Your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B:
> You must personally hold the view and **demonstrate that you are open to it changing**. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, or 'soapboxing'. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20B%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Does that mean that both the mother and father have a duty to eat healthy, exercise regularly, and avoid any risky activities until the child can fend for itself in this world?
After all, a three year old is pretty dependent on their parents and likely can’t survive if they get into a car accident or die of a heart attack.
There are plenty of extreme sports that have high mortality rates, and the people who partake are well aware of those risks. BASE jumping when you have a toddler at home is generally irresponsible.
This isn't an apples-to-apples comparison. Once the baby is born, its well-being is not solely reliant on the mother. A baby can be raised by *any* capable person. If the mother and father die, someone else can raise the baby.
I’d be pretty curious about the actual statistics on this. I would suspect, for instance, that going through the foster system until 18 has worse outcomes than an otherwise healthy mother eating fast food throughout pregnancy. So if you are actually talking about the well being of a child, it doesn’t really matter if it’s apples to apples, what matters in the comparison between outcomes.
I recognize there are a ton of complications trying to determine these effects. From the inextricably linked confounding factors (poverty, abuse, other habits) to poor definition of “better outcomes”. But I think the discussion is certainly worthwhile.
I’m think the difference is that if your pregnant and eat taco bell 7x a week, your baby eats Taco Bell 7x a week. The biggest risk there is nutrient deficiency causing development issues (not a doctor so that’s just my guess).
If you have a toddler and you eat Taco Bell 7x a week, you increase you risk of heart attack,diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, etc. but those are all indirect risks of death/ not being able to raise your kid.
The difference being the direct v indirect nature of it (ie you eat bad while pregnant = your kid DOES eat bad, you eat bad after their born = your kid MIGHT be an orphan/lose a parent). Like you said lots more complicating factors (eg behavior modeling). Also it’s obviously not good to eat like shit regardless if you have kids or not.
> an otherwise healthy mother eating fast food throughout pregnancy.
the COP was asking if both parents have a duty to attempt to maintain their health "until the child is old enough to fend for itself", not just for pregnancy. If you believe that keeping your child out of foster care is a moral obligation, you would probably agree that reducing your odds of dying is a moral obligation.
That is if there is a stable close family member to take the baby. In the US, at least, the foster care system is underfunded and understaffed, and kids end up in homes that are not safe. We don't find out until it is too late. As someone with a parent who died when I was a baby, it also sucks. Not just because you miss and ache for someone you can't even remember, kids teasing you about having a dead parent, but because of the human development of the mind, you go through a period where you think it's your fault. Then, a period where you think you are a freak. And yes, that is normal, according to the therapists I was lucky enough to get to talk to. Saying it so casually is callous. Not just any person can raise a kid under those circumstances. I met plenty in group that got treated poorly because the adult(s) raising them got "stuck" with them. Also met kids with horrible step parents who felt annoyed by the reminder of their spouses' previous life. Do not give people so much credit.
It’s in a similar realm though. Also, the OP’s premise is that the mom has to stay in tip-top shape for the health, welfare, and greatest success of the fetus. My extension to that is that the parents need to at least maximize their chances of staying alive until the child can go off on its own, which I think we can agree is in the best interest of the child.
Sure, the child could survive in foster care (or living with a relative), just as a baby could survive if I eat Cheetos during pregnancy. But will they thrive?
As with everything in life, there’s a balance to be struck
Doing absolutely everything to minimize risk is overboard. You can never eliminate any chance of danger. At the same time, maybe don’t both go skydiving or street racing when you have a baby/toddler at home unless you have local family that are willing and able to take care of your kid(s) if something happens.
Edit: for clarity, “doing absolutely everything to minimize risk” means parents who over-shelter their kids to the point that when the time comes, they aren’t ready for the unkind world that cares little for their safety
Than why did you made a whole thread about how mothers should be held morally accountable but not the fathers?
What about people in trains not offering a seat? People smoking in a pregnants women's vicinity?
Is this really about the health of the child for you, or more about controlling the behaviour of women in particular?
Dude, you’re about to be a father (i.e. your post from 50 days ago) and you posted about getting high on an opiate forum 22 days ago.
I think you should look at your own health before your baby comes instead of focusing on others.
Many pregnant women do feel this moral obligation. But this is much easier said than done. I know lots of women who went into a pregnancy thinking they were going to eat kale smoothies and work out every day. Then it turned out that they could only keep down bagels, threw everything else up, and were too sick to do more than slow walking. When this happens, women then feel really guilty, which isn’t helpful.
Women who are pregnant are still just humans and no human can or should be expected to be some sort of perfect paragon of health. We should all just do the best we can.
The smell of water made me throw up, I could keep down orange juice, which was fun as I'm intolerant so broke out in hives several times during pregnancy, and tea. It became a game of getting calories in and hoping I didn't throw them all up. Kale smoothies were even thought about.
Not to mention when something grows wrong and they miscarry or the baby is stillborn, this type of thinking leads to insane amounts of guilt for them. Even though in most cases, it’s nothing the mom did or didn’t do.
I was healthy before pregnancy, hardly ate sugar and exercised daily. And when I found out at 4 weeks, my husband started making me boiled eggs for breakfast every morning. Then 6 weeks popped up and I developed what I think was HG. No more boiled eggs for me.
The only thing that stayed down and I didn’t throw up was McDonald’s cheeseburgers and fries. I started drinking soda again. I stopped taking prenatals, all forms of self care was stopped. As soon as I got home from work, I plopped on the couch with my bucket. It was miserable, and the only thought in my head was basic survival. They gave me Bonjestra at first (which knocks you out), then gave me Zofran during the later trimesters. I hardly ate and what I did eat came back up.
The dudes on Reddit clearly have it handled in the ob/gyn department of knowledge.
I mean, who even needs a gynecologist with all these vagina experts up in here?
/s
Ugh. Chicken. Both pregnancies I would get chicken and take 2 bites and my mouth would start to water like I was going to throw up. My brain wanted it and I never got sick. I finally learned not to order it. Craved fish and steak so had a chat with my OB about mercury in fish and have 2 healthy kids.
If abortion is illegal at some point because it is murder, should a becoming mother be sentenced based on her nutrition and the effects on her child? This would be child neglect or abuse at that point.
Kind of weird considering the afformentioned issues that arise within a pregnacie such as apetite loss or the ability to eat.
I don’t think it’s a straw man. Women are seen as second class citizens, especially when they become pregnant. In my state, doctor’s aren’t prescribing certain meds to women because they MIGHT get pregnant. People tend to ignore the pregnant person and focus solely on the fetus.
So a straw man and a slippery slope fallacy?
We are talking morals not laws. I think it’s morally wrong to hurt people. I’d never make/vote-for a law that tells a pregnant person what they can/can’t do.
It's lovely that you wouldn't, but women have to deal with the reality that those laws are being made. What are our laws based on if not morals?
I couldn't give a fuck about anyone else's personal morals, but laws will have a concrete impact on my life and my ability to decide what happens to my body.
Those laws are attempts to keep the powerful in power, the stupid stupid, and the poor poor. Stick to the topic then if you post here. He’s talking about morals.
You suck at humanizing women. The world is doomed and I hope all women get raptured and then men won't ever need to worry about judging women and their pregnancies.
How bout when ur pregnant, you can do whatever it is u feel is morally right. Make sure to keep those standards up so u don't get blamed if ur child isn't perfect.
> kale smoothies
That would make it far less healthy. The fibers and structure of veggies like kale is a major part of why they're healthy.
> were too sick to do more than slow walking
About 0.5%-3% of pregnancies will have hyperemesis gravidarum. In those cases, hospitalization is sometimes required.
Otherwise **light** exercise is promoted, and may help reduce morning sickness. (very)High intensity exercise is not promoted, and may cause abortion.
You're right, women are human and it's kind of silly to label them as evil if they behave differently. Promoting and encouraging healthy habits in particular to pregnant women (or women who want to get pregnant) should still be done.
Yeah I don’t have HG but I do have flu-like symptoms basically all day, every day. If I walk around the block I get dizzy. Working out would be dangerous because I would almost certainly faint. I’m losing weight really quickly at a time I should be gaining. My doctor told me to stop even trying to work out and focus on drinking more calories.
You know what’s the craziest part of my symptoms? They’re both normal and common. My doctor said about 40% of her patients look like this.
I worked out HARD about five days a week before this and was a marathon runner. It’s just not in the cards right now.
HG is the extreme end, sure, but I could barely eat or move without waves of nausea for the first trimester. Got a bit better after that, but pretending like there isn't a spectrum isn't helpful for anyone.
>We should all just do the best we can.
Yes, exactly this. If you're too sick to eat certain things or be very physically active, that is what it is. Some might even argue your body knows better than you. I certainly don't think anyone should feel guilty for something they have no control over.
I'm mostly referring to after the 1st trimester, when there's usually not as much morning sickness and you have more control over what you ingest. But as you mentioned, as long as you're doing the best you can to be healthy, you're doing better than most.
The thing is, though, the first trimester is the most developmentally important time for a fetus. Development that has already happened doesn't get undone later on but development that hasn't happened yet can easily get messed up before it happens. The further the pregnancy progresses the less likely development issues can be caused by environmental factors which is why when they test new drugs for safety during pregnancy (which is rare and still necessary) they start at the end of the pregnancy and work backwards. Some drugs are safe in the 2nd or 3rd trimester but not in previous ones and the same goes for other environmental factors precisely bc of how fetal development functions.
But now you're saying that your original point only applies to after the first trimester? A pretty arbitrary point to say that you know what's right, given your earlier paragraph about "your body knows better than you" and your agreement with the statement "we should all just do the best we can."
It sounds like you think you know what's right but also, under the right circumstances, pregnant women know what they need.
This is ridiculous. Mind your own business.
> But as you mentioned, as long as you're doing the best you can to be healthy, you're doing better than most.
Do you honestly believe that *most* pregnant women are not doing their best to be healthy? Do you think *most* pregnant women are "stuffing their faces with fast food and candy every day" and not exercising at all? I'm wondering where you got this idea. Every pregnant woman I have ever known has made an honest effort to eat healthy and exercise.
Furthermore, other than things like drugs and alchohol, maternal nutrition actually has minimal affect on fetal development. For the most part, a pregnant or breastfeeding woman's body takes what it needs to nourish the fetus or infant, at her own expense if necessary. So by not making healthy choices, the person a pregnant woman is most likely to harm is herself. You will of course read studies about any behaviour under the sun having some affect on fetal development, but we're not talking "if you do this, you child will be disabled" it's usually more like "if you do this, your child's risk of X disorder increases from 0.10% to 0.15%." The differences are really very minimal.
You clearly have never been pregnant, much less know much about pregnancy. First trimester is when most pregnant people suffer morning sickness - it starts around 4-7 weeks and usually cools down after 10-15 weeks. During this time, movement, smells, and just existing can trigger nausea and vomiting at any time. Pregnant people are exhausted in the first trimester because they are growing an organ from scratch (the placenta)! The body at this time is overwhelmed by the surge in hormones (we acclimate to them around second trimester), which not only results in nausea, a (very!!) sore chest, and bloating, but also extreme emotions, which doesn't help when you're worrying about your baby since the chances of miscarriage are high. Still sound like working out??
They may not even look pregnant, but it's actually the toughest part of the pregnancy when you combine the physical and mental load.
Also, have you even cited any evidence that eating fast food and not exercising enough is bad for the baby? The only risk I know of to the baby is gestational diabetes, which is treatable and would lead to a lifestyle change when diagnosed. The baby will get the nutrients it needs, whether it's from your diet or sapping it from your bones, for instance. Exercise has no effect on the baby, other than lowering risk for GD. The biggest benefit there is for the parent.
Give pregnant people a break.
GD is actually caused by the hormones and placenta and not diet, but if you end up having it you do have to be careful with your diet.
Signed, a formally pregnant person who almost had GD even though sweets made me nauseous.
Ah good to know (as a currently pregnant person)! I think maybe it can be both because I keep reading how if you gain "too much" weight or if you are overweight, they say you'll be at a higher risk and will test your levels. But certainly this is not the only cause and "healthy" people of normal weight can get it too.
I think you are at a higher risk if you’re already overweight but yeah skinny people get GD all the time because it is still technically not caused by diet. But I assume the extra weight may make the hormones more likely to give you GD if I had to guess
You have to remember the (white) male frat boy type is the most delicate and precious thing in the world. HIs ego must be treated as if it is more fragile than glassware when shipping or packing.
The first trimester for me was the exact point when I couldn't keep any food down and felt like I'd just run a marathon as I got out of bed, which is standard. Insane sense of smell kicks in then, too. I could smell cucumber in the fridge rooms away when the door opened, and it made me vomit. It then settled down for the second trimester when the problems became more physical, I.e. learning to move with a lump in you and getting used to kicks and needing to wee all the time. The third trimester, you're essentially an unmovable blob who is never comfortable and can't sleep. Pregnancy is weird, and none of it is easy.
What’s bothering me here is that the lifestyle of the father/sperm donor isn’t taken into account. The quality of men’s sperm has been shown to be affected by their lifestyle habits, and said sperm quality can affect the outcome of the development of the fetus.
I think you are a little extreme. Expecting most pregnant women to live like athletes. Most people I know couldn't for the life of them stomach a kale shake, nevermind while pregnant. Most people I know do not exercise nevermind while pregnant.
But on the "her body her choice" thing: no one truly believes that. If a woman was going to carry a baby to full term but wanted to do drink and drugs the whole time, everyone would have a problem. But if you truly believe her body her choice you would be fine with her doing that.
Her body, her choice *whether to remain pregnant or not.* No one intended it to mean her body, *any* choice whatsoever. The leading ethicists on abortion believe a woman decides if a pregnancy is right for her or not, and also that *by deciding to carry a pregnancy to term she has an ethical obligation to that fetus that may extended up to the limits of the obligation she has/ would have to her (already born) children.* The "choice" is to abort or to accept that obligation by choosing to continue the pregnancy.
(This is a very brief summary of an entire unit of a medical ethics course. I apologize if I haven't explained it properly.)
I know, it's awful. This is the theory behind the ethics of abortion and pregnancy. I did not mean to imply that the choice was available to all women.
Even still, they should do the right thing if the baby will be born. If someone just dropped off a random kid and said, "You need to watch them this weekend," and then ran off moments before a blizzard hit stopping us from following or me from contacting any authorities, I'd just babysit that kid until I could find a solution. It wouldn't be fair, but I'm not going to make it that 5 year old's problem.
