Topics & Articles

Home

Culture

Ethnic Groups

History

Issues

Links

Viet Nam



Search

or Browse the Archives

or Gets Posts by Tags



Most Popular Books on Asian-Nation

Miscellaneous

All posts copyright © 2001- by C.N. Le.
Some rights reserved. Creative Commons License

The views and opinions expressed on this site and blog posts (excluding comments on blog posts left by others) are entirely my own and do not represent those of any employer or organization with whom I am currently or previously have been associated.

Blog powered by WordPress


Behind the Headlines: APA News Blog

Academic Version: Applying my personal experiences and academic research as a professor of Sociology and Asian American Studies to provide a more complete understanding of political, economic, and cultural issues and current events related to American race relations, and Asia/Asian America in particular.

Plain English: Trying to put my Ph.D. to good use.

March 9, 2007

Written by C.N.

Abortion vs. Adoption

For several years now, many hospitals, police stations, and other public facilities around the country have programs (Massachusett’s is called the “Safe Baby Haven“) where anyone can leave a newborn baby for someone else to adopt, no questions asked. The argument is that it’s better to give desperate mothers (and fathers) the option of giving their baby up for adoption anonymously rather than abandoning them to die. In Japan, a similar program exists, informally called the “baby box”:

Japan has also set up “public cradles against abortion”. Following India, which last week launched a “cradles scheme” against abortions and foeticide of girls, the Japanese Health Minister approved a decision taken by a hospital in Kumamoto to have a “baby box” for the public. Hospital officials said the box was intended to ensure absolute privacy for those parents who wanted to abandon their newly born babies. . . .

According to officials of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, the proposal “does not violate any law but should be supported because it protects the safety of unwanted babies.” Clearly, they added, from a legal point of view, the hospital would have to answer for the safety of the children. All the same, “the government will do everything possible to help through adoption and tax reduction campaigns”.

Supporters of such programs also argue that such “baby boxes” or “safe baby havens” eliminate the need for abortions, since parents can now just give up their child anonymously. Personally, I don’t think that it needs to be an either-or proposition — women should still have the right to an abortion within current medical guidelines (i.e., before their third trimester) while such “baby boxes” can still be available to parents who need to use them.

In other words, I believe that regardless of what country you’re in, more choices are always better than fewer choices.


Translate Into Another Language

Rules for Comments Post a Comment

All submitted comments are first reviewed before appearing on the site. Constructive disagreement and intelligent debate are fine and encouraged. Comments that just spew personal hatred, contain personal attacks, excessive profanity, spam or are blatantly offensive, slanderous, threatening, racist, or irrelevant to the topic are not and will be edited out or deleted, along with duplicate comments submitted on multiple posts.


comments powered by Disqus


Copyright © 2001- by C.N. Le. Some rights reserved. Creative Commons License

Suggested reference: Le, C.N. . "Abortion vs. Adoption" Asian-Nation: The Landscape of Asian America. <http://www.asian-nation.org/headlines/2007/03/abortion-vs-adoption/> ().

Short URL: http://www.asian-nation.org/headlines/?p=387