This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The second sentence effectively says that almost 90 percent of those unintended pregnancies which did not lead to abortion instead led to unintended births. This seems an incredible assertion on the face of it. Almost 90 percent of the women whose unintended pregnancies were not aborted were instead forced to give birth!!?? Just what what exactly does unintended birth mean as it is used in this sentence? Badmintonhist ( talk) 20:02, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
I think the section "Family Planning" can be interpreted as sexist, especially the first sentence which argues that having a baby is an important life in a female's life as well as that of her partner and family. This completely disregards the huge fact that having a baby is equally major for men and women alike, women simply go through nine months of carrying it, after those nine months are up to 80 years of life to be responsible for, which is the actual important part of having babies. I think the sentence should be rephrased to represent a view that accepts pregnancy and having babies as important parts of human life in our society completely unrelated to gender. If I'm going too far with this, that's okay, I was just personally bothered by it and thought it should be changed without knowing what to.
I'd also argue that it's not important or relevant enough to the article to even stay there, but yeah, I'm not sure what Wikipedia's policies are on that. Styrofoamblade ( talk) 00:35, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
I edited out some sections in 'Incidence'. As the thread does not deal with psychological, physiological aftermath of having 'abortions', but more about unintended pregnancies. I find it biased, so I removed it. It's sources arent very objective either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiesel14615 ( talk • contribs) 08:35, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
A user has a couple of times questioned this line of the summary.
Unintended pregnancy is also a major cause of maternal[4] and infant deaths.[1]
Please be aware that there are many types of causation. Things need not be the direct cause of death in order to be a cause.
Also, there are two aspects here: 1) unintended pregnancies are more likely to result in maternal or infant death than intended ones (i.e. there is a higher death rate), and 2) unintended pregnancies result in many deaths (i.e., there are a large absolute number of deaths resulting - a significant proportion of deaths of the given type).
If you think the phrasing needs improvement, please suggest a better way to say it. Zodon ( talk) 07:46, 26 April 2012 (UTC
Re your parenthetical that "if 1/5 of maternal deaths are due to unintended pregnancies, then the rest of them are due to intended ones." Something's rotten in the state of Denmark. Since, according to our article, in 1999 about 38% of pregnancies were unintended but only a fifth (20%) of maternal deaths are attributed to unintended pregnancies, then unintended pregnancies would be about half as likely as intended ones to cause maternal death. UP's would be safer for women than IP's. Somehow I doubt that's the case. If it were then we should be lauding the relative safety of unintended pregnancies as against intended ones. Badmintonhist ( talk) 20:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
This article needs some major editing. Whoever edited it most recently didn't know how to use the wiki code and there are major problems visible. I don't know enough about the subject to make any changes. deepsack ( talk) 08:31, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
The article's current first sentence "definition" of unintended pregnancy (which for some strange reason has replaced the previous rather pedestrian but markedly better definition) is inadequate. It implies that the set for "unintended pregnancies" encompasses the entire set for "unwanted pregnancies" but this is obviously not the case. As I believe the editor in question noted elsewhere, a pregnancy can be intended but later for any variety of reasons become unwanted. Also why add "mistimed" to the mix? Badmintonhist ( talk) 17:12, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
An editor has deleted the following portion of the article summary, alleging that it violates WP:CBALL.
They have not explained in what way it is supposed to do so. It is a summary of material in the article. The views and projections expressed are main stream, pretty standard stuff. The material in the article, as well as the summary cites reliable mainstream sources.
Since this article is within the realms of public health and preventive medicine it is reasonable and expected to cover the measures used or advocated for prevention of the condition, and the results of both the condition and results of prevention.
The second sentence in the deleted section is not even a future projection. It is a statement of what happens when unintended pregnancies are reduced (i.e. it states a connection, without reference to when (future/past) that connection applies.)
If you think it violates CBALL, then explain why, and what is different about the summary the material in the article. Or, since it is just the summary and not the underlying projections that appears to be problem, offer an alternative way of saying the same thing that addresses your concerns. Zodon ( talk) 18:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
References
Recently an editor has deleted the observation that "Partners have similar intentions regarding most pregnancies" because it was unsourced, and then because it was a truism. What is the objection? Deletion for unsourced would imply thought unlikely to be verifiable, whereas truism would not need verification. The reason the observation is there is that there are cases where partner intentions differ, and this has implications for prevention, etc. However to just talk about differing intentions without saying that that is the exception would create a false impression - violate NPOV, etc.
One might also wonder about what effect only looking at women's intention status, as some studies do, has on the results. Again, observing that intention status is usually similar helps to give perspective to that observation.