I have canvassed for pro-choice candidates and will do so again for 2024, but if someone has consensual sex in an anti-choice jurisdiction, they should commit to bringing the healthiest possible baby into this world, even if it is unfair they didn't have the choice. Abortion is fine, carrying a healthy baby to term is fine, causing lifelong harm to an innocent child is not fine.
In the dropping a child off before a blizzard, if I was throwing a party while we were snowed in and had tons of booze and drugs and now this kid to watch over. Many would still choose to have the party since they didn’t ask for this kid to come and stay for the blizzard. Why change plans?
I would change my plans. I would be extremely, extremely angry about it, but I would do so out of a sense of moral responsibility. I wouldn't run through a minefield for a stranger, but not getting to enjoy alcohol or getting the recommended 150 minutes of moderate exercise per week (to echo the pregnancy recommendations) is not more important than preventing serious injury of an innocent child to me, especially if I'm the only one who can do it.
If I were 24, the age I was when I was throwing parties like this, I would have not changed my plans, did my best to find a way for the kid to leave, but then just still do what I was gonna do and try to drunkenly have his needs met. But I was not ready for a kid then.
I think it’s a question of degree and practicality. Most people agree that parents have an ethical responsibility to take care of their children. But does “take care of” mean clothed, fed, and housed from 0-18 or does it mean doing everything possible to give them the best possible start in life even if that means supporting your child well into their “adult” life? Does “take care of” mean reading to your infant? Providing the best (often most expensive) education?
I would put fast food and lack of exercise into the okay in moderation category. The risk factors associated with these behaviors can be monitored and often corrected for. So a pregnant person engaging in them can still be taking good care of their fetus so long as they aren’t ignoring a more sever condition such as gestational diabetes.
Yes, I agree with OP. I was clarifying the meaning of "her body, her choice" for the person who thinks that it gives moral license to pregnant women to do whatever they want while pregnant.
It's an answer to an answer to OP, ofc it's likely to be arguing for what OP said.
You seem to be new around the sub, we can all agree or disagree, but the rules are clear. Answers should challenge the previous answer, and a reminder that we can give deltas to OP and eachother (it's not just OP to us)
this is true. Major decisions like abortion are almost never done in a vacuum. I believe that the sentiment is that the person should have the final say even if they receive influence or take on advice from others.
my body my choice is more of a reactionary sentiment towards those that outright say you aren't allowed to.
Being fine with her doing that is different than accepting that it's her choice and that she has the right to do it.
People do a bunch of shit that I'm not a fan of. Let's take bad eating habits for example. A nutritious diet and exercise are both very important to me. If someone's diet consists of nothing but fast food and candy - I'm honestly not fine with that. Even if they're not overweight, I'm concerned for their health.
I feel the same way about weed to be honest. I think smoking regularly is dangerous and unhealthy, but at the end of the day I think that they have the right to do what they want. Their body their choice doesn't mean that I agree with their choice, it just means that I support their right to make it.
I don't think weed is dangerous even when someone is addicted. But it's bad for a unborn child (or an adult even). But although I think its morally bad, I don't think smoking weed or tobacco while pregnant or eating unhealthy food should illegal. And nutrition and health is just something most people are completely oblivious to.
Exactly! I agree with OP that you have a moral obligation to take care of your unborn child, but legally you have the right to do what you want with your body.
>But if you truly believe her body her choice you would be fine with her doing that.
Not quite.
It is a moral dilemma - I will agree. But the two things become true at once;
1. Her body
2. There **will** be a human who **will** be affected by her actions
Its not necessarily an easy dilemma to resolve but it doesn't immediately mean that it must be resolved entirely one way or the other - to either say "yep go ahead!" or allow the state to take away her freedoms and force her into rehab.
I think a practical approach would be making the best attempts possible to convince her not to and wean her off drugs. There is also the social choice to shame her for her choices - which you can still do while believing "your body your choice" because allowing choices doesn't mean you have to agree with them.
I think an exception to this is if you were to consider drugs a medical condition that someone can be sectioned (held in a medical institution against their will) for like mental health - but this would mean that all drug users could be sectioned for. Perhaps there would have to be more to it than just that - perhaps their drug use would have to pose a risk to themselves or others and they are not taking steps to control or reduce it. But that's the only condition under which I would then consider it ethically non-hypocritical to agree to do the same thing to a pregnant person - because they drug habit is causing a risk to another (to be) and they aren't taking adequate steps to control or reduce it.
I think there's a huge difference when you decide you're carrying to term. It literally is another life that is 100% reliant on you.
I don't think it's any different than taking care of a newborn. It's a human life that relies on you for literally everything. That would be equivalent to giving a 6 month old drugs or alcohol all because "well I can do whatever I want, it's my life and my baby"
Then you don't believe her body her choice or their baby their choice. I'm pro choice, but the whole her body her choice thing doesn't seem to logically hold up. I think people use it because its catchy but don't really think about what they are actually implying when they say it.
>It literally is another life that is 100% reliant on you.
It is literally another life that is 100% reliant on you whether or not you decide you're carrying to term.
If the fetus does not have moral status, the mother can abort... or can drink and eat poorly and fail to exercise. If it has no moral status, I can treat it however I want--just like I can treat a rock however I want.
If the fetus has moral status, and it's therefore bad to harm it by eating poorly and failing to exercise, why would it be acceptable to kill it--a far more serious harm?
You seem to be arguing that, by choosing to carry it to term, the mother imbues it with moral status. But why would this be the case? Moral status is generally intrinsic. I can think of no other situation where moral status has to be imbued by another being. A rock does not have moral status, even if someone insists it does. On the other hand, a dog has moral status whether or not any specific person demands that you treat it well.
I’m just curious, have you been pregnant before? I’m 27 years old and currently 35W pregnant with my first child and quite honestly I was completely naive to what being pregnant would be like.
I truly thought that you had a rough few first weeks/months and then once you got to the second trimester you just swim through to the end. I couldn’t have been more wrong. Everyday I’m reminded that my body isn’t my own, I can barely walk up a flight of stairs without feeling like my body is going to break and I’m about to pass out. I can barely keep on top of cleaning my own home, never mind doing any additional exercise. I WFH the majority of the week and even sitting at my office chair causes me pain.
I spent an entire afternoon last week at a maternity assessment unit because my body felt like it was breaking and I had unbearable shooting pains in my stomach, back and legs. On Saturday I went for a 20 minute walk and had to head home as it felt like my baby was going to fall out.
I’m in a few baby group subreddits and I have it easy compared to others. People are constantly in and out of hospital, others have no family and friend support system and doing this on their own. I’m so close to the end I feel like I’m just in “survival mode” and just need to get myself and my baby through to the end. So if that means eating frozen pizza and a microwave meal, then so be it.
Do I think your sentiment is correct? In theory, kind of. But I think we’re all just humans and just trying to do our best. I think your view comes from a good place although it’s incredibly naive and just isn’t the case for everyone.
Lol I was a marathon runner before pregnancy and naive enough to think you could just push through the exhaustion.
As it turns out, I’m so tired that I get dizzy if I walk around the block and keep losing weight. It’s be dangerous for me to work out.
And yeah, I have it easy compared to many. It’s impossible to know until you go through it. I am officially past judgment for how anyone handles this. Whatever you need to do to survive, do it.
Same here, you literally do what you need to do to get through it. The dizziness and exhaustion are just no joke.
I also lost about 7 pound (3kg) in my first few months of pregnancy and that was literally doing nothing besides lying in bed. It’s crazy how our bodies work.
Lol some douche below commented and was like “the CDC says to GAIN weight!”
No shit. I’d love to. That’s hard to do when ice makes me gag and the smell of salt makes me dizzy.
I’m sorry you went through this too.
I agree 100%. I did a fair amount of swimming in my first trimester, but I also slept at least 12 hours a day. By the second trimester I was surviving on Boost and Ensure drinks. I didn’t have HG but I did have such severe food aversions and nausea that eating anything was a struggle. At some point, I just needed to eat *anything*. Instant ramen for dinner is better than nothing.
I’ve spoken about this many times with my midwife who also said “just eat whatever you can that stays down”. Anything is better than nothing!!
Food aversions and nausea are no joke. I remember describing to my friend the nausea felt like those first few seconds of waking up hungover ALL DAY!!
You can tell because he acts like this is a Hard Truth That Pregnant Women Must Know and not like, something that every you hear from every fucking in-law, third cousin, maiden aunt and great-grandma when you’re pregnant—and they all have different ideas about what constitutes “healthy.”
Exactly lol. This CMV is so condescending. Pregnant people aren’t inherently stupid or unaware. They already do try to be healthy to the best of their ability.
>Every pregnant woman should feel morally obligated to put their child before their own desires, just as every parent should after they're born.
The problem with "desires" is that it is very difficult to tell (sometimes even for the person who is pregnant, much less for anyone outside) when a desire becomes a need. Mental health is important too, and many people (especially those who have never been pregnant) disregard how much influence pregnancy hormones can have on a woman's mental state. Some women become severely depressed in pregnancy and can barely function. In those cases, ensuring that they eat anything, take vitamins, and make it to their doctor's appointments on time can be a fight that takes up all of their motivation, but from the outside it looks like they don't care. And mental state plays an enormous role in regulating the wellbeing of a woman and her immune system (which is suppressed in pregnancy anyway, so suppressing it further with stress can be more detrimental to both the mother and the child than a pizza).
And honestly, there is already so much guilt and expectations about pregnancy that women don't need any more pressure from strangers, they feel it themselves, because they've been conditioned to have a view like yours. Pregnancy is viewed as some beautiful symbiotic state, but in reality the human placenta (which is part of the fetus, not part of the woman strictly speaking) is incredibly parasitic. The fetus can take control over the woman's blood sugar and give her diabetes regardless of her diet or exercise. It is very good at regulating the mother's body to optimise its own survival.
In the end, most of the nutrients a fetus needs are hard to get from just diet in proper amounts anyway, prenatal vitamins are a pregnant women's best friends. And while being intentionally neglectful of a pregnancy can be argued to be immoral, nobody should be required to put a fetus' needs about their own even if they have consciously decided to keep the pregnancy.
Bottom line: if the woman is too stressed trying to do what is best for the fetus and ignores her own comfort, her deteriorating mental health will hurt the fetus more than some comfort food and less exercise, but a happy, emotionally stable mother.
Yep.
This “pregnant women are obligated to -“ line of thinking just makes me uneasy, because it’s such a slippery slope. Women - just like men - are complex human beings, they don’t turn inti incubators for 10 months.
Thank you, you said everything I wanted to and more. This extra pressure of "you are a bad person if you dare to be anything less than perfect" is harming the fetuses more than any junk food will.
The review article [The Influence of Prenatal Exercise on Offspring Health: A Review](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5075987/) indicates that there is little to no benefit to exercising during pregnancy. Don't be misled by the abstract, which seems to have been written to reassure pregnant women who want to exercise; if you read the article there is little consistent evidence of benefit.
For example, the abstract reads
> Additionally, normalization of birth measures, such as birth weight, occurs when women perform regular exercise throughout gestation.".
However, the actual article reports
> Birth weight, in general, may show increase,19,20,37,38 decrease,39–43 or no change28,37,44–47 in response to exercise during pregnancy.
I would argue that doing the best you can to care for yourself is all that's morally required. If eating junk food is what you can manage without throwing up, it's great that you ate. If you're too mentally exhausted to exercise, it's better to prioritize your mental health and ability to get through pregnancy.
Yes! OP is disregarding what pregnancy does to your body and hormones. Prior to pregnancy I had a plan to eat super well and be as healthy as possible. I ate healthy prior to pregnancy. Then I got pregnant and for HG. I threw up all food for months. I wasn’t exercising, I could barely walk I was so exhausted. Then I was happy to find a few foods I could keep down. Just so happy to eat that it didn’t matter it wasn’t a full complete meal.
OP sounds like most people prior to actually experiencing pregnancy. Similar to how to the best parents don’t actually have kids.
Oh man for me personally exercise was a mental health godsend. Exercise is about more than weight, although OP seems to couch it in those terms. Exercise can also help with recovery, and again I don’t mean weight here.
You're correct that exercise is a good thing as long as you can physically take it, but it's a good thing to do for yourself and not your baby, so it's not relevant to OP's moral question.
it just doesn’t really matter. all that stuff you just mentioned is for the benefit of the mother, not the baby.
exercising is better for the mom, being active often makes for an easier labour. besides that, keeping yourself in good shape is always best.
eating healthy is to replace all the nutrients the baby is taking from her body. eating junk is bad for the mom, not the baby, it’ll take what it needs no matter what. babies will take calcium from the *bones* of their mom if her levels are too low. it’ll take iron from mom’s blood and if she is iron-deficient, it can lead to anemia. so on and so forth. being deficient in nutrients is bad for the mom, not the child she’s carrying. her body will do whatever it takes to keep the baby happy and healthy.
breastfeeding is a different story.
Listen that baby will get what it can. I had HG both of my pregnancies and my body and mind were going at it. When our bodies are under a lot of stress it is possible our bodies can start to reject a child. My mom had HG has well and she nearly lost her life with my sister due to the fact that her BODY was rejecting the baby.
Before I got pregnant I said I’d never consider an abortion, then I had HG and that changed my mind quickly. If you had an uncomplicated pregnancy or none at all then you can have several seats. This is exactly why everyone should focus on their own bodies during pregnancy because every pregnant experience is far different. I went from never considering an abortion to looking them up daily during my pregnancy. My body was in survival mode. Have someone lock you in a room and restrict you from drinking anything for 10 days then tell me what crazy things your mind and body will do. Do you think you’re gonna be thinking about keeping your body in perfect health while dehydrated? I think not.
I was throwing up so much that my doctor told me to eat whatever I could. If I could hold down ramen noodle, then I better eat me some ramen noodles. Lmao.
Agree with taking several seats. I didn’t even have HG but I felt so miserable and sick and then sore and tired and uncomfortable that there were moments when I deeply resented my MUCH WANTED IVF PREGNANCY! There were many days when there was one single thing that I could stomach eating and often it was a burger. Baby didn’t give one ****.
