TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › American women are now pre-pregnant!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

American women are now pre-pregnant! - Page 2

post #31 of 51
Umm...it's called Planned Parenthood, Welfare, WIC, and social services. All are government funded/granted.
post #32 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by lunasmom
Umm...it's called Planned Parenthood, Welfare, WIC, and social services. All are government funded/granted.
But haven't you noticed the attack on these organizations and programs. We are confronted with "abstinence only" programs and condemn the women when they get pregnant.
post #33 of 51
Thread Starter 
"Umm...it's called Planned Parenthood, Welfare, WIC, and social services. All are government funded/granted."

Planned Parenthood is the effigy being burned by the pro-life movement. Any webpage that you find by any group who claims to be pro-life (some of them are very questionable) you will find pages of angry articles about how PP is singlehandedly destroying America. Also IT IS NOT GOVERNMENT FUNDED. At all. It is funded by donations and by itself- it is incorporated.

Welfare and WIC barely give women enough money to be dirt poor. Compared to countries with better social support systems, people who ask for public assistance here are, for one thing, treated like dirt, and for another, asked to survive on what most of us could never do. We take care of all children if you mean by take care of them that we keep them alive. Just barely. In Cleveland, welfare mothers are often bussed to Akron (about an hour away) and forced to work as domestic servants. That sounds more like slavery to me, even if they are paid...sort of.

The only thing there is no shortage of is free condoms. You can get those by the boatload. But somehow, they're not getting into the hands of the people who need them the most.
post #34 of 51
I figured out one of the reasons this is also so disturbing to me, which is that it devalues a woman if she doesn't have (or in this case doesn't want) children. Try to get public assistance without kids. Seriously, try - I dare you! No kids, the government does not care about you. We've gone through some tough times, and I did check into assistance programs (like medical assistance, sliding scale stuff). The first question asked was if I was pregnant or had children, even though the question was about adult assistance. No kids, no help. This new "pre-pregnant" crud perpetuates that attitude that you are not worth anything (to the government anyway) unless you are popping out kids. Your prime directive as a woman is to make new voters and if you aren't then your one vote does not matter. Is it any wonder they are pushing for pre-pregnant care and not birth control education?
post #35 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by lunasmom
Umm...it's called Planned Parenthood, Welfare, WIC, and social services. All are government funded/granted.
Welfare/WIC/social services are not enough.
I used to work for my state's Human Services department, in the welfare office, with welfare clients. I can tell you from first-hand experience with these programs and the people who "benefit" from them that they are not enough.
Also, Medicaid patients get treated like crap by medical providers, and a lot of the time Medicaid won't cover some of the more expensive life-saving/sustaining treatments that some people need.
post #36 of 51
I think the whole issue of health care sucks in this country and whether we want babies or choose not to have babies we need good health care for Men, women, and children.

I don't have any kids and that is my right, but I should be offered the same benefits as anyone else. I pay taxes too..

The argument on how a woman treats her body when she is pregnant is a no brainer for me. When a woman is pregnant she is no longer just taking care of herself. She is responsible for the unborn child in her body. Smoking, drinking, and drugs are unacceptable. I have a step daughter who is a product of somebody who did all the above, and she is mentally retarded and physically messed up. She never had a chance at being normal because her mother was irresponsible.
post #37 of 51
It's obviously different from state to state then. In Michigan, part of of PP is donated/funded by the state. If you're not a student and you don't have a job, you can get FREE birth control, that's the ONLY reason why I brought it up.

I understand that WIC/Welfare/Social Services are not perfect..as well as planned parenthood. But it is something rather then nothing.
post #38 of 51
I was born and raised in Michigan, and they had planned parenthood program when I was 18....That was alot of years ago.

I live in Nebraska and I just got a health screening on a program called "Every woman matters" It really helped with me getting my first mammogram at 46 years old. I can't afford my works health insurance that covers very little.
post #39 of 51
Thread Starter 
Maybe I was wrong about it being government-funded. They get alot of grant money and federal contracts, which is not the same as being funded persay, but still. Every time I get a plea for donations in the mail they have led me to believe that they aren't funded by the government and depend solely on donations. Which kind of makes me mad now thinking about it. Sorry!

My question is what happens when doctors start treating us like this? What do we do?

Do they have the right to deny access to birth control since it can harm an early pregnancy? What about the ECC, that also could harm it... This idea of us all being "pre-pregnant" is starting to terrify me since it opens the door on so much else...

