Caskets for Miscarriages

krystineM wrote:

...if its a miscarriage it therefore has died.
therefore not a human any longer.

A human dies it becomes non-human? What do we become then? Does that happen right after death or does it take a while.

I am asking because I have never heard anyone say that. Thats a very foreign idea to me.

krystineM wrote:

...if its a miscarriage it therefore has died.
therefore not a human any longer.

and i agree Rebel Cat.
i would grieve in a different way, and mourn the loss differently than with a funeral.

But don't you think a woman has the CHOICE to mourn in any safe way she wants? If the remains were properly placed in these caskets in sanitary ways, then what's the problem? Just because you disagree with it doesn't give you the right to tell these women they can't do it. Isn't that the pro-choice policy?

Quote :

I don't think they believe it can breathe, but it is certainly living and it is 100% a human being until it dies.

Ask Eiri, she had stated the above quote.^
I was just stating that if she thinks we are not human after we die, a miscarriage would not be human either.

And Eiri, i never told other women NOT to give a burial for a miscarriage.
I had said it sounds/seems odd for someone to bury a miscarried child, because there is nothing you can do about the situation.
Just grieve, move on, and try again and hope for the best.
But i never said they should not do it.

I said i would grieve a loss of a child through miscarriage differently than through a funeral.

And, on the note of telling people what to do, Eiri..

After reading through some of you responses on the Abortion Debate section, what gives YOU the right to tell a woman when it is right for them to get an abortion?

krystineM wrote:

Quote :

I don't think they believe it can breathe, but it is certainly living and it is 100% a human being until it dies.

Ask Eiri, she had stated the above quote.^
I was just stating that if she thinks we are not human after we die, a miscarriage would not be human either.

And Eiri, i never told other women NOT to give a burial for a miscarriage.
I had said it sounds/seems odd for someone to bury a miscarried child, because there is nothing you can do about the situation.
Just grieve, move on, and try again and hope for the best.
But i never said they should not do it.

I said i would grieve a loss of a child through miscarriage differently than through a funeral.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply it's not human after death lol. That was just an error of syntax. Of course it's human still.

Also, the query was directed at anyone in general who thinks that this process of mourning is "weird".

krystineM wrote:

And, on the note of telling people what to do, Eiri..

After reading through some of you responses on the Abortion Debate section, what gives YOU the right to tell a woman when it is right for them to get an abortion?

After reading through my responses, you should already know how I will answer this question. Nothing gives ME the right; I am not a doctor.

i think it just seems out of the ordinary in a way, its not something i hear very often when people have a miscarriage.
I mean, most times, you dont even know a person has had a miscarriage because its something they keep to their selves.
You don't hear of couples making a miscarriage a public affair that often.
So i guess that's why I find it odd or weird.

EiriForLife wrote:

futureshock wrote:

EiriForLife wrote:

This is meant for late-term miscarriages, not early-term miscarriages which often end up in the toilet, sadly. It's irrelevant what it's called, I know from the other forum that these caskets are meant for "still births" or whatever you want to call them. I don't know of many women who would want to bury a tiny bag of blood.

It would certainly make more sense if that were the case, but according to the website, it's not.


Plastic Casket (0 - 13 Weeks)

*shurg* I still don't have a problem with it. If a woman really feels that it will give her closure, then I feel its her right to do so. The hospital can give her the bag sealed up, or even place it in the casket in the hospital to assure no contamination.

What bag? lol! I don't think you realize how tiny an embryo is. Women do not have miscarriages at the hospital, they happen at home, in the bathroom, and the embryo gets flushed. Many times a woman isn't even sure she's had a miscarriage.

EiriForLife wrote:

RebelCats wrote:

EiriForLife wrote:

I still think a woman has a right to mourn any way she chooses.

Exactly.

krystineM wrote:

and at 16 weeks she had a miscarriage.
Instead of throwing a funeral for a tiny ball of bloody cells,

At 16 weeks its more then just a tiny ball of bloody cells.

http://www.pregnancy.org/pregnancy/fetaldevelopment2.php

Look at week 15-16 and 17 thats more than just a ball of tiny cells.