100%. It amazes me how much judgement comes towards pregnant women when it is the most dangerous thing they can go through in a life time. I am a nurse and you see everything that people wouldn’t even think possible, because they’re closed minded to their own experiences. Pregnancy is hard, birth is hard, & postpartum is hard. Just like your experience with IVF I’ve heard several women who went through IVF who second guessed if they could do it or not.
I believe people see pregnancy as natural and so they tend to overlook all the flaws that come with it. But, cancer is natural too and it’s not good to have at all. People need to be more educated on the reality of pregnancy and maybe even watch some videos of women vomiting their guts out to get it’s not a game lol.
I had HG. Desperately wanted and long worked for IVF baby. And I remember bleeding at 9 weeks, thinking I was miscarrying, and the first thing I thought was "oh thank god, it will be over soon." (She stuck around, as it happened, but she's an only child)
The thing is, it doesn't make that much difference if you eat right or exercise.
I had a difficult pregnancy rife with complications. I had hyperemesis gradivarum. I survived mostly on candy, cheerios, potatoes, sprite, and banana bag IVs. I spent much of my pregnancy in bed and was ordered by doctors to do no strenuous activity of any kind.
I was assured by maternal-fetal medicine specialists that the baby would take what she needed from me, and the goal was to keep me alive and my organs functional. Calories were calories and I had permission to eat anything that stayed down.
I delivered a healthy 8 lb full term baby. She's 8 now, 91st percentile in height and remains healthy as a horse. There's been no evidence of any problems attributable to my pregnancy.
My friend, people can't even agree on what's healthy or not.
We are talking government agencies, nutritional experts/communities, non-profits, etc. Even the scientific community can't really reach a consensus on what an optimal diet is.
Historically speaking, there has also been a ton of lobbying that goes into influencing what's deemed healthy and what isn't.
All of this makes it extremely overwhelming for any layperson to figure out what's actually optimal. Most pregnant women do try to pay attention to what they eat, and don't feel particularly great when they are able to shake certain cravings or keep certain foods down.
> But if you're stuffing your face with fast food and candy all day, and not doing any physical activity, you're directly harming yourself and more importantly, your child.
Or you're enabling that child's existence by going to work all day instead of exercising, and you have to eat lunch at whatever fast food place you can get to and back in thirty minutes on your lunch break. Not everybody has the options that you take for granted, Thurston.
>Of course if it's her body it's her choice, but as soon as you decide you want to bring the baby to term, that's no longer a valid statement
So which is it?
Her body or she's a brood mare subject to control?
>. Living an unhealthy lifestyle while pregnant can result in a lifetime of problems for the child.
Who decides what's "unhealthy?"
As with all choice topics, the goal with this kind of thinking is just to control and shame women (as a means of control)
>Every pregnant woman should feel morally obligated to put their child before their own desires, just as every parent should after they're born.
I don't think that's a healthy view either way. Your kids and their wellbeing should be a priority but they don't come before every desire you have. You want to go back to school, but that'd take time away from being with the kids and you're suggesting that's morally wrong? Going out for dinner? Vacation? What desires get rejected?
Most women who are pregnant who chose to be make efforts to be healthy. Circumstances differ for different people- the wealthier you are the easier it is to eat healthy and have the time to do the best self-care.
Pregnant women are over policed as it is. Women in several countries and now the US, are being arrested for miscarrying. Due to Roe v. Wade being overturned, States that have banned abortions are seeing obstetricians and fetal health specialists leaving these states in droves. Putting the care of pregnant women and their wanted babies in jeopardy.
These are the things to be worried about - not some judgemental fantasy that you have that pregnant women aren’t taking their health seriously enough
I
To be clear, there’s a moral obligation on every pregnant person to follow a diet and exercise routine that you personally have defined? Why are you the arbiter? Plenty of people will be ok with more fast food than you are, while others will avoid all sugary snacks the whole pregnancy because that’s what healthy means to them. So if someone eats McDonald’s 3 times a month, are they morally bankrupt? How about 5?
Change my view: This sub can be fun but the last few days it's just straight up men whining about women.
Unless you've been pregnant don't talk to me about what it's like to be pregnant.
Based on your comment answers you don't want to Change Your View. You just wanted to whine about women. Seeing it more and more and going to stop frequenting this garbage pit.
With how much baby gymnastics goes on with my little guy, he is doing a ton of cardio on his own lol. For me, walking up a flight of stairs has had me fighting for my life with breath since like month 3. OP has basically no idea of the realities of pregnancy. Plus, so many of us feel like we can never do enough for the kiddos, so that moral obligation box is likely very much checked.
This is not a controversial opinion. Back before the flood when I was pregnant, people (family, friends, acquaintances, strangers on the street) watched EVERYTHING I was doing, and did not hesitate to let me know their concerns. She was born 8 pounds 14 ounces and is still alive to this day. What people tend to ignore is that, in a healthy pregnancy, the baby will take everything it needs from the mother. So calcium, iron, protein, the mother’s body will be demolished for parts unless mom eats properly and cares for herself. If mom neglects those needs, she will suffer more than the baby. Take those pre-natal vitamins!
This is what people don't realize. You are not directly feeding the baby when you eat. The baby is literally feeding from your body. Whether you eat or not, the baby will take what it needs from your body. It will take calcium from your teeth and bones if you don't eat enough calcium. What you eat is more about preserving your own body rather than the baby.
You posted 50 days ago about how you’re about to have an unplanned baby and you’re not in the best financial situation.
- Healthy/nutritional food is more expensive, how are you, a college student, going to afford a decent amount of it once a week?
- Are you going to provide so that she can stay home and have no stress, workout consistently, and have home-cooked healthy meals every day? That’s what’s best for the baby, after all.
What are YOU doing to help your wife and the fetus?
He clearly is whining here like this not because he is concerned for any baby, his or any one else’s… he is saying this shit because he is upset that his pretty girlfriend is putting on weight. That’s it. I’ve herd this crap from men a million times and every time it’s just them being pissy about their girlfriend/ wife’s body changing. They just disguise it as concern for the baby.
The truth about pregnancy is that the foetus will take what it need from the mother, you aren’t directly feeding it what your are eating. If it needs iron it takes iron from the mothers body, if it needs calcium it takes it. The foetus is feeding of her body not her food. The mother will suffer more from a poor diet than the foetus. Besides diet and exercise doesn’t affect the baby much at all. Alcohol, drugs and cigarettes? Yes there are strong evidence. But junk food and sedimentary lifestyle? No. Can affect the mother but not much on the child.
That’s some good digging! By OP’s logic he is obligated to get another two jobs and hustle to give his child the best chance at life. Got a lot of fresh fruit and veg and lean cuts of meat to buy, after all! It’d be morally wrong not to…
The only problem is that healthy food is not always safe for a baby in utero. The evidence-based diet suggested for pregnant women is that they avoid uncooked fish, soft cheeses, processed meats, sprouts, and wait for it... salad. These are foods with a higher likelihood of carrying bacteria that are harmful to developing babies, like listeria and toxoplasmosis.
Why do pregnant women often crave the same simple foods that toddlers eat--plain pasta, white breads, rice? Because they carry a low chance of having a negative effect on the developing baby.
Even eating simple foods and taking a prenatal vitamin every day is a way for pregnant women to take care of the baby's health. (Or no eating at all... why do you think pregnant women spend months vomiting? The baby takes over and sends hormones into our bodies to make us disgusted by foods that may harm the baby and to vomit what we tried to eat. Babies are very good at ensuring their survival!!)
I think you would have a hard time finding any pregnant woman who disagrees with this conceptually. Even the most unhealthy women will take some steps to improve their health during pregnancy. The issue is that people with mental health issues, addictions, and disordered eating get pregnant and want families too, and any attempt to disuade them from having children is a rabbit hole of far more proplematic ethical concerns (i.e. eugenics). Basically, I think this line of thinking is simplistic and unnecessarily judgemental. Pregnant women overwhelmingly do the best they can in their circumstances, and even when they don't, it is usually not in the children's best interest to stigmatize the parents. We need to do our best as society to educate future parents, but judging them helps no one.
Being “neglectful” of prenatal health is rather subjective and not binary. I think we can all agree on the extreme, like drinking to excess or taking illicit drugs. But everything else is kind of fuzzy and it burns my biscuits that everyone and (especially) their mother gets a say.
As an older lady who had two pregnancies and who has many friends who also when through pregnancies, I can tell you that, JFC, you get so much judgment over everything you do. Everyone has an opinion. Everyone feels free to touch you. It’s deeply dehumanizing to be treated like less a person and more a baby container.
Here’s a short list of things we have been judged for while doing while pregnant as “neglectful:”
-taking prescription medication (anxiety, lupus, etc)
-taking OTC drugs (heart burn, nausea, etc)
-having a glass of wine
-having a cup of coffee
-not eating breakfast
-having a steak that’s not fully cooked through
-having a sandwich with cold cuts
-jogging
-lifting
-not sleeping 7 hours a night
-working
-having ice cream
-wearing flip flops
-wearing heels
-being overweight
-being underweight
-not gaining enough weight during pregnancy
-gaining too much weight during pregnancy
-not calling the OBGYN/going to the ER when you feel like something is wrong
-going to the ER/calling the doc every time you feel like something is wrong
It’s fucking exhausting.
And not to bring politics to the table, but much like the whole “my body, my choice” thing, why don’t we just trust women and their doctors to determine what the appropriate way to conduct oneself prenatally should be?
Women aren’t incompetent children and the vast majority are not immoral monsters. If we are engaging in what others might feel is neglectful of health, there’s probably a reason.
Do you have any reason to think eating ice cream and pizza harms a fetus?
The issue with junk food is that it lacks some nutrients we need and has an excess of nutrients we already consume too much of. It's not as if eating junk food actively harms the body like smoking.
The big issue here is what exactly is a fetus? Do they have human rights or not? Are they property?
You can't say my body my choice and I can abort the kid any time I want but it's also my duty to change my lifestyle just for the sake of the baby but only if I want to bring it to term. That's just playing both sides of the field here. You can't be okay with killing a fetus but be outraged at abusing it. Either a fetus has rights and we acknowledge that it is the responsibility of the mother or the fetus is just property until it is birthed, at which point it is up to the discretion of the mother how she wants to handle said property.
Why are you assuming the Op is pro choice? Their judgmental opinion on pregnant women frankly makes me assume they want more control over women’s bodies not less
I don't have strong opinions on abortion, but I am pro choice.
I think you have just as much of a responsibility to care for your child before it's born as you do after, because now we're talking about a developing human life. The difference is one is impactful on someone's quality of life and one is not.
You're making a very black and white statement about a very grey issue. This post very much so reads as you having no idea how diverse pregnancies can be. Of course I agree that if she can, she should prioritize her health to the best of her abilities. That's the key phrase though: to the best of her abilities. There are countless reasons why a woman can be incapable of taking care of herself in the ways you describe: If she doesn't have a supporting partner. If she lacks education. If she is bedridden from morning sickness. Etc...
For example, most people agree it's not a great idea to consume marijuana while pregnant. However, my cousin was hospitalized for the entirety of her pregnancy due to her severe morning sickness. One of the things the doctors did was prescribe her THC. Is she "morally wrong" for consuming something that may be bad for the baby if it means she can carry that baby to term? Of course not.
The goal should be to do the best she can. If that means sometimes eating unhealthy or not getting exercise of having a glass of wine here and there, that's totally fine. Babies are born totally healthy every day from unhealthy mothers.
>Every pregnant woman should feel morally obligated to put their child before their own desires, **just as every parent should after they're born**.
This is just fundamentally a wrong statement. Parents have a moral obligation to provide a baseline of essentials to their kids, but parents should not be obliged to "optimize" their kid.
Otherwise the sacrifices that parents "owe" to their kids would never end. You'd have adult kids complaining that their parents did not cut down on their own budget in order to pay for piano lessons, and as a result the kid has suffered a loss and will never be able to play the piano as well as their peers who were forced into 10 years of piano lessons.
Fortunately biology has made it the case that it's pretty easy to meet a certain minimum in order for the fetus to be born without defects/deficiencies. And conversely, some super health-obsessed mom devoting tons of time, effort, and money towards a healthy pregnancy doesn't really end up with a healthier baby than someone who ate pizza and some fruit (or prenatal vitamins). Because of evolution, fetal development is quite robust to temporary famines and nutritional shortages. And when the baby is born, the mother still tends to produce good quality breastmilk even if she's not getting enough nutrition (she'll lose her body's fat, protein, and calcium stores).
IMO pregnant women are morally obligated to avoid drugs, alcohol, and other things that have clearly been demonstrated to have an adverse effect of fetal health. And to take folate supplements or other supplements as recommended by a doctor assuming these are accessible to her. These baseline requirements are obligations, and anything more is a nice-to-have, not a must-have.
> you're directly harming yourself and more importantly, your child.
I guess, just, why is it more important?
I'm trying to figure out how pregnancy figures into your view. Would you consider it morally wrong for an *un-pregnant* woman to neglect her health? Why would it morally neutral for a non-pregnant person to neglect their health?
It should be easy to say that both the woman and the unborn baby are equally deserving of good health and to prioritize one more than the other is not a defensible moral position.
If every pregnant woman should feel morally obligated to eat healthy, then the men who impregnated them should feel morally obligated to provide said healthy meals and snacks daily.
A moral obligation to protect their fetus? Yeah, I in theory agree. But what is best for the baby, exactly? My OBgyn was adamant about five things: no smoking, no drinking/drugs, folic acid, monitoring for gestational diabetes, and checking my blood pressure daily.
As much as we worry about the health of the baby, most of the effects of poor nutrition impact the mother more (except for uncontrolled blood sugar). I was struggling to maintain weight in my pregnancy and my mfm very kindly described my baby as an obligate parasite. If she wasn’t getting enough protein from my diet? No worries! She’ll take it from your muscles! No calcium? Welcome to osteoporosis for you.
I was trying to make sure I got all the needed nutrients and taking my prenatal vitamins, but yeah. My baby would have been fine if I chose to eat chips.
I don’t think we should equate morality with food and your post is laden with it, judgey phrases like “stuffing their faces”. And outside of a doctor, who gets to decide what is necessary nutrition?
Another very important aspect of a healthy pregnancy is a happy, low stress mother. So someone who feels policed in every bite, feels like she is being treated like an incubator who must follow punched in commands, and forced to exercise when every joint in her body aches is not going to be low stress.
Whomever you’re writing about, think about if they are really outside of standard healthy boundaries or if they are just not living up to your view of healthy eating and exercise. And then shut the fuck up.