Oh, and Abbycats nobody will disagree with you that it is important to take care of a child you are going to have while it's in the womb. The issue here is that we are supposed to be treated and treat ourselves in a perpetual state of "pre-pregnancy" from the time we get our perid until the time we go through menopause.
post #40 of 51
I'm afraid it brings back the old days where employers wouldn't want to hire a woman or put her in a position of importance because "she might get pregnant and leave us".
post #41 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom
Maybe I was wrong about it being government-funded. They get alot of grant money and federal contracts, which is not the same as being funded persay, but still. Every time I get a plea for donations in the mail they have led me to believe that they aren't funded by the government and depend solely on donations. Which kind of makes me mad now thinking about it. Sorry!
No Problem! It is confusing, especially when the laws are different state to state. Most of the Michigan programs have to be at least state granted. They do ask for donations on the side to be able to do a little more with their programs. This is why Social workers often lose/change jobs in MI. The grant is denied so the program they're working for gets cut.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom
My question is what happens when doctors start treating us like this? What do we do?

Do they have the right to deny access to birth control since it can harm an early pregnancy? What about the ECC, that also could harm it... This idea of us all being "pre-pregnant" is starting to terrify me since it opens the door on so much else...

Oh, and Abbycats nobody will disagree with you that it is important to take care of a child you are going to have while it's in the womb. The issue here is that we are supposed to be treated and treat ourselves in a perpetual state of "pre-pregnancy" from the time we get our perid until the time we go through menopause.
As much as I wouldn't mind B to start cleaning the litter box, my question is for those that don't have a significant other. Does this mean if I were without a husband orlive in boyfriend I would have to hire someone to scoop the litter every week? Or would I have to give up the cats :O

I think it should not be a requirement, but more of a choice. If the woman is serious about having a child, a healthy living baby then the woman can choose to live that lifestyle. Similar idea to how vegartarians live or even what religion you practise.
I don't think that it should be a requirement on how we live. For centuries women never had to live this way. Even when the only purpose for a woman was to have children (According to men). Now we've come so far in freeing ourselves...we're allow an education beyond high school, we're allowed to vote, we're allowed to live a lifestyle that women even 100 years ago couldn't. Don't make us think or even plant in our heads that we will always need to bear children. We have that choice now.
post #42 of 51
I found this article interesting US low rank for newborns' survival.

"The researchers also said lack of national health insurance and short maternity leaves likely contribute to the poor U.S. rankings. Those factors can lead to poor health care before and during pregnancy, increasing risks for premature births and low birth weight, which are the leading causes of newborn death in industrialized countries. Infections are the main culprit in developing nations, the report said."

...

"“Our health care system focuses on providing high-tech services for complicated cases. We do this very well,” Thorpe said. “What we do not do is provide basic primary and preventive health care services. We do not pay for these services, and do not have a delivery system that is designed to provide either primary prevention, or adequately treat patients with chronic diseases.”"

So treating us as pre-pregnant just takes away our rights. It doesn't help us get better health care and healthier babies.
post #43 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by katachtig
I'm afraid it brings back the old days where employers wouldn't want to hire a woman or put her in a position of importance because "she might get pregnant and leave us".
Old days that's still around!
post #44 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by katachtig
I found this article interesting US low rank for newborns' survival.

"The researchers also said lack of national health insurance and short maternity leaves likely contribute to the poor U.S. rankings. Those factors can lead to poor health care before and during pregnancy, increasing risks for premature births and low birth weight, which are the leading causes of newborn death in industrialized countries. Infections are the main culprit in developing nations, the report said."

...

"“Our health care system focuses on providing high-tech services for complicated cases. We do this very well,†Thorpe said. “What we do not do is provide basic primary and preventive health care services. We do not pay for these services, and do not have a delivery system that is designed to provide either primary prevention, or adequately treat patients with chronic diseases.â€"

So have us treated as pre-pregnant just takes away our rights. It doesn't help us get better health care and healthier babies.
...unless of course we didn't put 9 gajillion dollars into our military, paying off bg businesses and a whole host of pork projects....then we might be able to pay for health care and proper education for EVERYONE.

And half of all pregnancies are unplanned? Well, insteads of just assuming then that our bodies must be baby machines, why not try to ELIMINATE thos unplanned pregnancies?
post #45 of 51
I don't mind putting any kind of health restrictions on people. The way I see it....people need to be healthier, period!!!

