I agree but if that is what she choose to do then it is her business. Personally myself I think it is child abuse. One of these days she will have to answer for harming her child.
2007-10-07 16:06:00
·
answer #1
·
answered by Pamela B 5
·
2⤊
4⤋
I agree that smoking or ingesting at a similar time as pregnant is faulty, yet no, we will not enforce rules to circumvent pregnant women from doing those issues. in the beginning, in many countries women are even cautioned via their OBs to have a tumbler of wine a night. i in my view would not take that threat, however the actuality is those countries do not teach a extra physically powerful prevalence of FAS than the U.S. the place it is thoroughly discouraged. throughout the 70's pregnant women smoked freely with little know-how of the possible undesirable outcomes on their infants. some infants have been born small and with respiration situations and that's the reason it is not good, yet once you think approximately that tens of millions of ladies did this (and it is nonetheless extra undemanding in different countries), the type of infants effected is comparatively small. As a mom I say a woman could do each and every thing to objective to guarantee the wellness of her infant. As an American citizen, i comprehend it is not my good to inform yet another woman what to do along with her very own physique. If cigarettes and alcohol are criminal for each man or woman, we don't get to shrink particular communities of persons. that may not the way the form works.
2016-10-06 07:09:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by courcelle 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree that smoking or drinking while pregnant is wrong, but no, we can't enforce laws to prevent pregnant women from doing those things. First of all, in many countries women are even advised by their OBs to have a glass of wine a night. I personally wouldn't take that chance, but the reality is these countries don't show a higher incidence of FAS than the U.S. where it's completely discouraged.
During the 70's pregnant women smoked freely with little knowledge of the possible negative effects on their babies. Some babies were born small and with respiratory conditions and that's why it's not good, but when you consider that millions of women did this (and it's still more common in other countries), the number of babies effected is relatively small.
As a mother I say a woman should do everything to try to guarantee the health of her baby. As an American citizen, I know it's not my right to tell another woman what to do with her own body. If cigarettes and alcohol are legal for everyone, we don't get to limit certain groups of people. That's not the way the Constitution works.
2007-10-07 16:12:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋
I fully agree that people who are preggars should take better care of themselves, take their nasty pre natal vitamins, and give up their bad habits, smoking, drinking talking on cell phones when driving......since you can find out if you are preg, so soon after conceiving most people do stop smoking and etc way earlier than was ever possible even 20 years ago. But not everyone who can get preg has the smarts to be preg, and not everyone can over come addictions for any reason.....
You say "saw a friend hand a cig to a preg lady" whose friend?
If you saw two strangers doing this it becomes a bite your tongue experience......they may not appreciate you offering them your opinion.
If this is someone you see often but don't know you could make friends and subtly bring up how exciting having a baby is and how many things a Mother has to do from concieving to marrying off a child and it still isn't over, yada yada and how you admire a person who has the strength to put baby first, yada yada, test the water a lecture never makes much headway if you put someone on the defensive they go deaf.... IF it was YOUR friend who handed a preg gal a cancer stick, just step up to the plate and tell her how you feel about the subject and how it makes you feel to think an unborn baby could be damaged as you feel you were. I am not saying you weren't I am saying keep it in the less arguable tense.
I applaud you wanting to protect an unborn. My pet peeve is if they can quit for 7 to 9 month why do they start again and blow second hand smoke near their babys. plus the waste of money that could buy things for the baby, put them thru college at the price of smokes.
Good Luck I hope the scenario is one you can follow thru on as it will make you feel good knowing you helped an unborn be healthieer....
2007-10-07 16:49:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by Judy 6
·
0⤊
3⤋
I agree. It's her body and she has both the legal and moral right to end the pregnancy by abortion, but if a woman is going to bring a child into the world she should not do anything to handicap that child! It's morally inexcusable.
Legislating this would be a nightmare though.
At 19 I realized that what I most desired from life was to bear a child. That same day I decided I could not---did not have the moral right to--because of serious genetic defects in members of my family. I'll always grieve, but I'll not be responsible for more human misery.