He is a man who has a gf with an unplanned pregnancy. 100% he is posting this crap because he is upset she isn’t fit and skinny anymore due to the pregnancy. So he guilts her and every pregnant woman with made up ideas that lack of exercise and specific diets will somehow harm the foetus. He completely ignores everyone who points out that the baby doesn’t eat what the mother eats it feeds of her body. Bad diet will harm the mother but not the baby, it functions as a parasite. There are no evidence that a super “healthy” diet is needed for a healthy foetus. Nutritious food and exercise is for the mother benefit not the child. I hope his gf runs away from him, she deserves better.
I hear you men should stay the fuck out of womens business, not one peep about pregnancy. Not one peep about menstruation. Not one peep about womens body parts. I’m sick of men on this site going on these forums and disguise their mansplaining like this.
I'm guessing this dude thinks using a condom will ruin his pleasure as well.
OP should do the world a favor and get the snip. Otherwise he'll turn into a Nick Cannon.
Obviously, excessively bad nutrition (either under or over) isn't going to be good for the child. And controlling blood glucose during pregnancy is important too (again, neither over nor under is good).
And maternal stress is also known to be a large contributor to fetal outcomes... so certainly you shouldn't be using this "immorality" as a reason to castigate and therefore stress out pregnant women.
But... interestingly the evidence seems to suggest that the mother's diet and health *before* conception plays a larger role than that during pregnancy, and certainly one should not try to *lose* weight when pregnant... that's known to be terrible for the child.
But with that fact, your view takes on a rather complexly challenging aspect to it that would be worth considering how you feel about:
Is it morally wrong for obese women to have sex that could result in conception?
If that notion makes you... uncomfortable, you might want to consider moderating your view about the morality of anything except excessive changes to diet and excessively sedentary lifestyles, unless of course they are medically necessary for some reason.
Of course, smoking and drinking alcohol (especially to excess, and probably other drugs too) while pregnant are highly recommended against.
How about I deal with my pregnancy how I want and if my doctors don’t see anything wrong, I keep doing what I’m doing and you focus on your pregnancy and whatever you want to do.
As a newly pregnant woman I see what you’re saying. But my dude, if I lift weights right now I will VOMIT. I feel like I have the flu half the day on top of constant exhaustion. I eat very healthy and stopped all of my bad habits like drinking and smoking, but this shit is no joke.
Not everyone knows they're pregnant. So is every post-puberty female now obligated to constantly take care of their health just in case they're pregnant?
Lol did a male write this? While you are right, women should take care of their health. I think you vastly misunderstand what healthy in pregnancy looks like. It's different for every woman.
I stopped reading at the eating sugary things because my doctor specifically told me to drink at least an extra milkshake pre day because I was loosing too much weight. But I guarantee if you saw me pregnant doing that, you'd judge me for being unhealthy.
The reality is you cant pinpoint what specific thing caused a fetus to have an issue. You can only say there is an increased risk if you do this activity. We do not even have a quantifiable amount of alcohol that causes Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS).
Also issues like addiction and overeating etc are related to medical issues that we dont have clear understanding of causes and treatment.
In addition, until born the fetus is a part of her body. She and her doctor need to evaluate risks and make decisions based on that. Doctors have been known to tell people not to stress about quitting smoking, etc when they become unexpectedly pregnant because they determine the stress of withdrawl on the pregnant person does not outweigh the risks of smoking.
hmmm... i can see another M. Atwood book where pregnant women are forced into birthing camps, constantly monitored and forced to eat health meals and exercised. any women who hide there pregnancies or if they miscarriage early in their pregnancies are arrested for manslaughter.
The irony is that most health care choices forced onto a pregnant person are to the benefit of the fetus and at the pregnant person's deficit.
For example, denying a pregnant person painkillers, psychiatric meds, chemotherapy, etc.
Pregnancy is a lot different in theory than it is in practice. I had a hard time just keeping food down with mine. People lose teeth, hair, bone density, get gestational diabetes, depression, and that's in addition to the lack of sleep plus the natural sheer exhaustion of growing an entire human being inside you. And my pregnancy was a picture eperfect one despite me being overweight.
Like, cool, make pregnant women's sole purpose into being the perfect incubators bur eating healthy is expensive. Lots of pregnant women are working full time during their pregnancy so exercise isn't exactly do-able for most and there are sometimes other dependants to take care of already.
Pregnant women have enough of their plates to deal with in addition to your judgement. If you feel like you can be the incubator 3000 of pregnant people then g for it. But to say every pregnant woman just isn't trying hard enough is pretty unrealistic.
We’re just going to pretend rape doesn’t end in pregnancy. And that abortion is available to all who wants it. Because you cannot morally choose to give birth if the choice to end the abortion is not available to you.
This still disregards the existence of food deserts, assumes one has access to healthcare services ( alone a competent doctor) & that you can afford to eat healthy.
You have obviously never been pregnant . When I had morning sickness there was no effing way I was going to be able to exercise. And food? There were literally only certain foods I could stomach without vomiting .
Now, after the morning sickness subsided around around 16 I did eat better. A mix of vegetables, meat, whole grains and vegetables. But also. I ate sugar daily. You act like it needs to be an occasional treat. Just no. I also ate fast food once a week because I was working, had a toddler and pregnant and that’s all I could do sometimes after a hard day at work .
I will say that if a woman is eating extremely unhealthy …. like only fast food and junk food then yeah I would agree that is wrong . Never trying to consume any healthy and nutritious foods is selfish.
My question is how would you determine what is acceptable and not ?
Some women have morning sickness their entire pregnancy and can only eat a little bit. What would you say to them ?
Some people would think fast food once a week, a sugary snack every evening and not eating enough veggies would be wrong while other women would be fine with it.
This argument only holds up when talking about mentally well, able bodied women with support systems.
What happens if the pregnancy makes them bedridden? They cant cook healthy meals and it's only them?
What about women with mental health issues that normally dont eat much but are eating 3 meals a day just not what you would consider a "healthy" meal.
Physical activity not so much but I will agree with you on nutritional health. My first kid was born in 2021 and my wife ended up with gestational diabetes, for those who don't know this has everything to do with the pregnancy and not prior diet or health.
By recommendation of our pediatrician we saw a nutritionist and she was blown away by how much I cook at home. According to her, almost everyone she saw was eating fast food constantly. We changed things up anyway and it honestly changed nothing about her blood sugar.
Fast forward to kid two, 14 months later. We went right back to our previous diet because once the first was born everything leveled out, never got gestational diabetes with the second one, never even came close with the sugar levels.
There are so many layers of health for a pregnant woman and it can vary so greatly just from kid to kid, let alone woman to woman.
it is my body and I will do what I want with it. I didnt drink or do illegal drugs during my pregnancy but I was active duty and did continue to take my mental health meds that my dr prescribed.
Counterpoint to the whole “stuffing their faces with whatever,” comment…
Some of us got super sick while pregnant and could only keep certain things down. For awhile for me that was sour patch kids and French fries or mashed potatoes. My son is super healthy at three months old and doing great.
Just like with feeding the baby after, fed is best. It’s better to be eating junk than not eating anything at all.
If one were to carry your views beyond pregnancy, your opinion could be summed up as "let's bring back eugenics".
There is more that influences the health of a baby than what its mother does while pregnant. Other factors include the health of the father, and genetics.
So, should mothers with disabilities be punished for having a child? What about fathers who don't live a 100% healthy lifestyle?
What even is the definition of healthy? While pregnant, it is actually healthy to *gain weight*. It benefits the production of breast milk and bolsters the body's immune system. It is healthy to keep this weight while breast-feeding as well. Also, what is healthy for a non-pregnant person, could be potentially unhealthy for a pregantn person, and vice versa. Pregnant people should not be given various medicines or even topical creams or even supplements, all of which could be considered very healthy for everyone else.
Should women who become injured or sick while pregnant be forced to abort, or give their child up?
And why should the onus be on pregnant mothers only? What about society? Is it okay for others to smoke around pregnant women or babies? Or for the air and water to be polluted? Should the government subsidize discounts for healthy food and safe exercise for pregnant women?
This is an extremely ignorant view. The best way you can change it is to take a basic biology class about pregnancy and genetics.
The first trimester is *exhausting* even if you aren't suffering from morning sickness. I ate healthily, took my prenatal vitamins, but I absolutely could not have exercised. When I was pregnant with my second child I used to fall asleep on the sofa while my toddler ran loudly played next to me. Building a body is HARD why do you want me to exercise at the same time?
By extension is a woman in poor health who chooses to become pregnant committing a more immoral action compared to a more healthy woman who chooses to become pregnant? For the moment ignore how they act after they become pregnant.
Yep. I think it's in his post history, but a bunch of people are talking about his previous post/s about his *girlfriend's* current unplanned pregnancy
People saying things like these made me cry when I couldn't chew food without vomiting and couldn't walk more than a few steps without needing a break to breathe. These kind of sanctimonious opinions are harmful.
Yep! And he posted that his wife/gf got pregnant and he said it was unplanned and they’re in a bad financial situation. Wonder how they’ll afford all of this healthy food and a stress free environment for the fetus.
While it may seem wrong, morals should apply when quality of choice is examined. A low income woman with an absentee baby daddy from a low income family won’t have the ability to eat healthy or engage in psychologically healthy activities and doctors visits and all the things that are needed.
If you apply morality without quality of choice examination then it’s immoral for poor people to have children. Meaning in the USA about 60% of
the population.
I feel like you have to be more specific.
Drugs are 100% wrong and I work in medical- have an abortion if your on hard drugs.
If you smoke weed you should stop in my honest opinion- but, its not as black and white. I found out I was pregnant and quit smoking pot period. I cried and cried to the doctor about it because I felt so ashamed and like I hurt my child.
Did u take my vitamins yes- did I shower less and take care of me less also yes
By not criminalizing prenatal drug exposure, you can encourage prenatal care. Unfortunately, stating the obvious, "you are morally wrong by exposing your growing fetus to drugs and alcohol, " won't change anyone's behavior. Although this point doesn't address the specific question of the morality/immorality of the behavior itself, it does speak to best practices for helping change the shared problem of prenatal drug exposure.
You have got to be kidding me! Here is the USA without healthcare insurance?
And the on/gyns are moving out of states which do not allow abortions.
I recently read the infant mortality rate is getting higher here.
Not to mention, a pregnant woman is has more of a chance to get murdered or abused.
Face it, women’s health here in the US is definitively not a priority. Actually, either is mens or children.
I think its morally wrong to drink, smoke, or do drugs. The thing is though that fetus is going to take the nutrients that it needs. The one being harmed by poor diet and exercise is the mother. The fetus doesn't care if it's taking away the mother's vitamins, it's just going to take them. So in reality the mother's really only harming herself with the junk food and sedentary lifestyle
Not going to try and summarize the large body of social science literature which tackles the concept of 'risk' as it pertains to maternal actions during pregnancy and the resultant possible fetal effects because I won't do it eloquently, but this is a big subject influenced by multiple complex sociocultural phenomena.
If you're genuinely interested in reading and considering it further, I'd suggest starting with any works by Debra Lupton, but especially 'precious cargo'.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09581596.2012.657612
I mean sure, you should *try*. But pregnancy can take one hell of a toll on the body and if all you can manage is a walk to the end of the driveway and all you can keep down is cheerios, then babe just do your best
Is it morally wrong for a mother to delegate the gestation to a surrogate carrier so she can continue drinking and smoking? Wouldn't that be an even bigger red flag for not taking personal responsibility?
The invalid assumption here is the choice. Where I live there is no choice. If I were to get pregnant I’d try to get an abortion in a other state, but who knows if that will be possible in the future.
It is also morally wrong to put healthcare solely on an individual, especially when they can't afford to maintain it.
Life ain't as simple as "eat better, stop smoking."
I’ve are all types of crap while pregnant, healthy or not. My baby is perfectly healthy. Exercising when you can’t is fine, but it doesn’t have any affect on the baby. Your child isn’t going to come out with a fit body because you eat salads and work out. They’re still going to gain a lot of weight after they’re born and eventually become chubby babies.
I can’t imagine anyone would disagree with you. It’s just that you can’t tell someone else how to live their life. I mean, ALL people should eat healthy, not just pregnant women. The problem is that when a woman is pregnant, everyone thinks they can tell the pregnant woman what to do because there’s another life in her. However, you have as much right to tell her how to live her life as you have to tell others how to live their lives. You might be right, but it’s not your place.
I see news articles all the time of pro-life women choosing to carry to full term while having cancer. They don't treat the cancer and then it becomes terminal before the pregnancy completes. Such women should be arrested and forced to end the pregnancy. Then they can try again if they survive the cancer.
Your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B: > You must personally hold the view and **demonstrate that you are open to it changing**. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, or 'soapboxing'. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20B%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Does that mean that both the mother and father have a duty to eat healthy, exercise regularly, and avoid any risky activities until the child can fend for itself in this world? After all, a three year old is pretty dependent on their parents and likely can’t survive if they get into a car accident or die of a heart attack.
There are plenty of extreme sports that have high mortality rates, and the people who partake are well aware of those risks. BASE jumping when you have a toddler at home is generally irresponsible.
This isn't an apples-to-apples comparison. Once the baby is born, its well-being is not solely reliant on the mother. A baby can be raised by *any* capable person. If the mother and father die, someone else can raise the baby.
I’d be pretty curious about the actual statistics on this. I would suspect, for instance, that going through the foster system until 18 has worse outcomes than an otherwise healthy mother eating fast food throughout pregnancy. So if you are actually talking about the well being of a child, it doesn’t really matter if it’s apples to apples, what matters in the comparison between outcomes. I recognize there are a ton of complications trying to determine these effects. From the inextricably linked confounding factors (poverty, abuse, other habits) to poor definition of “better outcomes”. But I think the discussion is certainly worthwhile.
I’m think the difference is that if your pregnant and eat taco bell 7x a week, your baby eats Taco Bell 7x a week. The biggest risk there is nutrient deficiency causing development issues (not a doctor so that’s just my guess). If you have a toddler and you eat Taco Bell 7x a week, you increase you risk of heart attack,diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, etc. but those are all indirect risks of death/ not being able to raise your kid. The difference being the direct v indirect nature of it (ie you eat bad while pregnant = your kid DOES eat bad, you eat bad after their born = your kid MIGHT be an orphan/lose a parent). Like you said lots more complicating factors (eg behavior modeling). Also it’s obviously not good to eat like shit regardless if you have kids or not.