At 21 weeks it can survive outside the womb, so there's no way it could only be a ball of cells at week 16... but that's one of the biggest pro-choice lies: fooling women into thinking they are not carrying a human being. Even when I was pro-choice I hated it when the unborn was referred to as "a blob of cells".

At 16 weeks, the baby is almost 5 inches long. If that was a "blob of cells", that would be a terrifying blob for sure! It has fully formed limbs and fingers, all internal organs, and is beginning to practice breathing. It can swallow, hiccup, and moves around quite a bit.

Pro-choicers are referring to the majority of abortions, which take place at 8 weeks or earlier.

futureshock wrote:

EiriForLife wrote:

futureshock wrote:

EiriForLife wrote:

This is meant for late-term miscarriages, not early-term miscarriages which often end up in the toilet, sadly. It's irrelevant what it's called, I know from the other forum that these caskets are meant for "still births" or whatever you want to call them. I don't know of many women who would want to bury a tiny bag of blood.

It would certainly make more sense if that were the case, but according to the website, it's not.


Plastic Casket (0 - 13 Weeks)

*shurg* I still don't have a problem with it. If a woman really feels that it will give her closure, then I feel its her right to do so. The hospital can give her the bag sealed up, or even place it in the casket in the hospital to assure no contamination.

What bag? lol! I don't think you realize how tiny an embryo is. Women do not have miscarriages at the hospital, they happen at home, in the bathroom, and the embryo gets flushed. Many times a woman isn't even sure she's had a miscarriage.

I'm aware of the fact that most miscarriages are at home and that there is nothing left. I mentioned the toilet a few pages back if you recall. I think this site has the smaller caskets more as a gesture; most women are not going to have any remains for a 0-4 week embryo. They are likely to not even realise they miscarried and are simply having a late, heavy period.

What I think is more meaningful are the larger caskets for later miscarriages. 10+ weeks and there will certainly be a body.

futureshock wrote:

EiriForLife wrote:

RebelCats wrote:

EiriForLife wrote:

I still think a woman has a right to mourn any way she chooses.

Exactly.

krystineM wrote:

and at 16 weeks she had a miscarriage.
Instead of throwing a funeral for a tiny ball of bloody cells,

At 16 weeks its more then just a tiny ball of bloody cells.

http://www.pregnancy.org/pregnancy/fetaldevelopment2.php

Look at week 15-16 and 17 thats more than just a ball of tiny cells.

At 21 weeks it can survive outside the womb, so there's no way it could only be a ball of cells at week 16... but that's one of the biggest pro-choice lies: fooling women into thinking they are not carrying a human being. Even when I was pro-choice I hated it when the unborn was referred to as "a blob of cells".

At 16 weeks, the baby is almost 5 inches long. If that was a "blob of cells", that would be a terrifying blob for sure! It has fully formed limbs and fingers, all internal organs, and is beginning to practice breathing. It can swallow, hiccup, and moves around quite a bit.

Pro-choicers are referring to the majority of abortions, which take place at 8 weeks or earlier.

Actually to my knowledge and research, most abortions occur before 12 weeks. There is a considerable statistic of abortions done at 12 weeks.

...if someone is not wanting to have a child,
gets pregnant accidentally and is not fond of wanting to keep that child,
why would they prolong the pregnancy rather than end it sooner?

krystineM wrote:

...if someone is not wanting to have a child,
gets pregnant accidentally and is not fond of wanting to keep that child,
why would they prolong the pregnancy rather than end it sooner?

Because they believe every human deserves a chance at life? It doesn't matter if you're pro-choice or pro-life on that one; I've known several pro-choice people who were pro-life for themselves. They give the child up for adoption.

its a nice thought to have as to why someone would wait,
but i dont think all people think that at the time.

krystineM wrote:

its a nice thought to have as to why someone would wait,
but i dont think all people think that at the time.

Of course all people don't think the same. The question wasn't "why would EVERYONE", it was "why would someone?"

but you answered "because they believe"
which sounds like your implying that theory to ALL who put off abortion.

krystineM wrote:

but you answered "because they believe"
which sounds like your implying that theory to ALL who put off abortion.

Well, if a woman puts off abortion, I would assume she believes the child has a right to life. So if women put off abortion, I assume THEY believe their unborn children have a right to life.

