Comments about ‘Jay Evensen: Why some mothers kill babies: searching for elusive answers’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, April 16 2014 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Tyler D
Meridian, ID

When I saw the article headline, I thought for sure this was going to be another article equating abortion (no matter how early in the pregnancy) with “killing babies.”

Glad DN can (sometimes) make factual distinctions…

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Good point Tyler D... is there a huge difference between this and a serial aborter? Does the fact that 6 of these babies took a breath make all the difference?

In both cases I doubt the babies knew what was going on. Does that make both OK?

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

@2 bits – “In both cases I doubt the babies knew what was going on. Does that make both OK?”

Not at all…

I have argued many times on this forum that abortion after a certain stage of development becomes appalling. I believe the abortion on demand until birth view is morally untenable.

However, I also find the view that abortion any time after conception is murder, not tenable either. In no sense is a 3 day old blastocyst comprised of approximately 150 cells and invisible to the naked eye, a “baby.” To claim this equivalent to saying blueprints are a house.

We would be better off if the Left & Right would agree to allow abortion (i.e., a choice left to mother & doctor) up to a certain point – arguably, let’s say around 12 weeks - and make it illegal (unless medically necessary) after that.

And making birth control universally available would reduce abortions as well… never understood why the Right (e.g., Hobby Lobby) doesn’t fully support this.

But we don’t want to compromise because we love our political causes and our addiction to righteous indignation.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

‘Jay Evensen: Why some mothers kill babies: searching for elusive answers’

=========

Answer : Desperation

10CC
Bountiful, UT

This happens sometimes in the animal kingdom, as well.

In these biological bodies we have, we're finding we're more like our cousins in the animal kingdom, more than we'd like to believe.

Very sobering.

Howard Beal
Provo, UT

Obviously this woman is highly emotionally and mentally disturbed. However, I think there were some points where she had to have lucid moments. A self-discovery of containers with dead babies. At some point she has to be accountable for her choices to become pregnant and of course the grisly aftermath. At some point she could turn herself in or in other words do the right thing.

There is also a sobering reality that we as neighbors and family members need to be more aware of what is going on. I don't know what is more scary. That no one noticed she was pregnant (her daughters, whoever she slept with, her neighbors, her other family members) or that some of these people actually did know something and did nothing. Neither of those options give me or others solace.

10CC might have a point to some degree though it is scary to admit.

Tyler D: Best post ever on the subject of abortion, a must read for all our politicians.

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY

There are likely no answers here beyond a severe mental illness of some sort. I don't think we will ever "understand" her. And I really don't think we should be able to.

Mainly Me
Werribee, 00

Some mothers kill their babies before they are born, some after. What's the difference?

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

@Mainly Me
Werribee, 00

Some mothers kill their babies before they are born, some after. What's the difference?
11:23 p.m. April 16, 2014

=======

The "difference" is;

One is a baby, the other is not.
One is murder, the other is not.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Tyler D,
I guess the part I don't understand is... what's the big difference between 12 weeks, and say 20 weeks? It's the same fetus... just a few weeks older... why is it different?

===

On the subject of political ideological purity... Remember last year when the Texas Legislature had a bill to limit abortion to 20 weeks?... and the Left and women's groups totally flip out? Remember the Legislator who threw the big filibuster that made her a national hero to Liberals? After that they wanted her to run for Governor or President! Just because of her stand against limiting abortion at ANY time...

===

Remember when Republicans tried to ban "partial birth abortion" (1995-97)? That's when the baby is near full term and they sever the spinal cord once the head has been delivered. Democrats fought hard to keep it LEGAL because ANY limit was unacceptable (their ideology). I'm pretty sure that exceeds your 12-week limit, and almost falls into the same category as what this woman did, and they wanted it LEGAL!

===

I agree with the Utah Republican Party platform on this (not Democrats).

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

@2 bits – “I guess the part I don't understand is... what's the big difference between 12 weeks, and say 20 weeks? It's the same fetus... just a few weeks older... why is it different?”

Obviously if I have moral qualms about abortions past 12 weeks, those qualms are even more intense at 20 weeks.

