think before you judge (or as i like to call it, you can't predict the future)

In case it's not clear enough: 
QUESTION 1: If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already, three who were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded and she had syphilis, would you recommend that she had an abortion? If you said YES, you just killed Beethoven.


I will only be looking at Qn1.

I saw this being circulated on tumblr, and to my surprise there weren't any sarcastic or angry comments below. How can this be? This is a joke. (I'm not talking about the damnlol watermark at the bottom.)

"You just killed Beethoven." Oops, sorry. You're sure that every single ninth child of a woman who has syphilis and three deaf kids, two blind kids, one mentally retarded kid is going to turn out like Beethoven? I know it's not meant literally. Beethoven doesn't spring out of every womb that's given birth to eight kids prior to him, the majority of which turned out to be handicapped in some way.

(Fact check: she didn't have eight kids, she had seven. Beethoven was the second. Four of the seven children died before the age of two.)

I hope people understand that Beethoven, for the lack of a better word, was an accident. Not every child born and raised like him turns out to actually have his talent. There might be children living in the streets who might have been able to achieve his level of fame - however, they lived in the streets and died, instead of living long enough, or having a dad who pushed them hard enough.

(Fact check: this is often used as a pro-life argument. Also Beethoven's dad wasn't confirmed to have forced him to practice until he cried.)

For your information, a woman who's had eight kids - three dead, two blind, one mentally retarded - would be very likely to be tired of giving birth to kids who are in some way different. (I say 'different' because it's a lot less likely to make people angry - people who have kids who are deaf, blind, etc) She is also very likely to give birth to other kids who are handicapped. Wait a second and think.

Supposing that her children aren't born nine years apart (like my brother and I, which means that I practically act as a mother to him since my parents are somewhat busy), she would then have to take care of eight (or nine) rowdy children. Who all  need extra help. That mother (and perhaps father too) is going to be very busy. Very tired. Very snappish and unpleasant to be around (usually).

Add some financial problems. Not every family is rich enough to afford eight (or nine) children. My parents complained (good-naturedly) about feeding me and paying for university for nine years. Then they complained (good-naturedly) about feeding two kids and paying for university twice. Also there are loans on the house and car.

Those eight (or nine) kids are going to be very deprived. Very unhappy or jealous of the other kids who have better clothes because their parents only had to pay for one set instead of eight (or nine). And let's not factor in any possible abuse that might occur because of the stress and resentment. And let's not factor in the possible bullying which might occur as a result of the eight (or nine) children's perceived lower social status.

(Fact check: assuming you are a middle-class family, you might have trouble providing fully for one kid, let alone eight - observed from everywhere around me.)

Now, let's move on to the actual abortion part. Recommend is a good word. It is a very good word. Recommend, to advise or counsel. Recommending things is what a doctor does, because he has a degree and the patient most likely doesn't. A doctor advises his patient in order to prevent said patient from dying a preventable, premature death (exaggeration on my part, mostly it's ill health, and sometimes the illness is incurable).

Now, recommending is not the same as forcing them to do the 'recommended' action (via blackmail, physical violence, etc). That is not a good course of action to take. That may land you in jail.

However, recommend means that you can either follow the recommended course of action, and avoid ill health (in most cases), or ignore it and run straight into ill health (in most cases). Ultimately, a doctor can't make someone have an operation. The doctor recommends an operation, and the patient says, hm, yes, that sounds okay, I think I'll have the operation.

It is the patient's choice.

Long story short, by recommending an abortion to someone who will most likely face stress and disappointment by not having an abortion, you are doing nothing but laying that option in front of the patient. You are not moving your patient's hand to force them to sign their unwilling agreement to the abortion. You are telling them, yes, an abortion would likely save you from dooming an innocent baby to syphilis.

(Fact check: The (syphilis) rates are significantly higher in communities with high levels of poverty, low levels of education, and inadequate access to health care. The likelihood that the aforementioned woman will have trouble providing for eight or nine children has just gone up.)

Let's look at it again. If the woman gives birth to the ninth child, the child might possibly be deaf, or blind, or mentally retarded, or any combination of the three, or other yet-unknown condition(s). She will likely face stress. Her children will likely be be bullied. Et cetera.

If the woman does not give birth to the ninth child, there might be one less person suffering from deafness/blindness/mental retardation/bullying. I say might, because it's not a given that the ninth child will be handicapped. But it's very likely.

If pressing the red button means a 80% chance of having boiling water poured over your baby, and pressing the blue button means a 0% chance of having boiling water poured over a baby (because there wouldn't be a baby), you'd press the blue one.

That boiling water is deafness/blindness/mental retardation/syphilis etc.

(Fact check: Syphilis can be transmitted to your baby through the placenta during pregnancy or by contact with a sore during birth.)

To put it extremely bluntly: would you rather have a ninth, (possibly) handicapped baby, after eight previous babies, or to have eight babies?

It isn't even about Beethoven any more. That woman isn't even his mother, the pro-lifer who made it clearly didn't get his/her facts right. This is about an unfortunate woman and her pregnancy.

But ultimately it isn't even about her pregnancy or syphilis or possible handicaps. All right, I admit, this post is needlessly long and convoluted. But it did help to set a scenario in which an abortion is clearly the best option.

The point is, it's the woman's choice. Who cares if a million people recommend abortion to her? Hell, it's her baby, she can give birth to it if she wants. Who cares if a million people condemn her for choosing to abort the baby? Hell, it's her baby, she can abort it if she wants.

That's not Beethoven, that's her baby. That's not an established composer, that's a new baby who might be burdened with things that he/she might not want to be burdened with if the woman gave birth. Wake up call: it's her baby, not yours.

Everything about the picture, everything that it implies, is condemnable. They're trying to say that a woman who will likely give birth to a deaf/blind/mentally retarded child with syphilis should still give birth.

That's not pro-life, that's idiocy. Do they think about the child's future? What if he gets depressed and kills himself? What if his mother gets depressed and kills herself? Who are you to say that she should give birth anyway because there's a nearly non-existent chance that the baby might be as talented as Beethoven? Who are you to guilt-trip people into giving birth?

Pro-life? Opposition to the legalisation of abortion? That's not pro-life, that's anti-choice. What are the chances that the woman gives away all eight (or nine) babies to an orphanage because she can't deal with it any more?

That baby doesn't even know that it's a baby. It's not sentient. It's the same as unplugging life support. So what if some people think the baby has a soul? The baby doesn't know it has a soul. The mother might not believe that the baby has a soul.

Pro-lifers are incomprehensible to me. The philosophy behind it is noble, but it's not very practical. Sure, save human life. Good, saving human lives is good. Practical? Often, no. Let's take the scenario where the woman dumps eight children at an orphanage. More orphans - good or bad? Bad. More people alive - good or bad? Good.

It contradicts. (Seriously, why not leave the choice available, ugh, it's like you're determined to seal off every other route until there's only one way left.)

And if anyone talks about God having a plan for each one of us, seriously, I will punch you. Those are the words of someone who is so entrenched in religion that he can't see into real life any more.