If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I see. I think this is where the confusion has come from.
The massage your talking about is a medical massage, carried out by usually a nurse, where as the ones we offer (inc our prenatal) is a relaxation or swiss massage, very very very different.
Our prenatal massage just focuses on different parts and is done in different positions. the massage through that article (reading the whole article) is different to what we offer. it is the same sort of massage offered by midwifes etc.
the mother didnt ask to be created either. Whats your point? None of uis did
a friend of mine was pregnant, and had a massage, which caused her to go into early labor. her kid is deaf and partially sighted, and i think she's got brain problems too.
yeah, she actually went into labor during the massage, i think it was something like 2 or 3 months early.
My point is that smoking is harmful, thats an indisputable fact.
As a concious being everyone has the choice wether to smoke or not thats fine i don't have a problem with that, however the baby has no choice in the matter so it seems a little unfair to force the effects on to them.
Please dont think im preaching i really am not its just my opinion
This.
Xx
No, it doesn't say that at all. It says most establishments don't allow them to be offered because they feel people may sue based on a perceived casual link between a massage and miscarriage.
any activity that invigorates the body is likely to precipitate a miscarriage that would have occurred anyway - hence the perceived causal link - but a simple study on the figures of miscarriage and carrying to term would identify wether it was a genuine risk factor.
So the mother should have an abortion before smoking?
bollocks. yeah, you can have children, and I wont have any... aren't you fucking special.
The mother "ideally" should not smoke there is no way you or anyone else can say differntly it is just ridiculos to say otherwise, i understand that it may be hard or even impossible for some to stop smoking, but the point here is does it harm the baby and the answer is 100% yes, smoking is harmful to everyone smokers and non smokers alike thats a fact its as simple as that!
Xx
I'm not disputing the ideal situation - which is that the mother will never have smoked, will be of ideal weight, and be of good health and between 16 and 25 and not have any serious hereditary conditions.
What I dispute is your assertion that the unborn child should have more say in the matter than the mother.
I don;t think any mother should carry a child she doesn't want.
But why should your friend, who appears to have difficulty carrying a child, have any impact on how someone else chooses to carry theirs? By that reasoning, me and my partner who have failed to conceive over many years have an even greater say.
If you concieve, that's something you have to deal with. Whether it was by accident, or on purpose, that child has a right to life.
Really, some people want kids but can't have them, and this gives them the right to tell those than can how they should be doing it.
I wanted kids. I can't have them. I think being a mother is a wonderful and special thing. I'm lucky to have 8 and a half nephews/nieces, but I still say the mother comes before the baby.
But your also saying the child has no rights at all. he/she doesn't have a choice if he/she is harmed because the mothers addictive habbit.
If a father was an alchoholic and hit a kid and caused serious brain damage, he'd be responsable? no? whats the difference?
Surely, whether it is wanted or not, the pregnant women has a obligation to care for the child, it is after all her responsability.
Absolutely. Otherwise you'll be saying women can't have abortions.
some people cant have children so to them its some amazing privelege.
Some people conceive when they really dont want to, so for them its a burden.
Whos to say who is right?
Maybe having children is just one of those things?
Its best for sure if a pregnant woman does what she can to ensure the foetus is kept as healthy as she can, but its not wrong if the mother wants a little massage occasionally for all her hard work, or really really craves a bit of soft cheese or her steak medium rare one time or the odd glass of wine. Its not a crime.
I agree with this part, just because others can't have children doesn't mean it should influence yourself, however as I said in my previous posts, health does.
The mother should come before the baby, in health, yes if it is something which harms the mother yes, but something as selfish as smoking because you "enjoy" it... what aload of bullshit and selfish attitude.
If i sat every night and injected poison directly into my blood stream that would be my choice you might think i was mad you might not, but if you were helpless and in my care and every night i injected you against your will you would feel pretty pissed off im sure and if after a few months of this you became ill who's fualt would that be yours or mine, not yours thats for sure as you were helpless and reliant on me for everthing. All the choices for both of us were in my hands thats a responsibility to taken seriously.
Ahhh that depends on when you term when it's alive or not, abortions are carried out before it is classed by law as alive (which IIRC is 23wks) someone smoking and causes harm to it when it is alive, and long term damage when it is born, makes its life harder is different than an abortion.
You can have abortions right up to term if there is something wrong with the baby anyway
I'd want to know why you did it, and yes it is a serious responsiblity.
So... how about if parents chose not to allow MMR - and the child gets measels and ends up brain damaged. Should they be locked away for child abuse?
People make decisions about risk, and it's a mothers right to make those decisions abot the child she carries - I certainly support every effort to make the mother aware of the consequences of her decisions - but not lecturing her into submission.
What I don't support is people claiming "smoking harms the baby' - it doesn't. It causes a reduction in the flexibility of red blood cells, and diminishes the capacity of oxygen exchange through the placenta - which can have consequences in a marginal pregnancy.
While I'd definitely agree with that from an ethical point of view, I cannot get into the mindset of someone (assuming that the pregnancy is wanted/planned) who would not do everything they could to protect their child, especially when it comes to things with a definite, provable risk.
It's not the fact that it's a baby and therefore is worth more as a human being and deserves extra protection, it's the fact that it's your baby, your son or daughter, and why wouldn't you want to give them extra protection?
:banghead: