Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rutgers!caip!amq
From: amq@caip.RUTGERS.EDU (Amqueue)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: 2-year-olds vs fetuses-survival
Message-ID: <3635@caip.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Fri, 10-Oct-86 03:21:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: caip.3635
Posted: Fri Oct 10 03:21:48 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 16-Oct-86 06:38:51 EDT
References: <Garble-garble> <648@houem.UUCP> <1233@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU> <652@houem.UUCP> <1242@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU>
Reply-To: amq@caip.UUCP (Amqueue)
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 42

In article <1242@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU> melissa@trillian.UUCP (Melissa Silvestre) writes:

>I'd like to know, how do other pro-choice'ers deal with the fact that
>0 months is rapidly becoming the age of viability?

and

>What if a $50 operation = abortion (kills it) but a certain $100,000
>procedure can keep it alive at exactly the same stage? Viable according
>to what level of medical technology (and what price?)
>Would you force me to beggar myself to pay for an operation that
>would enable the State to keep the fetus alive until it can be
>adopted? Can we as taxpayers afford for the State to pay for
>such expensive medical procedures?
>-- 
>Melissa Silvestre (melissa@athena.mit.edu)


One of the things pro-lifers say is "But why dont you carry it and then let
it be adopted? Lots of people want to adopt babies." I say: fine, let *them*
take care of it. If I want to abort the thing, it is a safe bet that I want
*nothing further to do with it*. This includes monetary considerations.

The "obvious" solution (ready? :-) is for whatever charitable groups are
advocating adoption to create and sustain creches for these unwanted
growing things until they can be adopted. That way, they bear the burden
for what they are advocating, and people are free to support it or not as
they wish (or can afford). It cant cost that much more to maintain 50
pieces of equipment as it down to maintain 10... certainly not 5 times
more, as much of the overhead can adn will be shared. In fact, they could
do that now, and thus allow abortions even later... remove the now barely
viable creature and give it to somewhere to nurture it. It probably wouldnt
have much more impact than to create legislation claiming that babies (and
I use that word reservedly) could not be "aborted" (should we now say
"removed"?) until *after* they were viable under these considerations, so
that all (or almost all, given potential complications) would be saved. 

Sponsor of Our Lady of the Holy Incubator Adoption Agency
(anyone want to join the bandwagon?)
/amqueue

In the meantime, ***KEEP YOUR LAWS OFF MY BODY!!!!!***