Sorry you have problems because of your biological mother's habits. (It was commonplace sexism for doctors to prescribe barbituates to any woman who was simply stressed well into the '70s. I doubt many women of the time realized the dangers to their uunborn children.) I empathize. I have serious learning disabilities which hinder me every day that may be due to the same thing...or not. I know of no way of determining such a matter. One of my cousins is severely mentally retarded and physically extremely frail for a man of his age. His mother and his father were appallingly negligent before (and after) his birth. :(
To gimpalomg: You're pro-death penalty and against abortion? Hi there. I'm anti-hypocrite.
Ah.. the compassionate consevative. *where's that bottle of Emetrol?*
2007-10-07 16:33:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by Cynthia_Secular_n_SillyHatState 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
People are always going to do stupid, dangerous things, but there should be a limit to our government's ability to stop it. For instance, we all know smoking and drinking while pregnant is dangerous. I'm sorry that you're an illustration of this. However, we can't outlaw it. What about the women who don't know they're pregnant yet? We can't prevent every woman from drinking and smoking, which are legal activities, not in a free society. Also, doctors actually don't suggest that heavy smokers go cold-turkey while pregnant. They want them to cut down by a lot, sure, but the withdrawal process is potentially dangerous to the fetus too. It may be in the baby's best interest for the mother to continue smoking a cigarette or two a day. It's the same with alcohol; heavy drinking is very bad, but a drink or two during pregnancy is unlikely to do harm.
I'm also uncomfortable with pregnant women doing things that are obviously dangerous, but I think what we do is probably the best we can. We educate women, most of whom want to bear healthy babies and go through a lot to ensure that anyway. And we put a lot of restrictions on things like certain medications that are always bad for babies. Safety and health are important, but it's so easy to go too far into fascism.
2007-10-07 16:18:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by random6x7 6
·
4⤊
4⤋
It is my understanding (and please correct me if I'm wrong here), babies are tested shortly after birth for the presence of illegal or harmful substances, and if present, the baby is often taken from the mother and given medical treatment. What may be better for babies is the testing of pregnant women for these substances before the birth of the baby, so that the mother can (with force, if need be) get treatment for the drug addiction, hopefully before damaging the fetus. Most of the vital organs are developing in the first three months of gestation, and this is a critical time for the development of the fetus. The problem is, many women don't know they are pregnant until well into the second month of pregnancy. If a woman is using drugs or alcohol during this time, the damage may be done before she even knows she's pregnant. It is a very sad fact that drug and alcohol addiction can cause permanent harm to babies. We need to (as a society) eradicate addictions of this sort before they cause damage, but this is very difficult to do. Please also, be wary of deciding that a pregnant woman who uses drugs does not care at all about her unborn child. Addiction is a physical, psychological, social, and spiritual disease. The addict is in denial about the addiction. They do not see themselves as addicts, or if they do, they do not comprehend the harm it causes to themselves or others. "Denial" is a major component of the disease.
2007-10-07 16:11:48
·
answer #7
·
answered by It's Ms. Fusion if you're Nasty! 7
·
2⤊
3⤋
You can't have it both ways --- you're either pro-choice or not.
If a woman has the right to abort, she also has the right to smoke 3 packs a day, drink herself into a coma nightly, or chew dip snuff non-stop for 40 the weeks if she so chooses.
After all, isn't it her body and her choice?
2007-10-07 16:14:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by mathisyahu 2
·
6⤊
3⤋
A lot of OB/GYNs might think that not smoking or drinking during pregnancy is a given. They really need to hammer that point home with pregnant women.
2007-10-07 16:08:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Rio Madeira 7
·
3⤊
3⤋
So you are pro-choice except when it comes to something you don't like.
Sound a bit hypocritical to me.
I am pro-life and pro-death penalty. People say the same about me. Of course that mass of tissue hasn't used a chain saw on my family at least not yet. I too am angered by women who smoke and so forth. The difference is I have a reason, not an excuse.
2007-10-07 16:06:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by gimpalomg 7
·
4⤊
4⤋
I agree but it`s a tough one people do have a choice and somtimes others have to live with the consequences. It`s down to education only someone brain dead would do that to their own child.
2007-10-07 16:02:22
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