Event Invitation: In Support of the Decriminalization of Therapeutic Abortion

in
Event Invitation: In Support of the Decriminalization of Therapeutic Abortion

Event: "CANTOS DE ESPERANZA POR LA VIDA DE LAS MUJERES"

When: May 28th, 7 pm (Free Admission!)

Where: Alianza Frances, Managua, Nicaragua

Why: May 28th is the International Day of Action for Women´s Health. This free concert serves to raise awareness and rally support for the decriminalization of therapeutic abortion in Nicaragua.

Musical guests include Katia Cardenal, Gaby Baca and Elsa Basíl

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

What a terrible shame

that anyone is trying to legalize the murder of infants. Inconvenienced? Change your mind? Bad timing? Lack of self-control? Difficult circumstances? Just poison/butcher/suction/stab the child and everything is resolved. But there will be hell to pay.

What a terrible shame...that therapeutic abortion is a CRIME

Perhaps you do not completely understand the differentiation between ABORTION and THERAPEUTIC ABORTION.

Abortion, in all its forms, is illegal in Nicaragua and through most of Central America. While I respect your opinion as pro-life -- as one is entitled to an opinion -- a THERAPEUTIC ABORTION is the medical terminology used for an abortion that is performed when (a) the pregnancy puts the mother’s life at risk; or (b) the pregnancy was caused due to rape or incest.

Therapeutic abortion was criminalized in Nicaragua in 2006 by the National Assembly, 52-0 (9 members abstaining, 29 members absent), directly before the presidential elections. Ortega rallied around this decision to gain the political support of the church, without which he may not have won the presidency in 2006. Any doctor who performs this life saving medical procedure now faces up to eight years in prison.

To provide a REAL LIFE example: A nine year old Nicaraguan girl named Rosita was raped and impregnated by her father in 2003. Thanks to the legality of therapeutic abortion at this time, she received the medical procedure in a clean and safe environment by a certified OBGYN.

Certainly one could not deny a mere child the human right to have ownership over her pre-adolescent body. An "inconvenience," you ask? Yes, certainly -- she was raped. "Change your mind?" Her opinion never counted. "Bad timing?" Absolutely. She was 9 years old. "Difficult circumstances?" Without a doubt -- she was sexually abused by her father.

Human Rights Watch reported the death of at least eighty Nicaraguan women in the eleven months following the 2006 ban. The point of view of Human Rights Watch is that the law intentionally denies women access to health services essential to saving their lives, and is thus inconsistent with Nicaragua’s obligations under international human rights law to ensure women’s right to life. Their report is called "Over Their Dead Bodies."

For those interested in learning more, I encourage you to watch a recent BBC documentary (link below) that is in three parts:

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=E-arqiqGIZ4

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff3mdgl1AqE

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=j1Mbti9nkqU

I understand that

I understand that two wrongs don't make a right, that the world is a messy place, and that once you start killing children for one reason, other 'good' reasons quickly surface. I also know that there are many people who are committed to loving and providing for the children whose parents don't want them. I understand that there are no valid reasons to ever kill the innocent.

Pretty narrow view

Your view seems to indicate that "the innocent" (which seems to imply the fetus and only the fetus) is more important than:

  • The life of the mother in the case of a pregnancy where the mother will likely die of complications. (In many cases, the fetus would also die anyway.)
  • The life of a child (a raped 9-year old was an example) being further traumatized by bearing a child.
  • In general, any other consideration.

Personally, I am a bit more compassionant for the people (and, for that matter, the animals) that already walk on this planet.

Nathan, the key word here is "Therapeutic"

I respect your opinion. The concept of prohibiting all abortions seems flawed to me.

Denying a woman the right to have therapeutic abortion may be the same as condemning her to death or to many years of health problems.

Who are we as outsiders to decide if the mother or the child has the right to live? Are you saying is that the government should have the right to kill pregnant mothers if they have medical problems because of a pregnancy? By prohibiting therapeutic abortions that is exactly what the government is doing.

I am a strong advocate of woman’s rights and their right to have complete control over their bodies. I feel that if nature had reversed the roles and men had the ability and the duty to bear children we would not have this discussion. It would be a given that the men would have the right to decide if or when to abort a child.

Darn, I forgot…… Men do that now!!!!

Who decides

This (usual) discussion made me think of something that I don't think has ever been discussed here but seems pretty important.

Let's say an underage girl gets raped and gets pregnant. Who gets to make the to abort or not to abort decision? Here are some points to think about:

  1. Does it matter who raped her? For example, one of the justifications for incent laws it to prevent inbreeding-related defects. So, for example, do we treat rape by father different than rape by stepfather? An uncle? ...
  2. If the girl, while underage, is a typical age for sex here—say 15—does she get to decide but if she is much younger, not?
  3. What about statuatory rape? That is, the girl is underage but concented to the act?
  4. Does the father of the potential offspring get any say?
  5. If the parents get to decide, do they need to agree?
  6. Is it a government function to make the decision or at least review the situation?

Interesting and valid points!

My definition of therapeutic abortions is that it come into play when pregnancy jeopardizes the healthy or the life of the mother or if it is determined that the child will have a debilitating illness that will not allow it to ever fend for itself.

I know that some will say that we have come a long way in treating some illnesses that would have fallen under that category just a few short years ago. That fact should not allow us to condemn someone to a life that has in reality zero quality and zero hope of improvement.

Let’s take this argument just one step further: Siamese twins.

When the life of both Siamese twins is threatened, a tough decision of, which one gets to live and which one must die so the other can live, is made. Who generally makes that decision? Doctors! A group of them! Why is it ok to trust their judgment is this case but not in the case of a pregnant mother?

On the question of rape by close blood relatives I am somewhat undecided. I am certain that a case could be made for both the pro and anti abortion argument.

lets put the blame ...

where it really belongs...

the Vatican.

-Doug

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate

In this case

it is a matter of law, Nicaraguan law.

If we look a little closer it becomes apparent that this law was passed because of political chess moves.

Depending on ones point of view, an argument can be made to prohibit abortions for the sake of convenience. In my opinion, NO argument can be made to prohibit therapeutic abortions.

laws change all the time...

but public opinion is formed by belief. And that is guided by religious leaders, who also influence political leaders.

"The former Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega was a defender of Nicaragua's limited abortion rights and a critic of the Catholic church when he led a left-wing Nicaraguan government in the 1980s.

He has since been reconciled with the church and has become a strident opponent of abortion.

Public opinion in Nicaragua, which is estimated to be 85% Roman Catholic, appeared to be behind the bill. "

-http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6161396.stm

-Doug

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate

IT IS A TERRIBLE SHAME

because a woman should have the right to choose over what happens to her body-it seems that men like to dictate laws that govern a women's body-i know many nica women that have to support their children after the men are long gone-what about child support-population explosion(the population will double in less than 30 years)-vascetomys for men-birth control pills-morning after pills-french abortion pills- all are sorely needed in nicaragua