It is sad how in the most properous nation on the world (the U.S.) people are still as sick as ever before. This is not supposed to be happen!!! In the land of prosperity people are supposed to live well!!!

Actually all of those so-called "restrictions" should be applied to both MEN and Women. I am a genetics graduate student and in the world of genetics, the sperm quality actually should be better than the ovum quality. There is no excuse for men to be unhealthy if they are having unprotected sex with women!!! I don't want to sound like a Nazi, but the genetic quality of our progeny would determine the quality of the future population!!!
post #46 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by shengmei
I don't mind putting any kind of health restrictions on people. The way I see it....people need to be healthier, period!!!

It is sad how in the most properous nation on the world (the U.S.) people are still as sick as ever before. This is not supposed to be happen!!! In the land of prosperity people are supposed to live well!!!

Actually all of those so-called "restrictions" should be applied to both MEN and Women. I am a genetics graduate student and in the world of genetics, the sperm quality actually should be better than the ovum quality. There is no excuse for men to be unhealthy if they are having unprotected sex with women!!! I don't want to sound like a Nazi, but the genetic quality of our progeny would determine the quality of the future population!!!
This is a very dangerous precedent. The government is the last entity I want doing this type of enforcing. While it seems best on the surface to say let's legislate, the government doesn't know what is best for an individual. One size doesn't fit all. And if our breeding of animals is anything to show, we sometimes don't know what we're doing and genetics need variety and randomness.

And look at how the government handled the disaster that came out of Katrina. Do we really want them telling us how to live our lives?
post #47 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by katachtig
we sometimes don't know what we're doing and genetics need variety and randomness.
That is extremely, extremely important in both animals and humans.

I personally believe there should be more interracial marriages, but I am pretty sure 99% of people don't think this way.

Edited to add: I believe the U.S. government can be trusted when it comes to nutrition. They sponsor and fund grants for all the important nutrition studies and research.
post #48 of 51
Thread Starter 
Actually they're not very good at nutrition-- by which I mean supporting the people who work for them who are dietitians.
Yes, the nutrition advice you get from the government isn't half bad, but the government is really really terrible at implementing it in some cases, good in others (like WIC, you can only buy the foods the government has decided are healthy). But then look at all the elementary schools with soda machines...

Why do you think 99% of people will disagree with interracial marriages? There are more than 1% of people in interracial marriages in the US... I don't disagree with them and don't see what there is to disagree with unless you're a racist.

And we're not talking about health restrictions, we're talking about women being treated like baby-machines.

My letter to the CDC was forwarded up the ladder, will see if I get any response.
post #49 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by shengmei
I don't mind putting any kind of health restrictions on people. The way I see it....people need to be healthier, period!!!

It is sad how in the most properous nation on the world (the U.S.) people are still as sick as ever before. This is not supposed to be happen!!! In the land of prosperity people are supposed to live well!!!

Actually all of those so-called "restrictions" should be applied to both MEN and Women. I am a genetics graduate student and in the world of genetics, the sperm quality actually should be better than the ovum quality. There is no excuse for men to be unhealthy if they are having unprotected sex with women!!! I don't want to sound like a Nazi, but the genetic quality of our progeny would determine the quality of the future population!!!
I remember doing some research in High school on sprem and egg quality facinating stuff and in 10-12 years I am sure there is alot more
I have decided not to have kids for two genetic issues and many personal ...If more folks thought about the reaction to their action maybe we wouldnt have the trouble we have now..
post #50 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom

Why do you think 99% of people will disagree with interracial marriages? There are more than 1% of people in interracial marriages in the US... I don't disagree with them and don't see what there is to disagree with unless you're a racist.
I apologize. I should have worded this differently. What I meant to say is very few people believe that interracial marriages are actutually essential to the diversification of genetic material in our progeny.
post #51 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by shengmei
I apologize. I should have worded this differently. What I meant to say is very few people believe that interracial marriages are actutually essential to the diversification of genetic material in our progeny.
I don't believe most people even think about it. Nowadays, marriage is very often not connected with raising children, and there are so many countries with fairly liberal immigration as well as foreign-adoption policies that procreation has been "globalized" to a fairly large extent. Not everywhere, of course, but more and more.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › American women are now pre-pregnant!