I know the majority of us in class today were completely against they way sterilization was happening in Puerto Rico. We think the women should be more educated about the procedure and/or the other methods of birth control. The should be able to give informed consent and not just allow the husband to decide. In the U.S. it is a choice for all women whether or not to have this procedure performed, and they are provided with all the necessary information to make an informed decision (discussing the side effects and consequences). This procedure is extreme also (serious side effects, irreversible), and women in the U.S. are provided with other methods as well. I think this is great, but it is also somewhat idealistic. This may sound horrible, and someone mentioned it in class, but some people just should not have children, or more children. I think it is irresponsible for families with little resources to add more burden to their load. But by doing so, they not only cause a problem for themselves, but for society who becomes responsible for these people.
I want to make it clear that I do not agree with the method advocated in Puerto Rico. However, if population control is necessary than something must be done. I completely disagree with surgery being performed on women who do not understand the procedure. I think the family planning clinics should be more focused on family planning than trying to get consent for sterilization. The fact that this procedure is performed on uninformed women leads to more serious consequences because they do not understand the necessary steps they need to take after surgery to make sure they heal correctly. The side effects can become much more serious. In the U.S. so many more methods are widely available and discussed. I think that that is important. But it is also important to understand that many of these other options are widely abused because they are so openly offered.
I think a balance must be reached in Puerto Rico where women can gain access to safe and healthy birth control methods, but are also educated on the consequences they pose to themselves and society by increasing their family to a point where they cannot be supported.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I think that you make a good point, it's more important to emphasize the other methods of birth control and the issues that may arise from a continued growth in the population. Yet I also think another important issue to remember that was brought up in class is that of the economy. Even if you are able to successfully control the population or lower it to the magic number that would make everything right, the problems wouldn't go away. Simply lowering the population doesn't create jobs, or economic stability. It doesn't give farmers back their jobs that have been taken away by big industries. Without a stable and growing economy for the people of any country, problems will continue to arise, not matter what the population is. The process and trend of sterilization seems to me to be the easy "fix" for a much larger problem that this leaves untouched.
I think you make some really good points with your statement here. I do not think population is a bad idea at all; however, I do believe the reason for the need for population control as well as the means for controlling a population are very important. Yes I agree with you in saying that the way that sterilization in Puerto Rico is being performed is wrong. Women and men should be able to make an educated decision regarding their lives. It is true that women in the United States are provided with more opportunities to make an informed decision, but I do not believe that all women have those opportunities, because just as women are exploited in foreign nations and territories of the United States they too are exploited here on United States soil. Such exploitation is proven by the treatment of Native American women in the article "Natural Laboratories", where women, men, and children are practically used as guinea pigs on U.S. soil to test new vaccines and drugs.
To comments on something else that you said, I know that you don't want to sound horrible, and yes I do believe that people should not have more children if they can't afford them because they are only hurting themselves more and their other children, but I think the question arises, which was brought up in class today, is population really the problem? If 1/3 of Puerto Rico has been sterilized and the population has greatly declined then why is the country in a worse economic state prior to the sterilization program. The solution lies in the nation's economy. A country needs to address the problems of its own economy before it tries to make a 1/3 of its women sterile. I really just think the approach that was taken in Puerto Rico was not only illogical but also detrimental to the country in the long run. The country is still in a state of poverty, and still people are uneducated about proper family planning. Sterilization is not proper family planning. There are other ways and people need to take responsibility and start educating the poor and the minorities about these ways as opposed to testing new medications on them and simply performing "la operacion."
Who gets to decide who is allowed to have children? Is it fair for this decision to be made solely on your economic status? Should your economic status change, should your children be taken away or restored to you? What is idealistic about women being able to choose which family planning methods are right for them?
I want us to think critically about the idealogical assumptions embedded in this analysis. One fact that might aid our discussion is that the vast majority, upwards of 70% of pregnancies in the U.S. are not planned. This extends beyond the realm of just poor women.
Your post begs a very interesting question. Is population control necessary? Many argue that it is not. When people talk about the burden of the poor on society there is little evidence to support that claim. See this website for more information.
http://www.cwpe.org/resources/popcontrol/ushighschool
I believe that the number of children a couple has should be planned out and thought of in advance. Questions such as "How many children could we fairly raise?" and "Can we afford to support another child?" are very important to bring up before having children. However, I must make a comment about your statement, "but some people just should not have children, or more children." Who has the right to tell a family they need to stop having children and at what point? Should their be a maximum number of children per family with a certain income? What if a family is still happy and able to raise healthy children with less money than another family? Family planning is very important but also complicated.
Exactly which people shouldn't have more children? And what societal programs in particular take on the responsibility of "these people"? This is a very provocative post! It would be helpful to see some citations to support such a strong thesis.
Post a Comment