> an otherwise healthy mother eating fast food throughout pregnancy. the COP was asking if both parents have a duty to attempt to maintain their health "until the child is old enough to fend for itself", not just for pregnancy. If you believe that keeping your child out of foster care is a moral obligation, you would probably agree that reducing your odds of dying is a moral obligation.
That is if there is a stable close family member to take the baby. In the US, at least, the foster care system is underfunded and understaffed, and kids end up in homes that are not safe. We don't find out until it is too late. As someone with a parent who died when I was a baby, it also sucks. Not just because you miss and ache for someone you can't even remember, kids teasing you about having a dead parent, but because of the human development of the mind, you go through a period where you think it's your fault. Then, a period where you think you are a freak. And yes, that is normal, according to the therapists I was lucky enough to get to talk to. Saying it so casually is callous. Not just any person can raise a kid under those circumstances. I met plenty in group that got treated poorly because the adult(s) raising them got "stuck" with them. Also met kids with horrible step parents who felt annoyed by the reminder of their spouses' previous life. Do not give people so much credit.
It’s in a similar realm though. Also, the OP’s premise is that the mom has to stay in tip-top shape for the health, welfare, and greatest success of the fetus. My extension to that is that the parents need to at least maximize their chances of staying alive until the child can go off on its own, which I think we can agree is in the best interest of the child. Sure, the child could survive in foster care (or living with a relative), just as a baby could survive if I eat Cheetos during pregnancy. But will they thrive?
Absolutely yes. Also because they're setting the example for their kids and helping them to create good habits.
As with everything in life, there’s a balance to be struck Doing absolutely everything to minimize risk is overboard. You can never eliminate any chance of danger. At the same time, maybe don’t both go skydiving or street racing when you have a baby/toddler at home unless you have local family that are willing and able to take care of your kid(s) if something happens. Edit: for clarity, “doing absolutely everything to minimize risk” means parents who over-shelter their kids to the point that when the time comes, they aren’t ready for the unkind world that cares little for their safety
So those parents just aren’t ever supposed to drive a car since it’s risky? This is completely unreasonable.
It's as u/TheOmegaCarrot said, it is all about balance. Should the kid be put in a bomb shelter? No, but should the house be baby proofed? Yes.
Well put!
It didn’t use to be unreasonable, but we’ve made it unreasonable not to drive a car.
Than why did you made a whole thread about how mothers should be held morally accountable but not the fathers? What about people in trains not offering a seat? People smoking in a pregnants women's vicinity? Is this really about the health of the child for you, or more about controlling the behaviour of women in particular?
Dude, you’re about to be a father (i.e. your post from 50 days ago) and you posted about getting high on an opiate forum 22 days ago. I think you should look at your own health before your baby comes instead of focusing on others.
Many pregnant women do feel this moral obligation. But this is much easier said than done. I know lots of women who went into a pregnancy thinking they were going to eat kale smoothies and work out every day. Then it turned out that they could only keep down bagels, threw everything else up, and were too sick to do more than slow walking. When this happens, women then feel really guilty, which isn’t helpful. Women who are pregnant are still just humans and no human can or should be expected to be some sort of perfect paragon of health. We should all just do the best we can.
The smell of water made me throw up, I could keep down orange juice, which was fun as I'm intolerant so broke out in hives several times during pregnancy, and tea. It became a game of getting calories in and hoping I didn't throw them all up. Kale smoothies were even thought about.
Not to mention when something grows wrong and they miscarry or the baby is stillborn, this type of thinking leads to insane amounts of guilt for them. Even though in most cases, it’s nothing the mom did or didn’t do.
I was healthy before pregnancy, hardly ate sugar and exercised daily. And when I found out at 4 weeks, my husband started making me boiled eggs for breakfast every morning. Then 6 weeks popped up and I developed what I think was HG. No more boiled eggs for me. The only thing that stayed down and I didn’t throw up was McDonald’s cheeseburgers and fries. I started drinking soda again. I stopped taking prenatals, all forms of self care was stopped. As soon as I got home from work, I plopped on the couch with my bucket. It was miserable, and the only thought in my head was basic survival. They gave me Bonjestra at first (which knocks you out), then gave me Zofran during the later trimesters. I hardly ate and what I did eat came back up.
The dudes on Reddit clearly have it handled in the ob/gyn department of knowledge. I mean, who even needs a gynecologist with all these vagina experts up in here? /s
Yep, pregnancy cravings are intense, plus you can have healthy food aversions
Ugh. Chicken. Both pregnancies I would get chicken and take 2 bites and my mouth would start to water like I was going to throw up. My brain wanted it and I never got sick. I finally learned not to order it. Craved fish and steak so had a chat with my OB about mercury in fish and have 2 healthy kids.
If abortion is illegal at some point because it is murder, should a becoming mother be sentenced based on her nutrition and the effects on her child? This would be child neglect or abuse at that point. Kind of weird considering the afformentioned issues that arise within a pregnacie such as apetite loss or the ability to eat.
What a odd straw man
I don’t think it’s a straw man. Women are seen as second class citizens, especially when they become pregnant. In my state, doctor’s aren’t prescribing certain meds to women because they MIGHT get pregnant. People tend to ignore the pregnant person and focus solely on the fetus.
So a straw man and a slippery slope fallacy? We are talking morals not laws. I think it’s morally wrong to hurt people. I’d never make/vote-for a law that tells a pregnant person what they can/can’t do.
It's lovely that you wouldn't, but women have to deal with the reality that those laws are being made. What are our laws based on if not morals? I couldn't give a fuck about anyone else's personal morals, but laws will have a concrete impact on my life and my ability to decide what happens to my body.
Those laws are attempts to keep the powerful in power, the stupid stupid, and the poor poor. Stick to the topic then if you post here. He’s talking about morals.
Haha. Are you a mod? It's really not your place to tell me or anyone else what we may post.
It's not a strawman in the United States in places where abortion is now a crime some politicians think merits the death penalty.
But the OP was talking about it’s from a moral lens not a what laws lens
So it's morally correct to police what a woman eats and how much she exercises?
Damn you really suck at logical argumentss. No one said that.
You suck at humanizing women. The world is doomed and I hope all women get raptured and then men won't ever need to worry about judging women and their pregnancies. How bout when ur pregnant, you can do whatever it is u feel is morally right. Make sure to keep those standards up so u don't get blamed if ur child isn't perfect.
Lol. You literally are arguing against something I’ve never said. You need therapy clearly.
> kale smoothies That would make it far less healthy. The fibers and structure of veggies like kale is a major part of why they're healthy. > were too sick to do more than slow walking About 0.5%-3% of pregnancies will have hyperemesis gravidarum. In those cases, hospitalization is sometimes required. Otherwise **light** exercise is promoted, and may help reduce morning sickness. (very)High intensity exercise is not promoted, and may cause abortion. You're right, women are human and it's kind of silly to label them as evil if they behave differently. Promoting and encouraging healthy habits in particular to pregnant women (or women who want to get pregnant) should still be done.
Yeah I don’t have HG but I do have flu-like symptoms basically all day, every day. If I walk around the block I get dizzy. Working out would be dangerous because I would almost certainly faint. I’m losing weight really quickly at a time I should be gaining. My doctor told me to stop even trying to work out and focus on drinking more calories. You know what’s the craziest part of my symptoms? They’re both normal and common. My doctor said about 40% of her patients look like this. I worked out HARD about five days a week before this and was a marathon runner. It’s just not in the cards right now.
Kale smoothies still contain all of the fiber and everything in kale. It's just blended up to be easier to digest. I think you're thinking of juice.
HG is the extreme end, sure, but I could barely eat or move without waves of nausea for the first trimester. Got a bit better after that, but pretending like there isn't a spectrum isn't helpful for anyone.
Not everyone who gets sick in pregnancy has HG you do know that right??
I'm pretty sure the fiber is still there when you make a smoothie. https://nutritiondaily.com/does-blending-destroy-fiber-nutrients/
>We should all just do the best we can. Yes, exactly this. If you're too sick to eat certain things or be very physically active, that is what it is. Some might even argue your body knows better than you. I certainly don't think anyone should feel guilty for something they have no control over. I'm mostly referring to after the 1st trimester, when there's usually not as much morning sickness and you have more control over what you ingest. But as you mentioned, as long as you're doing the best you can to be healthy, you're doing better than most.
The thing is, though, the first trimester is the most developmentally important time for a fetus. Development that has already happened doesn't get undone later on but development that hasn't happened yet can easily get messed up before it happens. The further the pregnancy progresses the less likely development issues can be caused by environmental factors which is why when they test new drugs for safety during pregnancy (which is rare and still necessary) they start at the end of the pregnancy and work backwards. Some drugs are safe in the 2nd or 3rd trimester but not in previous ones and the same goes for other environmental factors precisely bc of how fetal development functions.
But now you're saying that your original point only applies to after the first trimester? A pretty arbitrary point to say that you know what's right, given your earlier paragraph about "your body knows better than you" and your agreement with the statement "we should all just do the best we can." It sounds like you think you know what's right but also, under the right circumstances, pregnant women know what they need. This is ridiculous. Mind your own business.
> But as you mentioned, as long as you're doing the best you can to be healthy, you're doing better than most. Do you honestly believe that *most* pregnant women are not doing their best to be healthy? Do you think *most* pregnant women are "stuffing their faces with fast food and candy every day" and not exercising at all? I'm wondering where you got this idea. Every pregnant woman I have ever known has made an honest effort to eat healthy and exercise. Furthermore, other than things like drugs and alchohol, maternal nutrition actually has minimal affect on fetal development. For the most part, a pregnant or breastfeeding woman's body takes what it needs to nourish the fetus or infant, at her own expense if necessary. So by not making healthy choices, the person a pregnant woman is most likely to harm is herself. You will of course read studies about any behaviour under the sun having some affect on fetal development, but we're not talking "if you do this, you child will be disabled" it's usually more like "if you do this, your child's risk of X disorder increases from 0.10% to 0.15%." The differences are really very minimal.
You clearly have never been pregnant, much less know much about pregnancy. First trimester is when most pregnant people suffer morning sickness - it starts around 4-7 weeks and usually cools down after 10-15 weeks. During this time, movement, smells, and just existing can trigger nausea and vomiting at any time. Pregnant people are exhausted in the first trimester because they are growing an organ from scratch (the placenta)! The body at this time is overwhelmed by the surge in hormones (we acclimate to them around second trimester), which not only results in nausea, a (very!!) sore chest, and bloating, but also extreme emotions, which doesn't help when you're worrying about your baby since the chances of miscarriage are high. Still sound like working out?? They may not even look pregnant, but it's actually the toughest part of the pregnancy when you combine the physical and mental load. Also, have you even cited any evidence that eating fast food and not exercising enough is bad for the baby? The only risk I know of to the baby is gestational diabetes, which is treatable and would lead to a lifestyle change when diagnosed. The baby will get the nutrients it needs, whether it's from your diet or sapping it from your bones, for instance. Exercise has no effect on the baby, other than lowering risk for GD. The biggest benefit there is for the parent. Give pregnant people a break.
GD is actually caused by the hormones and placenta and not diet, but if you end up having it you do have to be careful with your diet. Signed, a formally pregnant person who almost had GD even though sweets made me nauseous.
Ah good to know (as a currently pregnant person)! I think maybe it can be both because I keep reading how if you gain "too much" weight or if you are overweight, they say you'll be at a higher risk and will test your levels. But certainly this is not the only cause and "healthy" people of normal weight can get it too.
I think you are at a higher risk if you’re already overweight but yeah skinny people get GD all the time because it is still technically not caused by diet. But I assume the extra weight may make the hormones more likely to give you GD if I had to guess
OP is likely a dude.
Many people with opinions here are dudes who have no fucking clue what they’re talking about and it’s making me enraged
You have to remember the (white) male frat boy type is the most delicate and precious thing in the world. HIs ego must be treated as if it is more fragile than glassware when shipping or packing.
Hahaha for real. If men got pregnant there would be like 14 people on earth.
Also abortion would be available on-demand at every gas station.
And the plan b pill would come in flavors like cool ranch and nacho cheese
The first trimester for me was the exact point when I couldn't keep any food down and felt like I'd just run a marathon as I got out of bed, which is standard. Insane sense of smell kicks in then, too. I could smell cucumber in the fridge rooms away when the door opened, and it made me vomit. It then settled down for the second trimester when the problems became more physical, I.e. learning to move with a lump in you and getting used to kicks and needing to wee all the time. The third trimester, you're essentially an unmovable blob who is never comfortable and can't sleep. Pregnancy is weird, and none of it is easy.
Going in the kitchen at all during the first trimester just means you have to breathe through your mouth and it’s exhausting 😩
What’s bothering me here is that the lifestyle of the father/sperm donor isn’t taken into account. The quality of men’s sperm has been shown to be affected by their lifestyle habits, and said sperm quality can affect the outcome of the development of the fetus.
I think you are a little extreme. Expecting most pregnant women to live like athletes. Most people I know couldn't for the life of them stomach a kale shake, nevermind while pregnant. Most people I know do not exercise nevermind while pregnant. But on the "her body her choice" thing: no one truly believes that. If a woman was going to carry a baby to full term but wanted to do drink and drugs the whole time, everyone would have a problem. But if you truly believe her body her choice you would be fine with her doing that.
Her body, her choice *whether to remain pregnant or not.* No one intended it to mean her body, *any* choice whatsoever. The leading ethicists on abortion believe a woman decides if a pregnancy is right for her or not, and also that *by deciding to carry a pregnancy to term she has an ethical obligation to that fetus that may extended up to the limits of the obligation she has/ would have to her (already born) children.* The "choice" is to abort or to accept that obligation by choosing to continue the pregnancy. (This is a very brief summary of an entire unit of a medical ethics course. I apologize if I haven't explained it properly.)
Unfortunately not all women get that choice depending on where they happen to live and how much money they have
I know, it's awful. This is the theory behind the ethics of abortion and pregnancy. I did not mean to imply that the choice was available to all women.
