When a religious organization such as Birthright helps a pregnant woman, what good is it if they won't support the baby until it's grown?

I understand what you’re saying and agree that it seems like a woman is left to her own devices in raising a child.

However, I don’t know how much more an organization could do than to help provide necessary items and emotional support through counseling. If organizations like Birthright did much more, I would think it would border on raising the child through an entity. It sounds that they would point mothers in the direction of other services that could help them as well.

I don’t like the idea of children “in the system” without a consistent home and guidance from trusted adults. Children born to drug addicts are often abandoned and foster parents don’t want them. What can an entity do to help those kids? Parents with mental illness can sometimes be abusive to their children, true- but what could an organization do other than to seek involvement with CPS?

It’s a sad fact, but I don’t think they are capable of helping beyond what they already do.

@Taciturnu That’s hardly fair. I was going to go ranting on the religious groups and you answer logically and, probably the real answer. There’s a limit on resources.

@Adirondackwannabe Aw, sorry to take all the fun out of it. Next time I’ll blame it on Al Roker. :)

Our systems for dealing with this suck. What can we do differently?

I was thinking more along the lines of if she wants an abortion, let her have one, instead of it becoming the organazations’ problem for 9 months and the rest of society’s for who-knows-how-long. I know these religious organizations are against abortion, but if there were no abortion, think of all the millions more babies that would be born to families with no means of support.

@jca I know what you mean. It’s a lousy choice. Maybe more Planned Parenthood? I’m just saying that out of sarcastic anger.

There are limited resources. Having worked as an escort at an abortion clinic, and seen the people on both side of the line, I have to wonder why, if people are so fanatical about this issue, they don’t offer to take women into their homes, or at the very least vote for a higher minimum wage or better subsidized child care.

Many of the women who have abortions at the clinics have spouses or significant others, have other children, work full time at minimum wage jobs, and have a failed birth control method, don’t have access to Planned Parenthood or don’t have health insurance and cannot afford birth control pills. It is not a happy or first choice for these women.

My daughter’s friends who have chosen to have children and kept them have really struggled. From friends who have children who had unplanned pregnancies and coworkers with children from unplanned pregnancies, it took 10 years of living at home with their parents in order to keep their lives on track and raise their child. In all but a few cases, the fathers, despite their best intentions, moved on from the relationships, and what they can contribute financially from a low wage job barely makes a dent in the expense of raising a child. For many, an unplanned pregnancy becomes a family issue, and not an individual issue.

If people really want to be pro-life, vote for what makes life easier for low income people. I read yesterday that the 400 wealthiest people in the US have more wealth than all of the lowest 50% of US citizens combined. For the rest of us, the journey down is more likely than the journey up. Corroboration of Michael Moore’s assertion

Yeah, it’s always boggled my mind how the people most fervent against abortion aren’t the foster care parents, adoptive parents, group home monitors, social workers, etc.

It is the obsession with the unborn over the born.

I agree with @Taciturnu in understanding your feelings, but to condemn people for helping without adopting the needy person for life would be to condemn almost all charitable work. Occasionally when I see someone who is homeless and obviously hungry, I take them into a restaurant or lunch counter and buy them a good meal. If I knew doing that meant I had to feed each one for the rest of his life, I would never take that one little step to help, because I am in no position to provide for them for a lifetime. At times I have a difficult enough task just feeding my own family.

@ETpro and @Taciturnu- there is a clear difference here in that not encouraging the birth of the child would, perhaps, result in the organisation not being in the position described by @jca.

I think the point of the question is about who is responsible for a child. For example, one could suggest that a 17 year old girl who is addicted to heroin might not make the best parent – indeed, she might be the worst parent imaginable. If such organisations, as detailed in the question, encourage her to keep the child she has conceived, and she does so, why do they have a lesser responsibility for the child than a parent? Without their input into the process, such a child might not exist.

Without their continuing involvement, such a child is likely to have, frankly, a shitty life that no sane person would wish on anyone else.

@the100thmonkey Your point is well taken. The anti-abortion types do take advantage of a young girl’s emotional confusion to push her to carry the baby to term, and they do generally end their concern once the baby is delivered alive. I do see the problem with that.

@jca @the100thmonkey I understand what you’re saying and I myself am pro-choice (though not for myself).

I don’t think Bush’s policy of only funding abstinence only education was a good one. Parents (as a whole) are still not comfortable talking about sex with their kids… So we can’t rely on them to teach their children about preventative measures in regards to pregnancy. I think this is where the problem starts.

HOWEVER, to say we don’t want to be financially responsible for a child is to put a price on human life. I don’t believe there is one. However “awful” someone’s life may be (and I’ve known of quite a few horror stories of people who were products of the system), I see the point of pro-life groups that an unborn child’s life could be great and we really don’t know until it happens.

On the other hand, there are people who habitually have abortions instead of using protection. I think that’s pretty abhorrent, too.