Hooligans Plays Baccarat

Not an easy question.

  • Start date •
  • Replies
    110 Replies •
  • Views 5,982 Views
Follow
wal66

wal66

Well-Known Member
Since
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
11,716
Score
2
Tokens
0
We all have various opinions about drugs and drug use. Some feel it should be an individual right, some feel some drugs are ok while others are crossing a line while still others are anti-drugs all-together. Regardless of your personal choice about individual circumstances, Im curious what some of you feel about a specific scenario.

A female heroin (it could be crack, meth or any number of other drugs) addict is pregnant.

Example 1: She has the baby while continuing to use and the baby is born damaged.
Example 2: She is forced into treatment but the strain of detox causes a miscarriage.


In either of the two given examples several moral, ethical and legal issues can arise.

In Example 1 if either authorities or even society stands by and allows this to happen arent they just as guilty of neglect as the woman is of child endangerment? Even if a legal definition of child endangerment excludes a fetus (I dont have a legal precedence so maybe Boner knows)? Should the woman be criminally charged, if so then to what degree?

In Example 2 the state steps in and forces the woman into detox. Could they or should they be allowed to do so without any an actual criminal act? Certainly it is ethically wrong for an addict to subject an unborn child to the potential harms of her addictions but is it illegal? So if the state was to take measures and those measures resulted in a miscarriage even though the intentions were to try and save the unborn child should they be liable?

Maybe some might think sterilization is the answer but what if that person was to get clean and stay clean later? Did she forfeit her right to be a mother during the time she was using and therefore be held accountable for the rest of her life?
 
I’ve always considered myself pro-choice but in analyzing this situation I found myself thinking of the fetus as a complete life form which doesn’t change my mind on abortion but does make me have to admit a double standard type of thinking.
 
I have known women that use drugs, are addicts, and have either A. had healthy babies, or B. do some sort of rehab and either lose the baby, or have a healthy baby.

What a doctor would not do, is tell her to quit cold turkey, well they would, but then they would go off the record to say not to because that would put her, and the baby both in shock. they may recomend using less, or even putting them onto cuboxin which from what I am told can have minimal negative effect on the fetus.
 
A female heroin (it could be crack, meth or any number of other drugs) addict is pregnant.

replace bolded with alcohol, nicotine, and all other legal drugs that kill 4Xs as many people every yr then all of illicit drugs combined....
and what would you stand????


"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me."
 
My friend had this neighbor that already had like three or four kids she hardly care for, was prego with another, and apparently quite the alcoholic, drinking at least half a bottle of Vodka a day.

disgusts me.
 
Mmike, I don't disagree. I used hardline drugs but certainly cigarettes and alcohol could easily cause similar problems. I also used the mother in the example but I guess it could be argued that the father is an addict would have equal culpability although detox wouldn't be an issue on the fetus.
 
I'm not against people using drugs as long as they only harm themselves if there is any harm from using them and don't hurt others. Same with alcohol, nicotine, prescription drugs etc. Like if someone wants to get stoned at their house and pass out there afterwards it shouldn't be illegal. But if someone wants to shoot heroin and then wants to operate a crane I have a problem with it.
 
I personally, feel that a father, when it comes to smoking/drinking should at the least cut back, and maybe not do it around the mother,
mainly, because if that is something the mother did previous to pregnancy, then it would be frustrating for her and tempting, I guess the father should
do this as more of a supportive and encourage thing, not so much out of obligation, though one could argue that the woman didn't get knocked up alone, so why should the father get to continue having all the "fun" while she does not.
 
senco78
A female heroin (it could be crack, meth or any number of other drugs) addict is pregnant.

replace bolded with alcohol, nicotine, and all other legal drugs that kill 4Xs as many people every yr then all of illicit drugs combined....
and what would you stand????


"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me."
Click to expand...
Ty...Wal ur definition of drugs (ie hard or soft??) is very loose here...
 
or even easier, give them 1 chance to get help and stop...if in 3 months when the mother comes in for a check up, if they have anything in their system, terminate the kid right then and there...no sense in fucking with it...we are overpopulated and broke as fuck already... last thing we need is for more crackhead/fucked up kids coming into the world that the govt (uh, me) ends up having to help pay for... and dont even get me started on these mother fuckers who are on drugs and fucked up and keep getting pregnant so their govt checks will get bigger...
 
RayRay, I considered something to that end but then I thought deeper about it. Terminating the baby does nothing to punish the responsible party. The child, while potentially damaged and requiring assistance both medical and financial for some or even all of it's life is still a victim. Can we actually eradicate on a government level a child?

I thought I would be in agreement with sterilization of users but that isn't the right answer either cause what happens if later in life that person is clean and then decides to have a child?

There are no easy answers.

I do respect the fact though that you can make your mind up and go with works for you. Right or wrong you make a stand and that admirable.
 
wal, ya know, when she first goes in, put her in a treatment to where the doc will be able to see a diff. in her in 3 months is what i mean...cold turkey wont work and can be harmful to them both.... if the woman still has the kid at the 3 month stage, then she wants it, so i dont know what you mean by terminating it does nothing to punish her... if she didnt want it, there are plenty of places to go and get rid of it...

personally, i dont agree with all this "fetus" stuff... that fucker aint a kid till his head is coming out, imo... so im a fan of the woman choosing to do whatever she likes up to the point where it becomes dangerous to her...might sound like im insensitive, but im just a realist...if a woman has a substance problem, i say you help her, if she rejects it, you terminate the kid...simple as that. no need to have more struggling kids come into the world... now, if its a wealthy broad and they dont need any type of govt. asst. or anything, let her do what she wants...its when the govt. dime comes in to play that the govt. should step in
 
You must log in or register to reply here.