Also, (based on your entire comment) what makes you think I am a liberal or party line Democrat? Clearly, unless you think I’m not being truthful, I part ways with many liberals on the issue of abortion, but I understand their position from a “political tactics” point of view.

Rather than undertaking the sort of compromise I outlined in first comment, many on the Right want a ban on all abortions any time after conception. Liberals understand this and see this entire issue as a war of attrition, and thus are unwilling to concede any battle, not matter how repugnant.

Our politics have become so corrosive, driven both by our media and (again) our addiction to self-righteous indignation.

Howard Beal – thanks, sad though today that compromise sounds profound… it should be commonplace.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Tyler D,
Sorry for thinking you were a Democrat. I agree that's not a fair assumption and I don't like when people assume I'm a Republican.

I still don't understand what changes at 12 weeks. What makes it OK before that... but not after??

===

You said, "many on the Right want a ban on all abortions any time after conception"...

You may be amazed to learn that we are not as extreme as you think. This is verbatim from Utah Republican party platform...

RIGHT TO LIFE
We believe in the right to life for both the born and unborn. We strongly oppose abortion, except
to preserve the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest. We believe the unborn child has a
fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed. We believe all human life is sacred regardless
of age or infirmity, and therefore we oppose abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and the public
funding of any of these abhorrent practices.

See... there's rational exceptions in there. Not as extreme as you thought I'll bet.

Some say the National platform is absolutely no abortions for ANY reason whatsoever... Never seen that...

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

@2 bits – “Sorry for thinking you were a Democrat.”

No problem… it’s a peeve of mine because some on this forum see the world in purely black & white terms – either you’re a Tea Party-type or your Che Guevara.

12 weeks was a somewhat arbitrary number, because… well, we have to draw the line somewhere. If we can agree that aborting a 3rd trimester fetus is wrong in a way that aborting a 3 day old blastocyst is not, then we have a place to start and can work in from there until a reasonable compromise is reached – something many countries around the world have done.

I applaud this platform for making the exceptions they do, however, it affirms a “right to life for the unborn” making none of the developmental distinctions I did above – so I assume that right begins at conception.

This could easily segue in to the type of personhood amendment Mississippi tried to pass thereby effectively banning all abortions.

I think as long as this remains the Republican platform, the Left will continue to fight every battle and we won’t reach a compromise.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Tyler D,
Would it be a POLITICAL compromise? Or a biological compromise?

Biologically... nothing changes around 12 weeks. It's the same fetus, just older or younger.

Religiously... nothing changes at 12 weeks, or 14 weeks. It's the same, just older.

Politically... I don't know what changes at 12 weeks... or ANY arbitrary age.

===

Some seem to be able to rationalize it at some ages, but not others. I don't get that. It requires morality... but a kind of date-dependent morality (just pick a date and it's good before that date, but banned after that date). Makes no logical sense to me.

Logically if it's good up till 12 weeks... it's good till full term. Unless something biological switches on at some date. But I don't think doctors have found an on/off event where it's alive after that, but not before. If there is one... it happens pretty early.

So if it's OK up till 12 or 20 weeks... logic would say it's probably still OK right up till the end.

IMO contraception is the answer. But abortion is not contraception. It's too late for contraception at that point.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

@2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

You may be amazed to learn that we are not as extreme as you think. This is verbatim from Utah Republican party platform...

RIGHT TO LIFE
We believe in the right to life for both the born and unborn. We strongly oppose abortion, except
to preserve the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest. We believe the unborn child has a
fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed. We believe all human life is sacred regardless
of age or infirmity, and therefore we oppose abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and the public
funding of any of these abhorrent practices.

See... there's rational exceptions in there. Not as extreme as you thought I'll bet.

Some say the National platform is absolutely no abortions for ANY reason whatsoever... Never seen that...

12:18 p.m. April 17, 2014

========

Except--
The LDS Church's postition also takes into account the HEALTH of the woman,
and
the viability of the Fetus.

Republicans approved platform language on Tuesday [aug. 12, 2013] calling for a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion with no explicit exceptions for cases of rape or incest.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments