Do you own your body?

[TastySuckToy]

If you have read my posts you will understand I am 100% against abortion, does that help to answer your question.

Actually I don't know that, so you claim a 6 week old clump of cells can be removed and it will survive?

As far as my understanding goes, 24 weeks is about the time where a fetus has a chance of surviving outside the womb. I'm pretty sure as technology improves that time frame will become less, but I do suspect there will be a minimum reached where it is not possible to have a fetus survive being removed and implanted into an artificial womb.

Why do you feel a need to ask the same question twice in one post? I don't feel a need to answer it twice.

Again, you asked this in your first paragraph, or didn't you realise that while writing this.

So you agree that killing the fetus to terminate a pregnancy isn't a requirement. That's the simple answer I was looking for.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

So you agree that killing the fetus to terminate a pregnancy isn't a requirement. That's the simple answer I was looking for.

You sure took the long road to get there....

 

[Lazaran]

As far as my understanding goes, 24 weeks is about the time where a fetus has a chance of surviving outside the womb. I'm pretty sure as technology improves that time frame will become less, but I do suspect there will be a minimum reached where it is not possible to have a fetus survive being removed and implanted into an artificial womb.

In reality, “a fetus” even a month shy of the scheduled delivery date cannot survive without outrageously intensive and expensive medical care. Add in a severe birth defect, and your talking a whole different level of care required simply to prolong the suffering of those unfortunate lives outside the womb.

That ^ level of care is impossible to deliver to every hypothetical extreme premie. And there are damn strong ethical arguments as to why those "heroic" medical efforts should NOT be employed / exercised.

It’s such an "elitist", first class world rationalization to suggest, because an extreme premie CAN survive outside the womb, it proves / supports "something(?)" when it comes to delineating a cut-off point for terminating a pregnancy.

It’s arguments like these that makes me wonder what the fuck happened to some people to make them so extreme.

JFC

SAD!!!

 

[Fuzzy1975]

In reality, “a fetus” even a month shy of the scheduled delivery date cannot survive without outrageously intensive and expensive medical care.

Ah the American system....it's not really that pricey north of the border or in other countries. It's just that little need for a profit in your system...

Add in a severe birth defect, and your talking a whole different level of care required simply to prolong the suffering of those unfortunate lives outside the womb.

yep

That ^ level of care is impossible to deliver to every hypothetical extreme premie. And there are damn strong ethical arguments as to why those "heroic" medical efforts should NOT be employed / exercised.

Agreed, but my posts was on the optimistic side!

It’s such an "elitist", first class world rationalization to suggest, because an extreme premie CAN survive outside the womb, it proves / supports "something(?)" when it comes to delineating a cut-off point for terminating a pregnancy.

It's a fair argument to make, that perhaps in the future, an abortion would not need result in the death of the fetus. However unlikely that is to be. I doubt it would ever be less than 24 weeks to have survive-ability , but then again many other wacky ideas of the past have actually become reality.

It’s arguments like these that makes me wonder what the fuck happened to some people to make them so extreme.

JFC

SAD!!!

I don't think he was extreme, or not HisArpy extreme anyhow....lol

 

[adrina]

It's a fair argument to make, that perhaps in the future, an abortion would not need result in the death of the fetus. However unlikely that is to be. I doubt it would ever be less than 24 weeks to have survive-ability , but then again many other wacky ideas of the past have actually become reality.

It's science fiction at this point in time and is not a valid basis for any kind of policy formation or serious policy discussion.

And, frankly, if these folks are so concerned with the health and life of embryos, fetuses and infants then they'd be far more convincing if they supported policies that demonstrated that concern.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

It's science fiction at this point in time and is not a valid basis for any kind of policy formation or serious policy discussion.

I wouldn't call it science fiction, and this thread is not on the radar of policymakers.

And, frankly, if these folks are so concerned with the health and life of embryos, fetuses and infants then they'd be far more convincing if they supported policies that demonstrated that concern.

He's a Canadian, he already lives in a country that supports a woman's right to control her own body.

 

[jaF0]

We have to be careful about viability, costly or not.

I've seen stories recently about some surviving after have been born very early. I'm not sure how early is considered normal or abnormal, but it happens.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

We have to be careful about viability, costly or not.

I've seen stories recently about some surviving after have been born very early. I'm not sure how early is considered normal or abnormal, but it happens.

It's a whole other can of worms. It does nothing to help women keep (or regain) the right to control their own bodies either. Even if the technology existed today.

 

[TastySuckToy]

You sure took the long road to get there....

When I asked you if killing a fetus isn't a necessity/prerequisite to terminating a pregnancy, you could've simply answered with three letters: "yes" and saved a lot of time. No idea why you didn't. *shrug*

 

[TastySuckToy]

It's science fiction at this point in time and is not a valid basis for any kind of policy formation or serious policy discussion.

Any choice to terminate a pregnancy doesn't need to kill the fetus if it is viable outside the womb. That's not science fiction, that's reality. Premature fetuses are indeed a thing and we are capable of keeping them alive outside a womb.

Woman gets the choice to continue the pregnancy or not, fully agreed. And if the fetus is viable/can survive outside the womb, there is absolutely zero reason to kill it.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

When I asked you if killing a fetus isn't a necessity/prerequisite to terminating a pregnancy, you could've simply answered with three letters: "yes" and saved a lot of time. No idea why you didn't. *shrug*

If you'd made a one sentence question instead of a paragraph I might have used three letters, but you didn't. Instead you ran around the block on it, asking like three different ways.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Any choice to terminate a pregnancy doesn't need to kill the fetus if it is viable outside the womb. That's not science fiction, that's reality. Premature fetuses are indeed a thing and we are capable of keeping them alive outside a womb.

Well you're wrong here, 96% of Abortions in the USA (or Canada for that matter) fall between weeks 12 and 20. Fetuses can't survive in that range, given today's technology.

Woman gets the choice to continue the pregnancy or not, fully agreed. And if the fetus is viable/can survive outside the womb, there is absolutely zero reason to kill it.

 

[Sparky74]

No but I rent it out occasionally you know we're in the middle of a cost of living crisis here in the UK

 

[TastySuckToy]

Well you're wrong here, 97% of Abortions in the USA (or Canada for that matter) fall between weeks 12 and 20. Fetuses can't survive in that range, given today's technology.

"if the fetus is viable outside the womb".

 

[TastySuckToy]

If you'd made a one sentence question instead of a paragraph I might have used three letters, but you didn't. Instead you ran around the block on it, asking like three different ways.

If I ask the same the question three different ways and you're unable to figure out a yes or no answer to it, not much I can do about that. *shrug*

 

[Fuzzy1975]

"if the fetus is viable outside the womb".

The Fetus is not viable outside the womb until (at the very earliest) 24 weeks. This is a proven medical fact. Most abortions are done prior to 20 weeks. In the USA many states have a cut off of 15 weeks. Sorry but what you want, and the reality of it are not on the same page.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

If I ask the same the question three different ways and you're unable to figure out a yes or no answer to it, not much I can do about that. *shrug*

You're asking a hypothetical, or don't you understand that? I doubt there is anyone who would say no to your question, if it was achievable. It's not currenlty. To be frank it's a pretty stupid question to be asking in thread about the woman's right to control her own body, don't you think?

 

[TastySuckToy]

The Fetus is not viable outside the womb until (at the very earliest) 24 weeks. This is a proven medical fact. Most abortions are done prior to 20 weeks. In the USA many states have a cut off of 15 weeks. Sorry but what you want, and the reality of it are not on the same page.

What part of the qualifier "if" escapes your understanding? I'm asserting no preference whatsoever. I'm simply stating that if a fetus is viable outside of the womb, there's no reason to kill it.

 

[jaF0]

The Fetus is not viable outside the womb until (at the very earliest) 24 weeks. This is a proven medical fact.

This says 22, though with likely complications.

Survival​

The chance of survival at 22 weeks is about 6%, while at 23 weeks it is 26%, 24 weeks 55% and 25 weeks about 72% as of 2016.[23] With extensive treatment up to 30% of those who survive birth at 22 weeks survive longer term as of 2019.[186] The chances of survival without long-term difficulties is less.[24] Of those who survive following birth at 22 weeks 33% have severe disabilities.[186] In the developed world, overall survival is about 90% while in low-income countries survival rates are about 10%.[187]

Some children will adjust well during childhood and adolescence,[177] although disability is more likely nearer the limits of viability. A large study followed children born between 22 and 25 weeks until the age of 6 years old. Of these children, 46% had moderate to severe disabilities such as cerebral palsy, vision or hearing loss and learning disabilities, 34% had mild disabilities, and 20% had no disabilities; 12% had disabling cerebral palsy.[188] Up to 15% of premature infants have significant hearing loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterm_birth#Survival

 

[Fuzzy1975]

What part of the qualifier "if" escapes your understanding? I'm asserting no preference whatsoever. I'm simply stating that if a fetus is viable outside of the womb, there's no reason to kill it.

Of the 1.2% of abortions that occur after 24 weeks, yes if the fetus is viable ( and some states already have this law in place) then all efforts should be used to keep it alive, if it is a viable fetus. However in 90% of the cases of those 1.2%, it has been discovered that the fetus has a medical issue that means it will not live after birth. Which is the whole reason for the "late term abortion".

What part of pregnancy and abortion don't you understand??? There seems to be a whole lot.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

This says 22, though with likely complications.

Survival​

The chance of survival at 22 weeks is about 6%, while at 23 weeks it is 26%, 24 weeks 55% and 25 weeks about 72% as of 2016.[23] With extensive treatment up to 30% of those who survive birth at 22 weeks survive longer term as of 2019.[186] The chances of survival without long-term difficulties is less.[24] Of those who survive following birth at 22 weeks 33% have severe disabilities.[186] In the developed world, overall survival is about 90% while in low-income countries survival rates are about 10%.[187]

Some children will adjust well during childhood and adolescence,[177] although disability is more likely nearer the limits of viability. A large study followed children born between 22 and 25 weeks until the age of 6 years old. Of these children, 46% had moderate to severe disabilities such as cerebral palsy, vision or hearing loss and learning disabilities, 34% had mild disabilities, and 20% had no disabilities; 12% had disabling cerebral palsy.[188] Up to 15% of premature infants have significant hearing loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterm_birth#Survival

Yes, I've seen the 22 weeks, but there is such a high risk of problems, I go with the 24 weeks as min, and 28 weeks offers a much more realistic chance.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Of the 1.2% of abortions that occur after 24 weeks, yes if the fetus is viable ( and some states already have this law in place) then all efforts should be used to keep it alive, if it is a viable fetus.

Glad we agree.

However in 90% of the cases of those 1.2%, it has been discovered that the fetus has a medical issue that means it will not live after birth. Which is the whole reason for the "late term abortion".

What part of pregnancy and abortion don't you understand??? There seems to be a whole lot.

Irrelevant. I never disputed any of that information and you bringing it up is a complete red herring to my above point you already agree with.

 

[adrina]

Any choice to terminate a pregnancy doesn't need to kill the fetus if it is viable outside the womb. That's not science fiction, that's reality. Premature fetuses are indeed a thing and we are capable of keeping them alive outside a womb.

Woman gets the choice to continue the pregnancy or not, fully agreed. And if the fetus is viable/can survive outside the womb, there is absolutely zero reason to kill it.

Where is the medical technology for sustaining a fetus outside of the womb at the early stages. Right now it's 24 weeks. After 6 months of the mother's physical and financial resources are not inconsiderable.

What you are talking about IS science fiction. When the Star Trek technology that makes it possible comes along then groovy. Until then this wild bit of conjecture has zero place in a policy discussion. And to have it even be considered a serious contribution to the abortion discussion is laughable. At best.

You seem to be very inexperienced with conception, gestation and giving birth. Perhaps you should leave it to the experts in the medical field.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Glad we agree.

I agreed to this half a dozen posts back.

Irrelevant. I never disputed any of that information and you bringing it up is a complete red herring to my above point you already agree with.

I'm just pointing out that what you are bringing up, has no relevance to the right to chose. Why, because the fetus has not yet reached viability by the time the law says to a woman you can no longer choose to have an abortion. With the exception of specific reasons. Which fall under "late term abortions".

 

[Lazaran]

Ah the American system....it's not really that pricey north of the border or in other countries. It's just that little need for a profit in your system...

yep

Agreed, but my posts was on the optimistic side!

It's a fair argument to make, that perhaps in the future, an abortion would not need result in the death of the fetus. However unlikely that is to be. I doubt it would ever be less than 24 weeks to have survive-ability , but then again many other wacky ideas of the past have actually become reality.

I don't think he was extreme, or not HisArpy extreme anyhow....lol

Yeah, I wasn’t really responding directly to your comments, I was riffing off them to make a larger point.

That ^ point being, how "elitist" and disingenuous it is to use the most extreme, most intensive care requiring, most expensive, most questionable, interventions to support / determine a cut-off point for the "legal" termination of ALL pregnancies.



And are we really headed for an America / first world where abortions are outlawed, with the alternative being every unwanted or defective embryo or fetus being transferred to an artificial womb to complete gestation???



That ^ is obviously a better solution than simply providing relatively ethical, simple, inexpensive, GREATER ACCESS to contraception and reproductive healthcare services (including abortions). -( GREATER ACCESS that, ironically, would GREATLY REDUCE the likelihood of / need for "late term" abortions)



Also: Those science fiction movies with rows of fetuses in "growth tanks" always creeped me out.



JFC

SAD!!!