completeness and accuracy, but in others, official data are lacking or are incomplete."  The article goes on to say that, "a common problem is that some privately performed procedures go unreported and are therefore not counted." 


The article highlighted the problems they received in gathering public opinion information in China.  The author had to use Ministry of Health statistics because of their availability.  But, there have been, "...suggestions that the administrative units that supply data to the Ministry of Health may have had a tendency to overreport [sic] in the past."  The overall message of the article is that abortion information in many countries is usually incomplete and misleading. 


According to the article, "although the official rate in China is 26 abortions per 1,000 women, the true rate is probably between 30 and 35 per 1,000, close to the world average, when the undercount is considered."  So, I wasn't kidding myself when I said it was hard to find information, but what's even harder is public opinion on the matters.  I really don't think it's from a lack of effort upon my part.  I think I will just omit China in my research even though I believe their country provides an interesting take on abortion. 

MIND OVER MATTER

Tired of all the typical abortion arguments of entitlement?  I came across an article titled, "Mental Health is the New Antiabortion Battleground. But the Science is all Wrong" on The Washington Post's website which offers the public a new way to look at the abortion issue.  It is becoming less of a fight over a woman's body and more about their minds.  

"In the past few years, under the banner of 'a woman's right to know,' a number of states have passed laws mandating that women seeking abortions be told that going ahead with the procedure would expose them to mental health risks, including post-traumatic stress and a greater danger of suicide." 

 

This is a strategy pro-life activists can adopt this stance--it's a political strategy.   The author claims that these laws mislead women seeking an abortion because this information lacks accuracy.  Research has not been able to link abortion to increased mental health problems.  Citing an Oregon State University national study, the author reports their findings show that "teenagers who have an abortion are no more likely to become depressed or to have low self-esteem one year or five years later, compared with their peers who deliver."

The author claims that pro-life activists who adopt this strategy "...distorts scientific principles, even as it uses the umbrella of scientific research to advance its aims."  She says there is a flaw in correlation v. causation.  Her argument is based upon the assumption that women seeking abortions are,"...on average, less likely to be married or involved in an intimate relationship, more likely to be poor, and more likely to have suffered physical or psychological abuse.  All these latter qualities are risk factors for poor mental health."

GET THIS.  Lawmakers in Nebraska have sanctions in place that allows women to file a civil suit against the physician.  She can claim that the physician did not screen her adequately for characteristics (like being poor and pregnant) that are said to lead to mental health issues after an abortion.  What if you flipped it?  Should women who plan on carrying out their pregnancy be screened for characteristic that would lead them to depression or other mental health issues?

AND LISTEN TO THIS.  The author believes that "...the emotionally evocative stories of a minority of women can lead people to overestimate the frequency of those experiences."  She gives the example of a woman's story of how she tried to kill herself by swallowing an entire bottle of pain medication after becoming very depressed after having an abortion.  The author makes a bold statement stating that, "...her story drowns out the evidence that a much larger number of women feel relief following an abortion."

DOES SHE HAVE THE RESEARCH TO BACK IT UP?  The author conducted a study in the 1990s with a sample size of over 400 women who sought first-trimester abortions.  Her research concluded that, "...women who terminate an unplanned pregnancy report a range of feelings, including sadness and loss as well as relief."  Another revelation in her study showed that, "...two years after their abortion, most women say they would make the same decision if they had it to do over again under the same circumstances."

In my opinion, I think that some her findings fail to understand correlation and causation, just as she criticizes the argument that abortions cause distress on mental health.  Of course if you interview women who are 2 years from the day they made the decision to have an abortion, they are going to feel positive about it.  It seems nowadays that abortions are becoming the more popular option for women who face difficult economic situations.  The thought of having a baby at the time their found out they were pregnant, they probably couldn't imagine the idea of paying for a baby and all its needs.  They have escaped the burden--so life seems good.

GaGa for GaGa? HELL NO.

This article is a little off-topic, but I wanted to share.  Apparently at the University of Virginia, there is a class taught on Lady GaGa.  The class is called "GaGa for GaGa:  Sex, Gender, and Identity."  What would my parents think if I brought home a schedule of my classes and that was on the bill!  It says that students will, "...read about her influence on feminism and gender expression," as well as, "...the skills to think analytically for life."  The author believes that this is a sneaky way to get students to sign up for a gender studies centered class.  Is pop culture worth analyzing?  Does it provide any useful knowledge that can be utilized into an expansion of a deeper thought process?  

Dear God, please save us! 

I agree with the author's opinion on the establishment of a Lady GaGa class.  She says, "...this particular pop culture moment is ephemeral and it will pass."  A pop culture moment is relative to the context of its time--whoever is popular will seize the title and surely be forgotten as we are on to the next one...RIP Hootie and the Blowfish =)  I agree that classes like this are not the best ways to "impart lessons for life", but if it inspires creativity and participation in more substantial umbrella topics, then I'm all for it.

THE LIKE BUTTON?

A mass of articles publicized an anti-abortionist who put instructions on how to make a bomb on Facebook.

In this article, Justin Carl Moose, 26 years old, "...declared himself a 'freedom fighter' in one status update, and regularly bowed to end abortion, at all costs."  Just yesterday, he signed a plea bargain.  The article states that he faces up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. 


This article makes me think why someone who believes that abortion is murder, would take steps to produce a weapon that is capable of murdering a whole number of people?  I don't agree with this man's actions.  I don't believe using violence in this type of situation does any good towards the a pro-life ideology's mission.  So, my question is:  How do demonstrations make you feel?  Does it matter on how politicized the issue is?  


In my opinion, I am almost kinda scared of demonstrators that are really out there.  I don't know if you guys remember the old guy that comes to the quad screaming about the lord?  I don't think I even had a chance to listen to what his message was because I was just wanting to get away from all of the yelling and crazy talk.  Maybe its just me, but I even hate the free sample people in the food court at the mall...lol

Exit Polling...

I really liked the exit polling experiment that we ended up doing.  It made me come out of my comfort zone and forced me to approach random people.  I always hate doing things like that, but I found a lot of people willing to participate and had actual conversations with during the process.  I didn't read any of the responses, which I wish I would have after we were done polling people.  I thought that people would see someone with a clipboard and run the other way, but that wasn't the case at all.  I was very surprised at how friendly the ISU campus was.  It kinda makes me rethink whenever I am walking around the Quad and someone approaches me.  I shouldn't dismiss them because I don't want to bothered.