Friday, February 3, 2012

It seems like many people (quite understandably) bring up birth control when abortion is discussed. Pro-life people say "you should have used birth control," pro-choice people say "pro-lifers should make birth control more available."

But no birth control substance or device is 100% effective.

So what now? The man and woman were being "responsible," yet there is still an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy.

Legally, what would people think should happen? MORALLY, what do people think?

Yes, there is a legal principle that no one - even a doctor who botched a vascectomy - is liable for damages if a live, healthy baby is born. But we could change that. Should Trojans set up a scholarship fund? Hey, McDonald's is being sued, so anything's possible.

Have fun with this one - I'm not sure I'd know how to answer myself, off the top of my head!|||hell no daddy better get your check book out babys aint cheap and they are your fault and responsibility only|||only if it can be proven that the error rate they reported was incorrect|||well they're not 100% effective and people know it, so I don't think there's any reason to sue them, unless it turned out that they were effective a lower percentage of the time than published, or if there was a faulty batch.

Morally, I think that for people who used birth control and ended up pregnant anyway, there should be an exception to any restrictions our society may eventually pass on abortion. I can't seem to see abortion in black and white, so for me this is one of the times it is appropriate to have an abortion. I think people have the right to have sex and to plan to have or not have a family.


About McDonald's lawsuits, it's another matter entirely... I think it's pretty much widely accepted that you have a one in a million chance of getting pregnant using birth control, but the fact is that until recently it was not commonly understood what trans-fats are and what they do to a human body. It IS a very serious health risk, and their use should be regulated or at least the people should be educated. I mean if everyone knows McDonald's is "fattening" but they don't really understand the science, they'll think it's OK as long as they get a little exercise or whatever, like the kinds of foods the human race has been eating for thousands of years, meat, milk, honey, things with sugar and fat, can be a problem but one that's easily compensated by exercise. Trans-fats and saturated fats are modern miracles which unfortunately will kill many people, and for this McDonald's has some level of responsibility, be it for using these products without making sure they are safe, or be it for using these products knowing they're not safe.|||How does McDonald's being sued have anything to do with birth control? Were they not handing out condoms with the happy meals?|||Sue your parents... if your dad would have shot you on the wall instead of in your mom, you wouldn't have been in a position to get someone pregnant.|||I think all pills, condoms, vasectomies, and Happy Meals now come with disclaimers that say stuff like "nothing put keeping your junk in your pants is 100% effecitve." So no I don't think any one should get sued for for antone else getting fatter.|||No, they aren't legally responsible. Each birth control method lists it's effectiveness. If you get pregnant, you're unfortunately a part of the 1% of the unlucky ones (when talking pills, anyway.) And the largest number of pregnancies with birth control happen due to human failure. The condom was too old, he wasn't hard enough when he put it on, she forgot her pill three days in a row, etc.|||Good question. I think it would be hard to make Trojan liable in the past, but now with the suits to McDonalds...|||No, because the manufacturers and independent tests have shown there is a small failure rate in all birth control products. It's up to the individual to take responsibility.

If kids were taught about birth control options in school, and were given birth control when they ask for it for free, there would be fewer unwanted pregnancies, and therefore fewer terminations. No-one WANTS people to have terminations, but most of us do want a woman to have control over her own body, and that includes having the choice to terminate.|||In my opinion, no the manufacturer is not responsible. As you said, no birth control is 100% effective and they make that very clear on the packaging and inserts. People are so sue-happy. I guess they were never taught to take responsibility for their own stupidity.|||Most of the time when birth control fails it is because of user error. If you fail to put the condom on before penetration or if the birth control pill users skips a day or doesn't take the pills at the same time each day, then I'd say no the manufacturer is not responsible. Morally I think that if you are told that the birth control method you are using is 80% effective or 99% effective then you know that there is a risk of pregnancy so if you absolutely do not want a baby, then you should not have sex. If you do you are taking the risk of becoming pregnant. We know that abstinence is the only 100% effective method of birth control, so if we choose one of the other methods it is our responsibility, not the manufacturers. I do think that if the doctor botches a vasectomy, then he should be liable for your medical expenses relating to the pregnancy.|||I can tell you for a a fact that people in the UK have been able to sue their doctors successfully when a failed birth control operation has resulted in the birth of a healthy baby. They have been awarded vast sums of money for the bringing up of that baby, something which I find it hard to reconcile myself to. What would be the effect on that child later on to discover that he or she was so unwelcome that the parents took the matter to court and were paid compensation for his or her existence? I dread to think. Meanwhile other people grieve because they can't have children. What a world we live in! http://www.parliament.the-stationery-off鈥?/a>|||You are wrong there is 1 form of birth control that is 100% effective it is called absentness. Now for a reality check that birth control is about 90% + effective that still doesn鈥檛 account for 2 million abortions per year.
Nice excuse but a failure of a drug means a death sentence for someone is still wrong.
I am in favor of sex education and giving the kids all the facts. That does include teaching them what likely will happen to them if they do get pregnant. As far as dropping out of school and making lower wages etc.
Give them real an effective rate of condemns, of birth control pills, and of absentness programs.
Introduce them to fetal devolvement show what a fetus looks like during each stage of pregnancy. So them the parts of the fetus after an abortion there is no need to hide all the facts and reality of what they are doing.
Maybe teach them personal responsibility and accountability would also be good.
Instead of them thinking they don鈥檛 have to face the consequences of their action.|||Fair question.

Generally product liability would make them liable for any damages their defective product causes.

If birth control is suppose to prevent birth and birth happens then they would be liable for damages.

However, since birth control is pretty common and has been around for many years, I am sure they have figured out a way to be pretty much judgment proof by now.

Besides there is not liability for every "defective product" usually just products that are defective beyond what is expected. Like if you buy a soda and it taste gross, you are just out of luck. But if you buy a soda and it taste gross because there is a mouse head in it you have a case (a real case). With birth control the fact that they all say on their packaging that they are only 99% or 89% or what ever on the side are there to protect them from litigation. I don't think any birth control says "This is a 100% sure fire way not to get pregnant."

Does this mean there is a no case to be made. No a case could be made, but it would be pretty hard to prove.|||really depends on its effectiveness. always read the fine print, it may say 99.9% accurate and then have an asterisk with the saying that results are different for everybody. because in that case i would say no

火车采集器

No comments:

Post a Comment