Posts Comments

Reconnecting With Your Birth Child

July 20, 2011 By Leave a Comment
father and adopted children

Image via Wikipedia

A lot of young mothers give up their children for adoption because they simply can’t see themselves doing well by their kids if they keep them. When you think your children couldn’t possibly have a good life with you, it makes perfect sense to give them away so they can have a better life with someone else.

However, there are times when it may be in your best interests to reconnect with your birth child. You may want to let your child know that your family’s lineage has a particularly horrific genetic disease, or perhaps you want to be certain your child has grown up well. In some cases a mother may even want to see if they can actually have a relationship with their child, even though decades have passed. In some cases, however, there is too much bitterness in place for there to be such a realationship in the first place.

Building a relationship with someone of any kind is a challenge for everyone. In some cases a grown child will be happy to meet a new family they never even knew existed. They can learn all kinds of things about themselves beyond just their genes. Family is about a lot of things, and if there isn’t a feeling of bitterness with the grown child things can get a lot better. If you want to meet your grown child, there is a great reason to at least try. At that point it comes down to whether or not they want to meet you as well.

Filed Under: News, Personal Stories, Political Implications Tagged With: , ,

Teenage Pregnancy’s Effect On Society

February 16, 2011 By Leave a Comment

We all hear about teen pregnancy all the time in school, on the news and on television. We all hear about the effects in has on the young mothers, but what others aren’t really hearing are the effects teenage pregnancy has on society.

According to many reports, teen pregnancy has a lot of other social issues that affect our society. To begin with, there’s poverty, education and health. This is mainly because teens are still kids themselves and they’re just not able or even ready to take on the responsibility of raising a child.

The costs alone are having a huge impact on society. Did you know that teen mothers will cost taxpayers about $9 billion each year? This number includes costs for healthcare and welfare.

Since teen mothers are unable to juggle school, work and raising a baby, they often times perform badly in school. According to reports, roughly 67 percent of families that started out in their teens end up living in poverty. 52 percent of mothers that are on welfare today had their first child when they were a teen. These numbers are this way because many mothers who become pregnancy during high school drop out because they need to try and find a better paying job.

Since teens don’t know a lot of prenatal care, a lot of times babies are born early and weighing less than they should. These babies often times suffer from neglect and abuse since their mothers don’t fully know how to raise and care for a child.

According to reports, 13 percent of teenage mothers are more than likely to end up in prison, increasing the costs for prison.

It’s important to not just understand the effects teen pregnancy has on a mother, but the effect it has on society. The mothers aren’t the only ones affected by it, because their child is too.

Filed Under: Political Implications Tagged With: , ,

Before it was Legal

January 22, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Your daughter, niece, granddaughter, and other young women never knew a world without computers, cell phones, CD players, MP3s and so on. Those of us over 50 remember those days well, although admission of such memories makes us feel ancient. Young women in a society with more sexual freedom than previous generations can also not imagine a world where legal abortion is not available in the event of an accidental or otherwise undesired pregnancy. The right to legal abortions, established in 1973 with the Supreme Court decision in the Roe v Wade case, is largely taken for granted by today’s women.

The legalized status for abortions is not based on technical advancements. The “how to” knowledge has been around for centuries. However, doctors faced loss of medical license or worse if they were caught performing such procedures. Roe v Wade, as controversial now as it was in 1973, made the choice to terminate a pregnancy a safe one with regard to the safety of women.

For those too young to remember what went on before abortions were legal, a review is in order.

Women have always tried to terminate unwanted pregnancies, even when they were banned by law. Absent the choice to have a safe medical procedure, they resorted to dangerous–sometimes-fatal–”back-alley” abortions. These procedures were generally performed under unsanitary conditions by practitioners with questionable qualifications, and were frequently followed by hemorrhaging, infection, and horrifically painful death. Because of the unsavory, underground, illegal nature of “back alley” abortions, women were frequently afraid to see a doctor when complications set in.

There were countless cases of couples attempting “do it yourself” abortions at home, many of which went terribly wrong. Sometimes wire coat hangers were used as crude instruments to attempt scraping the fetus from the woman’s womb, with disastrous results.

Right or wrong, the option of legal abortion allows women to make a difficult choice that allows them to live.

Filed Under: Political Implications Tagged With: ,

Roe v. Wade and Stem Cell Research

January 4, 2011 By Leave a Comment

ROE V. WADE AND STEM CELL RESEARCH

Roe v. Wade, the 1973 US Supreme Court decision that declared a Texas anti-abortion law unconstitutional and therefore made all anti-abortion laws in other states illegal, has always been controversial. The decision has also had unexpected affects on science and politics in the form of stem cell research.

Stem cell research was in its infancy in 1973. Physicians had just learned to successfully transplant unrelated bone marrow in an attempt to cure leukemia. Because this technique uses bone marrow from a living donor, it is called adult stem cell. It was not until 1988 that the first embryonic stem cells were developed using “extra” eggs from in vitro fertilization procedures.

A QUESTION OF ETHICS

The question of when life begins became the central issue. To those who believe life begins at conception, destroying an embryo in research is murder. The ethics of using fertilized eggs created a firestorm of controversy and resulted in a moratorium on governmental funding for human embryo research. President Bill Clinton removed the ban, but reinstated it because of public outcry.  President George W. Bush allowed Federal funding of research on existing embryonic stem cell lines and banned the creation of new lines.

President Bush urged the adoption of unused frozen embryos, nicknamed “snowflake babies”, as a way of dealing with the surplus fertilized eggs. Over one hundred children were born from this program.

Proponents of stem cell research argue that the benefit to society, the potential cures of diseases and crippling conditions outweigh the cost. They argue that the “extra” embryos will eventually be destroyed and should be put to a good use that will benefit humankind.

Stem cell research support comes from all corners – political conservatives like Nancy Reagan and liberal Bill Clinton. Scientists say it offers hope of a cure for diseases like diabetes, cancer, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, spinal cord injuries, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s disease) and muscular dystrophy.

Filed Under: Political Implications Tagged With: ,

Abortion: When a Personal Issue Turns Political

December 23, 2010 By Leave a Comment

The abortion of a fetus is a personal decision. Although women who partake in abortions are sometimes looked down upon, it is a heart-wrenching decision for most that do not see another way out of the situation. In some instances, women are too sick to bear a healthy child and the baby may be at risk for miscarriage or premature birth. In other cases, the person having an abortion is just a child who cannot possibly care for a baby. Whether you agree with abortion or not, it is a very personal issue that you could not imagine being involved in unless you are directly affected.

Given the personal nature of abortions, it’s a wonder that politicians gain votes and attempt to regulate the process. A majority of conservative Republicans believe that abortions should be illegal and that life begins at conception. Most Democrats believe that women should have the right to an abortion with some limitations. For example, it would be considered immoral if a pregnant woman changed her mind about having a baby at seven months’ gestation.

The Supreme Court ultimately decides abortion rights. Since the 1973 ruling of Roe v. Wade, the Court has still been split on rights. As of 2010, half of the country believes in having moderate abortion rights. The current law is moderate, stating that women can have an abortion during the first trimester.

Education for all women on abortion is particularly important, given the emotional nature of the procedure. However, some politicians opt to ban abortion information. This can lead to illegal and unsafe abortion practices.

Politicians on both sides continue to argue whether the law is too conservative or too liberal. Whether you are in support of or against the current law, you can perhaps wonder how dangerous it is for politicians to be the ultimate decision makers in such a personal matter. Keep in mind that this decision is a tough one for a woman.

Filed Under: Political Implications Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Conservative Take on Roe v. Wade

December 14, 2010 By Leave a Comment

While it may be seem as if conservatives are all painted with the same brush when it comes to abortion and Roe v. Wade, the issue is actually a divisive one. The issue is complex, and conservatives can think differently about the issue.

The political terminology is pro-life — that is what those who want to overturn Roe v. Wade term themselves — and pro-choice — the term favored by those who say Roe v. Wade should stay on the books.

In politics, the issue is a hot button that can be used to persuade voters who feel strongly about the legality of abortion and whether it should be prohibited. Conservative members of the Republican party will use this issue to get candidates elected. If a candidate has an endorsement from the National Right to Life Committee, for instance, that carries enormous weight with the conservative voters. President George W. Bush, for instance, had the organization’s endorsement.

Many conservatives on the far right will not tolerate even the slightest wavering on the topic, and often use it to decide how conservative a candidate is. Is he a true conservative who thinks abortion is wrong no matter what, or a waverer, someone who
thinks abortion should be legal if the woman has been raped for instance, or if the pregnancy will result in the mother’s death.

When then presidential candidate John McCain said he would not work to repeal Roe v. Wade because of the resulting illegal abortions that would kill and maim women, he was criticized by staunch conservatives. McCain has also gone on the record as saying he can understand why a woman would want an abortion if she were raped or a victim of incest.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: Political Implications Tagged With: , ,

Reproductive Rights Issues Raised by Roe v. Wade

December 10, 2010 By Leave a Comment

Rove v. Wade is the court decision that just won’t quit. Decades after the landmark Supreme Court decision, combatants are still trying to overturn it, and it continues to create more controversy than any other Supreme Court decision.

One are of contention — out of many — is what exactly consitututes a woman’s reproductive rights. The term has come to be synonomous with abortion rights. Coupled with abortion rights is how to prevent pregancy, whether that is through abstinence or contraception.

Many who support Roe v. Wade want to expand the definition of reproductive rights — saying that the current use is narrow and excludes important issues that come under the umbrella of reproductive rights. These activists want the debate to include infertility, selecting an embryo, and even the issues faced by women who want to have their babies and raise them.

One issue that is remains table is that of multiple pregnancies caused by in vitro fertilization. Carrying multiple fetuses increases the health risks of the babies and also of the mother. Certainly, raising twins, triplets or more — think Kate Gosselin — can be very stressful. How do you pay for all those diapers and formula? How do you meet their emotional needs? These consequences of multiple births greatly impact families and society at large.