I know of sources to support this similarity of intendedness, if that is the issue, intend to incorporate them presently. Zodon ( talk) 23:46, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi WikiforPH, when adding content to this article that specifically refers to one country (the US), it is best to be explicit about that. Because this article is about unintended pregnancy, it is expected that it represents a worldwide view of the subject. I made that clearer in a subsequent edit. Given that many of these sections are only about the US (everything in "Factors associated with unintended pregnancy" only pertains here), I'm wondering if it would be best to rehome this content into a new article Unintended pregnancy in the United States (while the title technically already exists, it is a redirect to this article). The other option would be to globalize this content and make sure it represents more than just the statistics of one country, which would be much more work. Elysia (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 18:16, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 July 2022 and 16 August 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cindyhong123 ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Sqlo123 ( talk) 20:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The second sentence effectively says that almost 90 percent of those unintended pregnancies which did not lead to abortion instead led to unintended births. This seems an incredible assertion on the face of it. Almost 90 percent of the women whose unintended pregnancies were not aborted were instead forced to give birth!!?? Just what what exactly does unintended birth mean as it is used in this sentence? Badmintonhist ( talk) 20:02, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
I think the section "Family Planning" can be interpreted as sexist, especially the first sentence which argues that having a baby is an important life in a female's life as well as that of her partner and family. This completely disregards the huge fact that having a baby is equally major for men and women alike, women simply go through nine months of carrying it, after those nine months are up to 80 years of life to be responsible for, which is the actual important part of having babies. I think the sentence should be rephrased to represent a view that accepts pregnancy and having babies as important parts of human life in our society completely unrelated to gender. If I'm going too far with this, that's okay, I was just personally bothered by it and thought it should be changed without knowing what to.
I'd also argue that it's not important or relevant enough to the article to even stay there, but yeah, I'm not sure what Wikipedia's policies are on that. Styrofoamblade ( talk) 00:35, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
I edited out some sections in 'Incidence'. As the thread does not deal with psychological, physiological aftermath of having 'abortions', but more about unintended pregnancies. I find it biased, so I removed it. It's sources arent very objective either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiesel14615 ( talk • contribs) 08:35, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
A user has a couple of times questioned this line of the summary.
Unintended pregnancy is also a major cause of maternal[4] and infant deaths.[1]
Please be aware that there are many types of causation. Things need not be the direct cause of death in order to be a cause.
Also, there are two aspects here: 1) unintended pregnancies are more likely to result in maternal or infant death than intended ones (i.e. there is a higher death rate), and 2) unintended pregnancies result in many deaths (i.e., there are a large absolute number of deaths resulting - a significant proportion of deaths of the given type).
If you think the phrasing needs improvement, please suggest a better way to say it. Zodon ( talk) 07:46, 26 April 2012 (UTC
Re your parenthetical that "if 1/5 of maternal deaths are due to unintended pregnancies, then the rest of them are due to intended ones." Something's rotten in the state of Denmark. Since, according to our article, in 1999 about 38% of pregnancies were unintended but only a fifth (20%) of maternal deaths are attributed to unintended pregnancies, then unintended pregnancies would be about half as likely as intended ones to cause maternal death. UP's would be safer for women than IP's. Somehow I doubt that's the case. If it were then we should be lauding the relative safety of unintended pregnancies as against intended ones. Badmintonhist ( talk) 20:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
This article needs some major editing. Whoever edited it most recently didn't know how to use the wiki code and there are major problems visible. I don't know enough about the subject to make any changes. deepsack ( talk) 08:31, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
The article's current first sentence "definition" of unintended pregnancy (which for some strange reason has replaced the previous rather pedestrian but markedly better definition) is inadequate. It implies that the set for "unintended pregnancies" encompasses the entire set for "unwanted pregnancies" but this is obviously not the case. As I believe the editor in question noted elsewhere, a pregnancy can be intended but later for any variety of reasons become unwanted. Also why add "mistimed" to the mix? Badmintonhist ( talk) 17:12, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
An editor has deleted the following portion of the article summary, alleging that it violates WP:CBALL.
They have not explained in what way it is supposed to do so. It is a summary of material in the article. The views and projections expressed are main stream, pretty standard stuff. The material in the article, as well as the summary cites reliable mainstream sources.
Since this article is within the realms of public health and preventive medicine it is reasonable and expected to cover the measures used or advocated for prevention of the condition, and the results of both the condition and results of prevention.
The second sentence in the deleted section is not even a future projection. It is a statement of what happens when unintended pregnancies are reduced (i.e. it states a connection, without reference to when (future/past) that connection applies.)
If you think it violates CBALL, then explain why, and what is different about the summary the material in the article. Or, since it is just the summary and not the underlying projections that appears to be problem, offer an alternative way of saying the same thing that addresses your concerns. Zodon ( talk) 18:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
References
Recently an editor has deleted the observation that "Partners have similar intentions regarding most pregnancies" because it was unsourced, and then because it was a truism. What is the objection? Deletion for unsourced would imply thought unlikely to be verifiable, whereas truism would not need verification. The reason the observation is there is that there are cases where partner intentions differ, and this has implications for prevention, etc. However to just talk about differing intentions without saying that that is the exception would create a false impression - violate NPOV, etc.
One might also wonder about what effect only looking at women's intention status, as some studies do, has on the results. Again, observing that intention status is usually similar helps to give perspective to that observation.
I know of sources to support this similarity of intendedness, if that is the issue, intend to incorporate them presently. Zodon ( talk) 23:46, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi WikiforPH, when adding content to this article that specifically refers to one country (the US), it is best to be explicit about that. Because this article is about unintended pregnancy, it is expected that it represents a worldwide view of the subject. I made that clearer in a subsequent edit. Given that many of these sections are only about the US (everything in "Factors associated with unintended pregnancy" only pertains here), I'm wondering if it would be best to rehome this content into a new article Unintended pregnancy in the United States (while the title technically already exists, it is a redirect to this article). The other option would be to globalize this content and make sure it represents more than just the statistics of one country, which would be much more work. Elysia (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 18:16, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 July 2022 and 16 August 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cindyhong123 ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Sqlo123 ( talk) 20:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)