What happens to families who are denied abortions?

NYT: What happens to families who are denied abortions?

With a team of Czech colleagues, David enrolled 220 of the women who were twice denied the abortion they sought and 220 women who never pursued an abortion. For the next 35 years, he followed their children, making regular inquiries and comparisons between the two groups.

The first results examined the children at age 9. David reported that the children born of unwanted pregnancies had significant disadvantages. They were breast-fed for shorter periods; were slightly but consistently overweight; had more instances of acute illness and lower grades in Czech. They seemed less capable in socially demanding situations; they were less popular among peers and teachers and even, if sons, with their own mothers. David concluded that “the child of a woman denied abortion appears to be born into a potentially handicapping situation.”

In the course of interviewing the mothers about their children, David’s research suggested that whether the mother wanted the child was a significant predictor of the child’s future negative qualities, independent of the effect of the mother’s personality.

Anti-abortion crowd’s interest in this only up until birth. This article is an overview, based on scientific studies, of what happens after birth to unwanted children.

I think anti-abortion crowd has to also advocate and facilitate adoptions, otherwise they are hypocritical in their “think of the children” outlook.

They become parents?

Specifically, they become shitty parents.

Who raise internet trolls that spam forums trying to generate a controversial thread.

And likely to end up in poverty too… all around undesirable outcome.

They make delicious pies.

Oh no, no, no, no, you’re not doing this here, Zylon.

Either the original topic, or on one other topic which shall soon become clear are appropriate. I have listened to you pie and cake people go on and on about who is right and who is wrong, and who is a relic of antiquated definitions promulgated by the patriarchy in the context of post meal confectionery. Sinij raises an important point about women being stuck between two competing concerns, yet cleaved in twain by a society that cares more about what is on the outside than is on the inside. The relationship of the different members of the family unit can have many configurations, but without the emotional mayonnaise of actually wanting the children, these relationships can turn dry and become stale or rotten. With poor job prospects because they must care for children and could not finish school, many of these families have no one to bring home the bacon. Relationship, metaphorical bacon, piled high on top a steaming mound of the roasted turkey of extracurricular participation, dabbled with the honey dijon that only comes with attending parent-teacher conferences and helping children with their crisp, freshly peeled pieces of iceburg lettuce, and also homework. People have to want to be together, mother and child, husband and wife, peanut butter and…jelly.

That’s right, genderless term denoting physical or emotional weakness and lacking in racial, ethnic or religious negative connotations, it is sandwich time!

Behold, the croque monsieur.

Perhaps some middle ground can be found between pie and sandwich.

The rueben sandwich

That’s not a sandwich. That’s, like, a tea cake you serve to your froo-froo friends. It’s even got a froo-froo French name! The Kevin Butler - aka “the Meat Diamond” - now that’s a sandwich.

You might not be able to handle this much awesome

“The KFC Double Down is to Barry Bonds in 1987 as the Kevin Butler is to Barry Bonds in 2005.”

Zylon, you should know that pics like that are NWS. Or family safe, either. Won’t you think of the children?

I will meet you in the middle.
See you.
Drop my pants.
And raise you, like a middle finger embroidered flag,

Ok, where do I go to get one of those.

I am not trying to be a sizist, unbongwah, but your sandwich may or may not contain an old shoe. You can order me not to be a bigot or call me old fashioned, or you could call me a bigot and order me an old fashioned, either way, I think that the traditional definition of sandwich is two slices of bread, and can fit in your mouth without unhinging your jaw like a snake or using “gustatory aids,” like a fork or another person.

Whatever you do with your mouth is your business, but you are attacking the art of sandwich making when you expand the definition beyond what the Earl of Sandwich intended.

damn sandwich elitist

And yet you uncritically (unknowingly? What epistemological baggage freights your mealtime preferences?) privilege the croque monsieur [emphasis mine].

Behold, the croque monsieur.

On the distaff, the croque madame:

I 'll take the madame.

I just don’t see how these aren’t all BLTs, except in scale and time.


What is a Monte Cristo sandwich?