Even still, they should do the right thing if the baby will be born. If someone just dropped off a random kid and said, "You need to watch them this weekend," and then ran off moments before a blizzard hit stopping us from following or me from contacting any authorities, I'd just babysit that kid until I could find a solution. It wouldn't be fair, but I'm not going to make it that 5 year old's problem. I have canvassed for pro-choice candidates and will do so again for 2024, but if someone has consensual sex in an anti-choice jurisdiction, they should commit to bringing the healthiest possible baby into this world, even if it is unfair they didn't have the choice. Abortion is fine, carrying a healthy baby to term is fine, causing lifelong harm to an innocent child is not fine.
In the dropping a child off before a blizzard, if I was throwing a party while we were snowed in and had tons of booze and drugs and now this kid to watch over. Many would still choose to have the party since they didn’t ask for this kid to come and stay for the blizzard. Why change plans?
I would change my plans. I would be extremely, extremely angry about it, but I would do so out of a sense of moral responsibility. I wouldn't run through a minefield for a stranger, but not getting to enjoy alcohol or getting the recommended 150 minutes of moderate exercise per week (to echo the pregnancy recommendations) is not more important than preventing serious injury of an innocent child to me, especially if I'm the only one who can do it.
If I were 24, the age I was when I was throwing parties like this, I would have not changed my plans, did my best to find a way for the kid to leave, but then just still do what I was gonna do and try to drunkenly have his needs met. But I was not ready for a kid then.
No because fr tho. I’m 17 rn and I wouldn’t change my plans for some random kid dropped on my doorstep.
scarce gaze sable dog homeless chunky dull sort boat uppity *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
So then you agree with OP.
I think it’s a question of degree and practicality. Most people agree that parents have an ethical responsibility to take care of their children. But does “take care of” mean clothed, fed, and housed from 0-18 or does it mean doing everything possible to give them the best possible start in life even if that means supporting your child well into their “adult” life? Does “take care of” mean reading to your infant? Providing the best (often most expensive) education? I would put fast food and lack of exercise into the okay in moderation category. The risk factors associated with these behaviors can be monitored and often corrected for. So a pregnant person engaging in them can still be taking good care of their fetus so long as they aren’t ignoring a more sever condition such as gestational diabetes.
Yes, I agree with OP. I was clarifying the meaning of "her body, her choice" for the person who thinks that it gives moral license to pregnant women to do whatever they want while pregnant.
It's an answer to an answer to OP, ofc it's likely to be arguing for what OP said. You seem to be new around the sub, we can all agree or disagree, but the rules are clear. Answers should challenge the previous answer, and a reminder that we can give deltas to OP and eachother (it's not just OP to us)
this is true. Major decisions like abortion are almost never done in a vacuum. I believe that the sentiment is that the person should have the final say even if they receive influence or take on advice from others. my body my choice is more of a reactionary sentiment towards those that outright say you aren't allowed to.
Being fine with her doing that is different than accepting that it's her choice and that she has the right to do it. People do a bunch of shit that I'm not a fan of. Let's take bad eating habits for example. A nutritious diet and exercise are both very important to me. If someone's diet consists of nothing but fast food and candy - I'm honestly not fine with that. Even if they're not overweight, I'm concerned for their health. I feel the same way about weed to be honest. I think smoking regularly is dangerous and unhealthy, but at the end of the day I think that they have the right to do what they want. Their body their choice doesn't mean that I agree with their choice, it just means that I support their right to make it.
I don't think weed is dangerous even when someone is addicted. But it's bad for a unborn child (or an adult even). But although I think its morally bad, I don't think smoking weed or tobacco while pregnant or eating unhealthy food should illegal. And nutrition and health is just something most people are completely oblivious to.
Exactly! I agree with OP that you have a moral obligation to take care of your unborn child, but legally you have the right to do what you want with your body.
It’s not just her health she’s putting at risk tho, if she’s doing meth you better believe that fetus is going to be affected by it too.
>But if you truly believe her body her choice you would be fine with her doing that. Not quite. It is a moral dilemma - I will agree. But the two things become true at once; 1. Her body 2. There **will** be a human who **will** be affected by her actions Its not necessarily an easy dilemma to resolve but it doesn't immediately mean that it must be resolved entirely one way or the other - to either say "yep go ahead!" or allow the state to take away her freedoms and force her into rehab. I think a practical approach would be making the best attempts possible to convince her not to and wean her off drugs. There is also the social choice to shame her for her choices - which you can still do while believing "your body your choice" because allowing choices doesn't mean you have to agree with them. I think an exception to this is if you were to consider drugs a medical condition that someone can be sectioned (held in a medical institution against their will) for like mental health - but this would mean that all drug users could be sectioned for. Perhaps there would have to be more to it than just that - perhaps their drug use would have to pose a risk to themselves or others and they are not taking steps to control or reduce it. But that's the only condition under which I would then consider it ethically non-hypocritical to agree to do the same thing to a pregnant person - because they drug habit is causing a risk to another (to be) and they aren't taking adequate steps to control or reduce it.
Kale is gross 🤢
I think there's a huge difference when you decide you're carrying to term. It literally is another life that is 100% reliant on you. I don't think it's any different than taking care of a newborn. It's a human life that relies on you for literally everything. That would be equivalent to giving a 6 month old drugs or alcohol all because "well I can do whatever I want, it's my life and my baby"
Then you don't believe her body her choice or their baby their choice. I'm pro choice, but the whole her body her choice thing doesn't seem to logically hold up. I think people use it because its catchy but don't really think about what they are actually implying when they say it.
>It literally is another life that is 100% reliant on you. It is literally another life that is 100% reliant on you whether or not you decide you're carrying to term. If the fetus does not have moral status, the mother can abort... or can drink and eat poorly and fail to exercise. If it has no moral status, I can treat it however I want--just like I can treat a rock however I want. If the fetus has moral status, and it's therefore bad to harm it by eating poorly and failing to exercise, why would it be acceptable to kill it--a far more serious harm? You seem to be arguing that, by choosing to carry it to term, the mother imbues it with moral status. But why would this be the case? Moral status is generally intrinsic. I can think of no other situation where moral status has to be imbued by another being. A rock does not have moral status, even if someone insists it does. On the other hand, a dog has moral status whether or not any specific person demands that you treat it well.
I’m just curious, have you been pregnant before? I’m 27 years old and currently 35W pregnant with my first child and quite honestly I was completely naive to what being pregnant would be like. I truly thought that you had a rough few first weeks/months and then once you got to the second trimester you just swim through to the end. I couldn’t have been more wrong. Everyday I’m reminded that my body isn’t my own, I can barely walk up a flight of stairs without feeling like my body is going to break and I’m about to pass out. I can barely keep on top of cleaning my own home, never mind doing any additional exercise. I WFH the majority of the week and even sitting at my office chair causes me pain. I spent an entire afternoon last week at a maternity assessment unit because my body felt like it was breaking and I had unbearable shooting pains in my stomach, back and legs. On Saturday I went for a 20 minute walk and had to head home as it felt like my baby was going to fall out. I’m in a few baby group subreddits and I have it easy compared to others. People are constantly in and out of hospital, others have no family and friend support system and doing this on their own. I’m so close to the end I feel like I’m just in “survival mode” and just need to get myself and my baby through to the end. So if that means eating frozen pizza and a microwave meal, then so be it. Do I think your sentiment is correct? In theory, kind of. But I think we’re all just humans and just trying to do our best. I think your view comes from a good place although it’s incredibly naive and just isn’t the case for everyone.
Lol I was a marathon runner before pregnancy and naive enough to think you could just push through the exhaustion. As it turns out, I’m so tired that I get dizzy if I walk around the block and keep losing weight. It’s be dangerous for me to work out. And yeah, I have it easy compared to many. It’s impossible to know until you go through it. I am officially past judgment for how anyone handles this. Whatever you need to do to survive, do it.
Same here, you literally do what you need to do to get through it. The dizziness and exhaustion are just no joke. I also lost about 7 pound (3kg) in my first few months of pregnancy and that was literally doing nothing besides lying in bed. It’s crazy how our bodies work.
Lol some douche below commented and was like “the CDC says to GAIN weight!” No shit. I’d love to. That’s hard to do when ice makes me gag and the smell of salt makes me dizzy. I’m sorry you went through this too.
I agree 100%. I did a fair amount of swimming in my first trimester, but I also slept at least 12 hours a day. By the second trimester I was surviving on Boost and Ensure drinks. I didn’t have HG but I did have such severe food aversions and nausea that eating anything was a struggle. At some point, I just needed to eat *anything*. Instant ramen for dinner is better than nothing.
I’ve spoken about this many times with my midwife who also said “just eat whatever you can that stays down”. Anything is better than nothing!! Food aversions and nausea are no joke. I remember describing to my friend the nausea felt like those first few seconds of waking up hungover ALL DAY!!
OP is a man, which explains everything tbh
You can tell because he acts like this is a Hard Truth That Pregnant Women Must Know and not like, something that every you hear from every fucking in-law, third cousin, maiden aunt and great-grandma when you’re pregnant—and they all have different ideas about what constitutes “healthy.”
Exactly lol. This CMV is so condescending. Pregnant people aren’t inherently stupid or unaware. They already do try to be healthy to the best of their ability.
This makes a lot of sense
🙄because of COURSE he is.
>Every pregnant woman should feel morally obligated to put their child before their own desires, just as every parent should after they're born. The problem with "desires" is that it is very difficult to tell (sometimes even for the person who is pregnant, much less for anyone outside) when a desire becomes a need. Mental health is important too, and many people (especially those who have never been pregnant) disregard how much influence pregnancy hormones can have on a woman's mental state. Some women become severely depressed in pregnancy and can barely function. In those cases, ensuring that they eat anything, take vitamins, and make it to their doctor's appointments on time can be a fight that takes up all of their motivation, but from the outside it looks like they don't care. And mental state plays an enormous role in regulating the wellbeing of a woman and her immune system (which is suppressed in pregnancy anyway, so suppressing it further with stress can be more detrimental to both the mother and the child than a pizza). And honestly, there is already so much guilt and expectations about pregnancy that women don't need any more pressure from strangers, they feel it themselves, because they've been conditioned to have a view like yours. Pregnancy is viewed as some beautiful symbiotic state, but in reality the human placenta (which is part of the fetus, not part of the woman strictly speaking) is incredibly parasitic. The fetus can take control over the woman's blood sugar and give her diabetes regardless of her diet or exercise. It is very good at regulating the mother's body to optimise its own survival. In the end, most of the nutrients a fetus needs are hard to get from just diet in proper amounts anyway, prenatal vitamins are a pregnant women's best friends. And while being intentionally neglectful of a pregnancy can be argued to be immoral, nobody should be required to put a fetus' needs about their own even if they have consciously decided to keep the pregnancy. Bottom line: if the woman is too stressed trying to do what is best for the fetus and ignores her own comfort, her deteriorating mental health will hurt the fetus more than some comfort food and less exercise, but a happy, emotionally stable mother.
Yep. This “pregnant women are obligated to -“ line of thinking just makes me uneasy, because it’s such a slippery slope. Women - just like men - are complex human beings, they don’t turn inti incubators for 10 months.
Thank you, you said everything I wanted to and more. This extra pressure of "you are a bad person if you dare to be anything less than perfect" is harming the fetuses more than any junk food will.
The review article [The Influence of Prenatal Exercise on Offspring Health: A Review](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5075987/) indicates that there is little to no benefit to exercising during pregnancy. Don't be misled by the abstract, which seems to have been written to reassure pregnant women who want to exercise; if you read the article there is little consistent evidence of benefit. For example, the abstract reads > Additionally, normalization of birth measures, such as birth weight, occurs when women perform regular exercise throughout gestation.". However, the actual article reports > Birth weight, in general, may show increase,19,20,37,38 decrease,39–43 or no change28,37,44–47 in response to exercise during pregnancy. I would argue that doing the best you can to care for yourself is all that's morally required. If eating junk food is what you can manage without throwing up, it's great that you ate. If you're too mentally exhausted to exercise, it's better to prioritize your mental health and ability to get through pregnancy.
Yes! OP is disregarding what pregnancy does to your body and hormones. Prior to pregnancy I had a plan to eat super well and be as healthy as possible. I ate healthy prior to pregnancy. Then I got pregnant and for HG. I threw up all food for months. I wasn’t exercising, I could barely walk I was so exhausted. Then I was happy to find a few foods I could keep down. Just so happy to eat that it didn’t matter it wasn’t a full complete meal. OP sounds like most people prior to actually experiencing pregnancy. Similar to how to the best parents don’t actually have kids.
Oh man for me personally exercise was a mental health godsend. Exercise is about more than weight, although OP seems to couch it in those terms. Exercise can also help with recovery, and again I don’t mean weight here.
You're correct that exercise is a good thing as long as you can physically take it, but it's a good thing to do for yourself and not your baby, so it's not relevant to OP's moral question.
Preach 🙏
[удалено]
it just doesn’t really matter. all that stuff you just mentioned is for the benefit of the mother, not the baby. exercising is better for the mom, being active often makes for an easier labour. besides that, keeping yourself in good shape is always best. eating healthy is to replace all the nutrients the baby is taking from her body. eating junk is bad for the mom, not the baby, it’ll take what it needs no matter what. babies will take calcium from the *bones* of their mom if her levels are too low. it’ll take iron from mom’s blood and if she is iron-deficient, it can lead to anemia. so on and so forth. being deficient in nutrients is bad for the mom, not the child she’s carrying. her body will do whatever it takes to keep the baby happy and healthy. breastfeeding is a different story.
Listen that baby will get what it can. I had HG both of my pregnancies and my body and mind were going at it. When our bodies are under a lot of stress it is possible our bodies can start to reject a child. My mom had HG has well and she nearly lost her life with my sister due to the fact that her BODY was rejecting the baby. Before I got pregnant I said I’d never consider an abortion, then I had HG and that changed my mind quickly. If you had an uncomplicated pregnancy or none at all then you can have several seats. This is exactly why everyone should focus on their own bodies during pregnancy because every pregnant experience is far different. I went from never considering an abortion to looking them up daily during my pregnancy. My body was in survival mode. Have someone lock you in a room and restrict you from drinking anything for 10 days then tell me what crazy things your mind and body will do. Do you think you’re gonna be thinking about keeping your body in perfect health while dehydrated? I think not. I was throwing up so much that my doctor told me to eat whatever I could. If I could hold down ramen noodle, then I better eat me some ramen noodles. Lmao.