Why else would a woman put off abortion when in a dire situation or a situation where the child is deformed? Obviously it is because she cares for the child. If she was in true danger and wanted to abort, the procedure would just happen - she wouldn't have to wait to save up money to save her life. So the only reason she's waiting is because she wants the unborn to live.

lol, sweetheart it could just be the case of she's to lazy to go sooner, not because she thinks this child has the right to live.
and if she wanted the unborn to live, she would not even have the thought of abortion in her head, and would not abort later on. she would continue with the pregnancy all the way through.
therefore, since she decided to get an abortion after all, she did not want the child. and may have been lazy to go sooner for an abortion than wait later.
and what do you mean by "if she was in true danger and wanted to abort, the procedure would just happen -she wouldn't have to wait to save up money to save her life"
an abortion isnt about saving the pregnant mothers life. its the decision she makes as to whether or not she wants to have this child, or abort it.
that's all.

krystineM wrote:

lol, sweetheart it could just be the case of she's to lazy to go sooner, not because she thinks this child has the right to live.

Hightly HIGHTLY unlikely, and I doubt you'd ever get that answer from a woman as to why she aborted late in her pregnancy.

Quote :

and if she wanted the unborn to live, she would not even have the thought of abortion in her head, and would not abort later on.

Unless it was necessary to save her life. Like me for example. When I get pregnant, I am not planning to ever abort, but if a condition arose where I would die if I kept the pregnancy, I would abort. That's not hard to imagine.

Quote :

she would continue with the pregnancy all the way through.
therefore, since she decided to get an abortion after all, she did not want the child. and may have been lazy to go sooner for an abortion than wait later.

You actually think the majority of women who have late term abortions are just lazy??? if you said that to one of them, they'd slap you.

Quote :

and what do you mean by "if she was in true danger and wanted to abort, the procedure would just happen -she wouldn't have to wait to save up money to save her life"
an abortion isnt about saving the pregnant mothers life. its the decision she makes as to whether or not she wants to have this child, or abort it.
that's all.

Yes, abortion can be about saving the woman's life. There are several conditions curable only by the removal of the pregnancy. In an ER, this decision would be made just like any other emergency surgery.

im sure some are, you and i cannot prove that laziness could not be a case.
nor can you prove that they actually put off abortion because they wanted the unborn to live.
Because, if they did in fact want to let that child see the light of day, they would not abort at all AND would have put that child up for adoption.
GIving them the chance to live in this world rather than terminate them.
So, since they decided to end the pregnancy later than sooner, they DID NOT want that child to live. Not because of a medical problem, not because the woman could die, because they did not want a child and did not want that child to live at all.
Like i said, laziness COULD be one circumstance as to why it was put off.

Same as pressure, confusion, weighing the options etc could be a reason in the delay. Not all women that have abortions run to the clinic the moment they find out they are pregnant. Some of the are confused and scared and they talk to people about what to do before doing the procedure. There is an infinite number of possibilities of why a woman may wait to get the procedure done.

i meant to say exactally what you had said rebelCats
something along the lines of, they could be weighing out the possibilities of bringing a child into the world,
pressure from people and that not all go right away.

Or they could be lazy, right? Because laziness is one of the reasons women don't get abortions in a timely manner.

EiriForLife wrote:

krystineM wrote:

And, on the note of telling people what to do, Eiri..

After reading through some of you responses on the Abortion Debate section, what gives YOU the right to tell a woman when it is right for them to get an abortion?

After reading through my responses, you should already know how I will answer this question. Nothing gives ME the right; I am not a doctor.

that's not true. if you are prolife then you think you get the right to tell women if they can get an abortion or not. ifyou were prochoice then you'd think it was okay for a doctor to decide. prolifers don't care what doctors think or what women think. they want abortions illegal and itdoesn't matter what anyone thinks but themselves. it's crazy.

krystine I am sure women aren't waiting around to get abortins because they are lazy. they don'twant to be pregnant anymore and the sooner the better.

im sure not all are, it was just a thought that had come into my mind.

and that was what i was trying to tell Eiri.
If they dont want to be pregnant, they would go right away instead of put it off.
But she replied by saying that they may want the unborn to live...