Uner Roe v. Wade, can a woman decide that she wants to transfer six embryos during her in vitro fertilization procedure? Should be able to make this decision even after her doctor says its is very risky to her and to the development of the embryos? Should the doctor be able to veto such a decision?

These are very complex questions that should be included in any discussion of reproductive rights. As technology opens doors previously closed, ethics and consequences of these open doors need to be debated.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: Political Implications Tagged With: , ,

What is the Roe Effect

December 9, 2010 By Leave a Comment

The Roe Effect is a theory of how the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade has affected the political landscape of America. It is a hypothesis about the effects of legalized abortion in the long term number of democratic voters. Believers of the Roe effect think that the democrats who support legalized abortion are causing their on political party to shrink because they are reducing their potential political base.

James Taranto, a columnist from the Wall Street Journal came up with the phrase “The Roe Effect” in his column that he writes for the Best of the Web Today. He theorized that people who agree with abortion are more likely to get one. He also believes that children tend to follow in their parents political footsteps, leading to pro choice parents not having as many children because they are having more abortions. This in turn will lead to a reduction in the number of pro-choice voters. The result of this will eventually lead to this number being smaller than the number of pro-life voters. The ending result of a smaller population of pro-life supporters will be a reduced support for the ability to legally have an abortion.

Just like the original ruling of the Supreme Court on Roe-V. Wade and the subsequent fire storm that resulted from it, this article and others supporting have have stirred things up. There have been a few other articles supporting the theory published in the Journal, such as “The Empty Cradle Will Rock”, written by Larry L. Eastland, but there have also been many articles and opinions printed pointing out the holes and flaws in the theory.

This theory, with not real data to back it up, along with the topic of abortion in general will continue to create controversy across political lines with no end in site.

Filed Under: Political Implications Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Roe v, Wade — What is it?

December 8, 2010 By Leave a Comment

Roe v. Wade — such a simple phrase to have caused so much consternation throughout the United Staes.

Unless you have been hiding under a rock for the last decade, you will have at least a rudimentary understanding of what Roe v. Wade is — a decision made by the Supreme Court of the United States in January of 1973 that basically made performing and getting an abortion in the first six months of pregnancy legal in the U.S. An abortion in the later months of pregnancy was declared legal as well, but only under certain circumstances. And individual states could still restrict abortion in the last trimester, unless the life of the mother could be jeopordized. Women now had the right to determine if they wanted to have an abortion. The Supreme Court based its decision on the

Remember the scene in Dirty Dancing when the dance instructor had to have an illegal abortion and how devastatingly ill she became because of it? Well, this decision made the need for such scary procedures obsolete.

As a federal law, it reigns supreme — overriding any previous state laws that make abortion illegal. After the landmark decision, 31 states had to rescind their laws that made abortion illegal, including the state where it all started, Texas.

So who was this Jane Roe who had the gumption to fight the system? Her real name was Norma McCorvey, and she filed her case in Texas. She used the right to privacy as her basis for bringing the suit, claiming that the Texas law violated her rights as stated in the United States Constitution.

Wade was Herny Wade, the district attorney in Dallas, Texas.

The Supreme Court decision was a seven to two vote. Justice Harry Blackmun wrote the opionon for the majority. Two judges, William Rehnquist and Byron White, did not vote with the majority. Both of the judges wrote dissents. There were also what are called concurring opinions, which were written by three justices: Potter Stewart, Warren Burger, and Byron White.

Their decision was based on upholding the Ninth Amemdment and the Fourteenth Amendment.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: Political Implications Tagged With: ,

Eastern and Western Attitudes Differ

December 7, 2010 By Leave a Comment

It’s an established notion that there’s a wide difference between people from the East and people from the West. Easterners are, according to the common wisdom, a little short on small talk while being up and at ‘em sorts, quick to apply biting, sarcastic wit in the event that anyone looks less than perfect at any time. As that state of affairs is part of the human condition, cutting comments are constantly flying back and forth through the air. With this going on around them, people tend to do two things. For one, they feel constant pressure to perform at a high level without mistakes. Secondly, many people develop a tough exterior ‘skin’ which helps to protect against the barbs which fly through the air. Developing these two traits ends up keeping a gulf between people, which results in a less friendly social atmosphere.

In the West, the former home of the cowboy, a different sort of mentality developed. Perhaps it was the wide open spaces available as compared to the tight confines of the highly developed Eastern coast, but one way or the other, people ended up being pretty friendly folks out West. Perhaps gregarious on the occasion of seeing others because it’s a less common occurrence, people in the West generally have a cheerful greeting to share with each other. There is a little less of the well-known New Yorker attitude happening, whereby people avoid looking at one another on the streets.

These traits don’t just affect a certain young segment of society either. They seem to be embedded in people of all ages, including those who’ve reached the years where they require assisted living care. Walking into such a facility West of the Rocky Mountains, one might be surprised at the number of rousing, cheerful greetings bestowed by the clientele. And that’s a better way to live, as anyone can see.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: Political Implications Tagged With: , , ,
« Older Posts