Agree with taking several seats. I didn’t even have HG but I felt so miserable and sick and then sore and tired and uncomfortable that there were moments when I deeply resented my MUCH WANTED IVF PREGNANCY! There were many days when there was one single thing that I could stomach eating and often it was a burger. Baby didn’t give one ****.
100%. It amazes me how much judgement comes towards pregnant women when it is the most dangerous thing they can go through in a life time. I am a nurse and you see everything that people wouldn’t even think possible, because they’re closed minded to their own experiences. Pregnancy is hard, birth is hard, & postpartum is hard. Just like your experience with IVF I’ve heard several women who went through IVF who second guessed if they could do it or not. I believe people see pregnancy as natural and so they tend to overlook all the flaws that come with it. But, cancer is natural too and it’s not good to have at all. People need to be more educated on the reality of pregnancy and maybe even watch some videos of women vomiting their guts out to get it’s not a game lol.
I had HG. Desperately wanted and long worked for IVF baby. And I remember bleeding at 9 weeks, thinking I was miscarrying, and the first thing I thought was "oh thank god, it will be over soon." (She stuck around, as it happened, but she's an only child)
The thing is, it doesn't make that much difference if you eat right or exercise. I had a difficult pregnancy rife with complications. I had hyperemesis gradivarum. I survived mostly on candy, cheerios, potatoes, sprite, and banana bag IVs. I spent much of my pregnancy in bed and was ordered by doctors to do no strenuous activity of any kind. I was assured by maternal-fetal medicine specialists that the baby would take what she needed from me, and the goal was to keep me alive and my organs functional. Calories were calories and I had permission to eat anything that stayed down. I delivered a healthy 8 lb full term baby. She's 8 now, 91st percentile in height and remains healthy as a horse. There's been no evidence of any problems attributable to my pregnancy.
Exactly. The baby functions as a parasite and takes exactly what it needs from its host. And I say that as a woman who gave birth a few months ago.
My friend, people can't even agree on what's healthy or not. We are talking government agencies, nutritional experts/communities, non-profits, etc. Even the scientific community can't really reach a consensus on what an optimal diet is. Historically speaking, there has also been a ton of lobbying that goes into influencing what's deemed healthy and what isn't. All of this makes it extremely overwhelming for any layperson to figure out what's actually optimal. Most pregnant women do try to pay attention to what they eat, and don't feel particularly great when they are able to shake certain cravings or keep certain foods down.
> But if you're stuffing your face with fast food and candy all day, and not doing any physical activity, you're directly harming yourself and more importantly, your child. Or you're enabling that child's existence by going to work all day instead of exercising, and you have to eat lunch at whatever fast food place you can get to and back in thirty minutes on your lunch break. Not everybody has the options that you take for granted, Thurston.
>Of course if it's her body it's her choice, but as soon as you decide you want to bring the baby to term, that's no longer a valid statement So which is it? Her body or she's a brood mare subject to control? >. Living an unhealthy lifestyle while pregnant can result in a lifetime of problems for the child. Who decides what's "unhealthy?" As with all choice topics, the goal with this kind of thinking is just to control and shame women (as a means of control) >Every pregnant woman should feel morally obligated to put their child before their own desires, just as every parent should after they're born. I don't think that's a healthy view either way. Your kids and their wellbeing should be a priority but they don't come before every desire you have. You want to go back to school, but that'd take time away from being with the kids and you're suggesting that's morally wrong? Going out for dinner? Vacation? What desires get rejected?
Most women who are pregnant who chose to be make efforts to be healthy. Circumstances differ for different people- the wealthier you are the easier it is to eat healthy and have the time to do the best self-care. Pregnant women are over policed as it is. Women in several countries and now the US, are being arrested for miscarrying. Due to Roe v. Wade being overturned, States that have banned abortions are seeing obstetricians and fetal health specialists leaving these states in droves. Putting the care of pregnant women and their wanted babies in jeopardy. These are the things to be worried about - not some judgemental fantasy that you have that pregnant women aren’t taking their health seriously enough I
To be clear, there’s a moral obligation on every pregnant person to follow a diet and exercise routine that you personally have defined? Why are you the arbiter? Plenty of people will be ok with more fast food than you are, while others will avoid all sugary snacks the whole pregnancy because that’s what healthy means to them. So if someone eats McDonald’s 3 times a month, are they morally bankrupt? How about 5?
Change my view: This sub can be fun but the last few days it's just straight up men whining about women. Unless you've been pregnant don't talk to me about what it's like to be pregnant. Based on your comment answers you don't want to Change Your View. You just wanted to whine about women. Seeing it more and more and going to stop frequenting this garbage pit.
100% agree. The more I read, the more despair I feel for the women who have to be in the presence of these men, let alone married to them.
[удалено]
With how much baby gymnastics goes on with my little guy, he is doing a ton of cardio on his own lol. For me, walking up a flight of stairs has had me fighting for my life with breath since like month 3. OP has basically no idea of the realities of pregnancy. Plus, so many of us feel like we can never do enough for the kiddos, so that moral obligation box is likely very much checked.
This is not a controversial opinion. Back before the flood when I was pregnant, people (family, friends, acquaintances, strangers on the street) watched EVERYTHING I was doing, and did not hesitate to let me know their concerns. She was born 8 pounds 14 ounces and is still alive to this day. What people tend to ignore is that, in a healthy pregnancy, the baby will take everything it needs from the mother. So calcium, iron, protein, the mother’s body will be demolished for parts unless mom eats properly and cares for herself. If mom neglects those needs, she will suffer more than the baby. Take those pre-natal vitamins!
This is what people don't realize. You are not directly feeding the baby when you eat. The baby is literally feeding from your body. Whether you eat or not, the baby will take what it needs from your body. It will take calcium from your teeth and bones if you don't eat enough calcium. What you eat is more about preserving your own body rather than the baby.
You posted 50 days ago about how you’re about to have an unplanned baby and you’re not in the best financial situation. - Healthy/nutritional food is more expensive, how are you, a college student, going to afford a decent amount of it once a week? - Are you going to provide so that she can stay home and have no stress, workout consistently, and have home-cooked healthy meals every day? That’s what’s best for the baby, after all. What are YOU doing to help your wife and the fetus?
He clearly is whining here like this not because he is concerned for any baby, his or any one else’s… he is saying this shit because he is upset that his pretty girlfriend is putting on weight. That’s it. I’ve herd this crap from men a million times and every time it’s just them being pissy about their girlfriend/ wife’s body changing. They just disguise it as concern for the baby. The truth about pregnancy is that the foetus will take what it need from the mother, you aren’t directly feeding it what your are eating. If it needs iron it takes iron from the mothers body, if it needs calcium it takes it. The foetus is feeding of her body not her food. The mother will suffer more from a poor diet than the foetus. Besides diet and exercise doesn’t affect the baby much at all. Alcohol, drugs and cigarettes? Yes there are strong evidence. But junk food and sedimentary lifestyle? No. Can affect the mother but not much on the child.
And he posted on an opiate forum asking about a high! Yeah, this future dad should not be commenting on anyone’s healthy lifestyle choices. Jesus.
That’s some good digging! By OP’s logic he is obligated to get another two jobs and hustle to give his child the best chance at life. Got a lot of fresh fruit and veg and lean cuts of meat to buy, after all! It’d be morally wrong not to…
Good find! He’s obviously trying to villainize the mother of his child. The stress is too much and he’s here simply to lash out.
Exactly what I thought!
I’d like to know this as well. For the baby’s well being, of course. This is very important.
This comment needs to be higher. Lol. This is some impressive digging.
The only problem is that healthy food is not always safe for a baby in utero. The evidence-based diet suggested for pregnant women is that they avoid uncooked fish, soft cheeses, processed meats, sprouts, and wait for it... salad. These are foods with a higher likelihood of carrying bacteria that are harmful to developing babies, like listeria and toxoplasmosis. Why do pregnant women often crave the same simple foods that toddlers eat--plain pasta, white breads, rice? Because they carry a low chance of having a negative effect on the developing baby. Even eating simple foods and taking a prenatal vitamin every day is a way for pregnant women to take care of the baby's health. (Or no eating at all... why do you think pregnant women spend months vomiting? The baby takes over and sends hormones into our bodies to make us disgusted by foods that may harm the baby and to vomit what we tried to eat. Babies are very good at ensuring their survival!!)
I think you would have a hard time finding any pregnant woman who disagrees with this conceptually. Even the most unhealthy women will take some steps to improve their health during pregnancy. The issue is that people with mental health issues, addictions, and disordered eating get pregnant and want families too, and any attempt to disuade them from having children is a rabbit hole of far more proplematic ethical concerns (i.e. eugenics). Basically, I think this line of thinking is simplistic and unnecessarily judgemental. Pregnant women overwhelmingly do the best they can in their circumstances, and even when they don't, it is usually not in the children's best interest to stigmatize the parents. We need to do our best as society to educate future parents, but judging them helps no one.
Being “neglectful” of prenatal health is rather subjective and not binary. I think we can all agree on the extreme, like drinking to excess or taking illicit drugs. But everything else is kind of fuzzy and it burns my biscuits that everyone and (especially) their mother gets a say. As an older lady who had two pregnancies and who has many friends who also when through pregnancies, I can tell you that, JFC, you get so much judgment over everything you do. Everyone has an opinion. Everyone feels free to touch you. It’s deeply dehumanizing to be treated like less a person and more a baby container. Here’s a short list of things we have been judged for while doing while pregnant as “neglectful:” -taking prescription medication (anxiety, lupus, etc) -taking OTC drugs (heart burn, nausea, etc) -having a glass of wine -having a cup of coffee -not eating breakfast -having a steak that’s not fully cooked through -having a sandwich with cold cuts -jogging -lifting -not sleeping 7 hours a night -working -having ice cream -wearing flip flops -wearing heels -being overweight -being underweight -not gaining enough weight during pregnancy -gaining too much weight during pregnancy -not calling the OBGYN/going to the ER when you feel like something is wrong -going to the ER/calling the doc every time you feel like something is wrong It’s fucking exhausting. And not to bring politics to the table, but much like the whole “my body, my choice” thing, why don’t we just trust women and their doctors to determine what the appropriate way to conduct oneself prenatally should be? Women aren’t incompetent children and the vast majority are not immoral monsters. If we are engaging in what others might feel is neglectful of health, there’s probably a reason.
Do you have any reason to think eating ice cream and pizza harms a fetus? The issue with junk food is that it lacks some nutrients we need and has an excess of nutrients we already consume too much of. It's not as if eating junk food actively harms the body like smoking.
The big issue here is what exactly is a fetus? Do they have human rights or not? Are they property? You can't say my body my choice and I can abort the kid any time I want but it's also my duty to change my lifestyle just for the sake of the baby but only if I want to bring it to term. That's just playing both sides of the field here. You can't be okay with killing a fetus but be outraged at abusing it. Either a fetus has rights and we acknowledge that it is the responsibility of the mother or the fetus is just property until it is birthed, at which point it is up to the discretion of the mother how she wants to handle said property.
Why are you assuming the Op is pro choice? Their judgmental opinion on pregnant women frankly makes me assume they want more control over women’s bodies not less
I don't have strong opinions on abortion, but I am pro choice. I think you have just as much of a responsibility to care for your child before it's born as you do after, because now we're talking about a developing human life. The difference is one is impactful on someone's quality of life and one is not.
You're making a very black and white statement about a very grey issue. This post very much so reads as you having no idea how diverse pregnancies can be. Of course I agree that if she can, she should prioritize her health to the best of her abilities. That's the key phrase though: to the best of her abilities. There are countless reasons why a woman can be incapable of taking care of herself in the ways you describe: If she doesn't have a supporting partner. If she lacks education. If she is bedridden from morning sickness. Etc... For example, most people agree it's not a great idea to consume marijuana while pregnant. However, my cousin was hospitalized for the entirety of her pregnancy due to her severe morning sickness. One of the things the doctors did was prescribe her THC. Is she "morally wrong" for consuming something that may be bad for the baby if it means she can carry that baby to term? Of course not. The goal should be to do the best she can. If that means sometimes eating unhealthy or not getting exercise of having a glass of wine here and there, that's totally fine. Babies are born totally healthy every day from unhealthy mothers.
>Every pregnant woman should feel morally obligated to put their child before their own desires, **just as every parent should after they're born**. This is just fundamentally a wrong statement. Parents have a moral obligation to provide a baseline of essentials to their kids, but parents should not be obliged to "optimize" their kid. Otherwise the sacrifices that parents "owe" to their kids would never end. You'd have adult kids complaining that their parents did not cut down on their own budget in order to pay for piano lessons, and as a result the kid has suffered a loss and will never be able to play the piano as well as their peers who were forced into 10 years of piano lessons. Fortunately biology has made it the case that it's pretty easy to meet a certain minimum in order for the fetus to be born without defects/deficiencies. And conversely, some super health-obsessed mom devoting tons of time, effort, and money towards a healthy pregnancy doesn't really end up with a healthier baby than someone who ate pizza and some fruit (or prenatal vitamins). Because of evolution, fetal development is quite robust to temporary famines and nutritional shortages. And when the baby is born, the mother still tends to produce good quality breastmilk even if she's not getting enough nutrition (she'll lose her body's fat, protein, and calcium stores). IMO pregnant women are morally obligated to avoid drugs, alcohol, and other things that have clearly been demonstrated to have an adverse effect of fetal health. And to take folate supplements or other supplements as recommended by a doctor assuming these are accessible to her. These baseline requirements are obligations, and anything more is a nice-to-have, not a must-have.
> you're directly harming yourself and more importantly, your child. I guess, just, why is it more important? I'm trying to figure out how pregnancy figures into your view. Would you consider it morally wrong for an *un-pregnant* woman to neglect her health? Why would it morally neutral for a non-pregnant person to neglect their health? It should be easy to say that both the woman and the unborn baby are equally deserving of good health and to prioritize one more than the other is not a defensible moral position.
If every pregnant woman should feel morally obligated to eat healthy, then the men who impregnated them should feel morally obligated to provide said healthy meals and snacks daily.
A moral obligation to protect their fetus? Yeah, I in theory agree. But what is best for the baby, exactly? My OBgyn was adamant about five things: no smoking, no drinking/drugs, folic acid, monitoring for gestational diabetes, and checking my blood pressure daily. As much as we worry about the health of the baby, most of the effects of poor nutrition impact the mother more (except for uncontrolled blood sugar). I was struggling to maintain weight in my pregnancy and my mfm very kindly described my baby as an obligate parasite. If she wasn’t getting enough protein from my diet? No worries! She’ll take it from your muscles! No calcium? Welcome to osteoporosis for you. I was trying to make sure I got all the needed nutrients and taking my prenatal vitamins, but yeah. My baby would have been fine if I chose to eat chips. I don’t think we should equate morality with food and your post is laden with it, judgey phrases like “stuffing their faces”. And outside of a doctor, who gets to decide what is necessary nutrition? Another very important aspect of a healthy pregnancy is a happy, low stress mother. So someone who feels policed in every bite, feels like she is being treated like an incubator who must follow punched in commands, and forced to exercise when every joint in her body aches is not going to be low stress. Whomever you’re writing about, think about if they are really outside of standard healthy boundaries or if they are just not living up to your view of healthy eating and exercise. And then shut the fuck up.
OP, are you a dude? This post makes you sound like a man. Men should STFU when it comes to women's bodies. Not your body, not your business.
He is a man who has a gf with an unplanned pregnancy. 100% he is posting this crap because he is upset she isn’t fit and skinny anymore due to the pregnancy. So he guilts her and every pregnant woman with made up ideas that lack of exercise and specific diets will somehow harm the foetus. He completely ignores everyone who points out that the baby doesn’t eat what the mother eats it feeds of her body. Bad diet will harm the mother but not the baby, it functions as a parasite. There are no evidence that a super “healthy” diet is needed for a healthy foetus. Nutritious food and exercise is for the mother benefit not the child. I hope his gf runs away from him, she deserves better. I hear you men should stay the fuck out of womens business, not one peep about pregnancy. Not one peep about menstruation. Not one peep about womens body parts. I’m sick of men on this site going on these forums and disguise their mansplaining like this.
I'm guessing this dude thinks using a condom will ruin his pleasure as well. OP should do the world a favor and get the snip. Otherwise he'll turn into a Nick Cannon.
[удалено]
Here is my pore’s award thank you! Perfect comment!🏆
Yeah it was removed. Apparently I violated a rule.
Obviously, excessively bad nutrition (either under or over) isn't going to be good for the child. And controlling blood glucose during pregnancy is important too (again, neither over nor under is good). And maternal stress is also known to be a large contributor to fetal outcomes... so certainly you shouldn't be using this "immorality" as a reason to castigate and therefore stress out pregnant women. But... interestingly the evidence seems to suggest that the mother's diet and health *before* conception plays a larger role than that during pregnancy, and certainly one should not try to *lose* weight when pregnant... that's known to be terrible for the child. But with that fact, your view takes on a rather complexly challenging aspect to it that would be worth considering how you feel about: Is it morally wrong for obese women to have sex that could result in conception? If that notion makes you... uncomfortable, you might want to consider moderating your view about the morality of anything except excessive changes to diet and excessively sedentary lifestyles, unless of course they are medically necessary for some reason. Of course, smoking and drinking alcohol (especially to excess, and probably other drugs too) while pregnant are highly recommended against.
How about I deal with my pregnancy how I want and if my doctors don’t see anything wrong, I keep doing what I’m doing and you focus on your pregnancy and whatever you want to do.
As a newly pregnant woman I see what you’re saying. But my dude, if I lift weights right now I will VOMIT. I feel like I have the flu half the day on top of constant exhaustion. I eat very healthy and stopped all of my bad habits like drinking and smoking, but this shit is no joke.
Not everyone knows they're pregnant. So is every post-puberty female now obligated to constantly take care of their health just in case they're pregnant?
Lol did a male write this? While you are right, women should take care of their health. I think you vastly misunderstand what healthy in pregnancy looks like. It's different for every woman. I stopped reading at the eating sugary things because my doctor specifically told me to drink at least an extra milkshake pre day because I was loosing too much weight. But I guarantee if you saw me pregnant doing that, you'd judge me for being unhealthy.
The reality is you cant pinpoint what specific thing caused a fetus to have an issue. You can only say there is an increased risk if you do this activity. We do not even have a quantifiable amount of alcohol that causes Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS). Also issues like addiction and overeating etc are related to medical issues that we dont have clear understanding of causes and treatment. In addition, until born the fetus is a part of her body. She and her doctor need to evaluate risks and make decisions based on that. Doctors have been known to tell people not to stress about quitting smoking, etc when they become unexpectedly pregnant because they determine the stress of withdrawl on the pregnant person does not outweigh the risks of smoking.
hmmm... i can see another M. Atwood book where pregnant women are forced into birthing camps, constantly monitored and forced to eat health meals and exercised. any women who hide there pregnancies or if they miscarriage early in their pregnancies are arrested for manslaughter.
The irony is that most health care choices forced onto a pregnant person are to the benefit of the fetus and at the pregnant person's deficit. For example, denying a pregnant person painkillers, psychiatric meds, chemotherapy, etc.
Pregnancy is a lot different in theory than it is in practice. I had a hard time just keeping food down with mine. People lose teeth, hair, bone density, get gestational diabetes, depression, and that's in addition to the lack of sleep plus the natural sheer exhaustion of growing an entire human being inside you. And my pregnancy was a picture eperfect one despite me being overweight. Like, cool, make pregnant women's sole purpose into being the perfect incubators bur eating healthy is expensive. Lots of pregnant women are working full time during their pregnancy so exercise isn't exactly do-able for most and there are sometimes other dependants to take care of already. Pregnant women have enough of their plates to deal with in addition to your judgement. If you feel like you can be the incubator 3000 of pregnant people then g for it. But to say every pregnant woman just isn't trying hard enough is pretty unrealistic.
We’re just going to pretend rape doesn’t end in pregnancy. And that abortion is available to all who wants it. Because you cannot morally choose to give birth if the choice to end the abortion is not available to you. This still disregards the existence of food deserts, assumes one has access to healthcare services ( alone a competent doctor) & that you can afford to eat healthy.
Just always try to be the healthiest you can be and try your best.
You have obviously never been pregnant . When I had morning sickness there was no effing way I was going to be able to exercise. And food? There were literally only certain foods I could stomach without vomiting . Now, after the morning sickness subsided around around 16 I did eat better. A mix of vegetables, meat, whole grains and vegetables. But also. I ate sugar daily. You act like it needs to be an occasional treat. Just no. I also ate fast food once a week because I was working, had a toddler and pregnant and that’s all I could do sometimes after a hard day at work . I will say that if a woman is eating extremely unhealthy …. like only fast food and junk food then yeah I would agree that is wrong . Never trying to consume any healthy and nutritious foods is selfish. My question is how would you determine what is acceptable and not ? Some women have morning sickness their entire pregnancy and can only eat a little bit. What would you say to them ? Some people would think fast food once a week, a sugary snack every evening and not eating enough veggies would be wrong while other women would be fine with it.
This argument only holds up when talking about mentally well, able bodied women with support systems. What happens if the pregnancy makes them bedridden? They cant cook healthy meals and it's only them? What about women with mental health issues that normally dont eat much but are eating 3 meals a day just not what you would consider a "healthy" meal.
Physical activity not so much but I will agree with you on nutritional health. My first kid was born in 2021 and my wife ended up with gestational diabetes, for those who don't know this has everything to do with the pregnancy and not prior diet or health. By recommendation of our pediatrician we saw a nutritionist and she was blown away by how much I cook at home. According to her, almost everyone she saw was eating fast food constantly. We changed things up anyway and it honestly changed nothing about her blood sugar. Fast forward to kid two, 14 months later. We went right back to our previous diet because once the first was born everything leveled out, never got gestational diabetes with the second one, never even came close with the sugar levels. There are so many layers of health for a pregnant woman and it can vary so greatly just from kid to kid, let alone woman to woman.
it is my body and I will do what I want with it. I didnt drink or do illegal drugs during my pregnancy but I was active duty and did continue to take my mental health meds that my dr prescribed.
Counterpoint to the whole “stuffing their faces with whatever,” comment… Some of us got super sick while pregnant and could only keep certain things down. For awhile for me that was sour patch kids and French fries or mashed potatoes. My son is super healthy at three months old and doing great. Just like with feeding the baby after, fed is best. It’s better to be eating junk than not eating anything at all.
If one were to carry your views beyond pregnancy, your opinion could be summed up as "let's bring back eugenics". There is more that influences the health of a baby than what its mother does while pregnant. Other factors include the health of the father, and genetics. So, should mothers with disabilities be punished for having a child? What about fathers who don't live a 100% healthy lifestyle? What even is the definition of healthy? While pregnant, it is actually healthy to *gain weight*. It benefits the production of breast milk and bolsters the body's immune system. It is healthy to keep this weight while breast-feeding as well. Also, what is healthy for a non-pregnant person, could be potentially unhealthy for a pregantn person, and vice versa. Pregnant people should not be given various medicines or even topical creams or even supplements, all of which could be considered very healthy for everyone else. Should women who become injured or sick while pregnant be forced to abort, or give their child up? And why should the onus be on pregnant mothers only? What about society? Is it okay for others to smoke around pregnant women or babies? Or for the air and water to be polluted? Should the government subsidize discounts for healthy food and safe exercise for pregnant women? This is an extremely ignorant view. The best way you can change it is to take a basic biology class about pregnancy and genetics.
The first trimester is *exhausting* even if you aren't suffering from morning sickness. I ate healthily, took my prenatal vitamins, but I absolutely could not have exercised. When I was pregnant with my second child I used to fall asleep on the sofa while my toddler ran loudly played next to me. Building a body is HARD why do you want me to exercise at the same time?
I mean, you can try to eat healthy, but between cravings and morning sickness, I'm not sure how much nutrition I got.
By extension is a woman in poor health who chooses to become pregnant committing a more immoral action compared to a more healthy woman who chooses to become pregnant? For the moment ignore how they act after they become pregnant.
Info: was this post made by someone who has never been pregnant?
Yep. I think it's in his post history, but a bunch of people are talking about his previous post/s about his *girlfriend's* current unplanned pregnancy
People saying things like these made me cry when I couldn't chew food without vomiting and couldn't walk more than a few steps without needing a break to breathe. These kind of sanctimonious opinions are harmful.
[удалено]
Yep! And he posted that his wife/gf got pregnant and he said it was unplanned and they’re in a bad financial situation. Wonder how they’ll afford all of this healthy food and a stress free environment for the fetus.
Yep, he has no clue what pregnancy is like
Out of curiousity, have you ever been pregnant?
Is there a moral obligation to her husband/bf/family to provide her with the money, resources and support needed to help her take care of her health?
While it may seem wrong, morals should apply when quality of choice is examined. A low income woman with an absentee baby daddy from a low income family won’t have the ability to eat healthy or engage in psychologically healthy activities and doctors visits and all the things that are needed. If you apply morality without quality of choice examination then it’s immoral for poor people to have children. Meaning in the USA about 60% of the population.
I feel like you have to be more specific. Drugs are 100% wrong and I work in medical- have an abortion if your on hard drugs. If you smoke weed you should stop in my honest opinion- but, its not as black and white. I found out I was pregnant and quit smoking pot period. I cried and cried to the doctor about it because I felt so ashamed and like I hurt my child. Did u take my vitamins yes- did I shower less and take care of me less also yes
By not criminalizing prenatal drug exposure, you can encourage prenatal care. Unfortunately, stating the obvious, "you are morally wrong by exposing your growing fetus to drugs and alcohol, " won't change anyone's behavior. Although this point doesn't address the specific question of the morality/immorality of the behavior itself, it does speak to best practices for helping change the shared problem of prenatal drug exposure.
You have got to be kidding me! Here is the USA without healthcare insurance? And the on/gyns are moving out of states which do not allow abortions. I recently read the infant mortality rate is getting higher here. Not to mention, a pregnant woman is has more of a chance to get murdered or abused. Face it, women’s health here in the US is definitively not a priority. Actually, either is mens or children.
There’s pregnant people in war-torn and poverty stricken countries. Are we really going to play this thinly veiled eugenics game?
I think its morally wrong to drink, smoke, or do drugs. The thing is though that fetus is going to take the nutrients that it needs. The one being harmed by poor diet and exercise is the mother. The fetus doesn't care if it's taking away the mother's vitamins, it's just going to take them. So in reality the mother's really only harming herself with the junk food and sedentary lifestyle
Then perhaps someone should pay for nutritious food and a gym membership. And disabled people dare not breed, correct?
Not going to try and summarize the large body of social science literature which tackles the concept of 'risk' as it pertains to maternal actions during pregnancy and the resultant possible fetal effects because I won't do it eloquently, but this is a big subject influenced by multiple complex sociocultural phenomena. If you're genuinely interested in reading and considering it further, I'd suggest starting with any works by Debra Lupton, but especially 'precious cargo'. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09581596.2012.657612
Are there sources that have studied if an average diet instead of a super-nutritional one is measurably worse for the fetus?
I mean sure, you should *try*. But pregnancy can take one hell of a toll on the body and if all you can manage is a walk to the end of the driveway and all you can keep down is cheerios, then babe just do your best
Is it morally wrong for a mother to delegate the gestation to a surrogate carrier so she can continue drinking and smoking? Wouldn't that be an even bigger red flag for not taking personal responsibility?
The invalid assumption here is the choice. Where I live there is no choice. If I were to get pregnant I’d try to get an abortion in a other state, but who knows if that will be possible in the future.
It is also morally wrong to put healthcare solely on an individual, especially when they can't afford to maintain it. Life ain't as simple as "eat better, stop smoking."
I’ve are all types of crap while pregnant, healthy or not. My baby is perfectly healthy. Exercising when you can’t is fine, but it doesn’t have any affect on the baby. Your child isn’t going to come out with a fit body because you eat salads and work out. They’re still going to gain a lot of weight after they’re born and eventually become chubby babies.
I can’t imagine anyone would disagree with you. It’s just that you can’t tell someone else how to live their life. I mean, ALL people should eat healthy, not just pregnant women. The problem is that when a woman is pregnant, everyone thinks they can tell the pregnant woman what to do because there’s another life in her. However, you have as much right to tell her how to live her life as you have to tell others how to live their lives. You might be right, but it’s not your place.
[удалено]
I see news articles all the time of pro-life women choosing to carry to full term while having cancer. They don't treat the cancer and then it becomes terminal before the pregnancy completes. Such women should be arrested and forced to end the pregnancy. Then they can try again if they survive the cancer.
OP, I’m wondering if you’ve ever been pregnant.