Partial Birth Abortion

[weed]

This is often heralded as the Pro-Lifer's most sensational ploy against a woman's right to abortion.

I will admit it's a horrible procedure. As someone who takes care of premies the idea of destroying a healthy fetus beyond 22 weeks seems irresponsible but having worked in this field I also realize their are times when it is appropriate, when the mother is threatened or the fetus unviable. Thankfully, rarely although pro-lifers would have us think it happens all the time and use their graphic pictures to strike at the hearts of those who do not understand.



The only current statistics I can find say that the procedure is actually taking place in less than 0.05% of all abortions in the US. That's approximately 650/year. Only about 14 institutions perform the procedure.


http://www.crlp.org/pr_98_1210abstats.html

If anyone else has some statistics to share I'd be interested in hearing.

 

[Silverluna]

While I cannot vouch for other pro lifers....

Some, myself included, understand that there are times when a PA is needed....it's an unpleasant idea...and I think that many wackos on both sides refuse to face facts that sometimes you need to do certain things....

IMO...

Personally I am against abortion unless it is life threating to the child/mother....a case of rape or incest...because the child was not concieved willingly.

 

[weed]

While I cannot vouch for other pro lifers....

Some, myself included, understand that there are times when a PA is needed....it's an unpleasant idea...and I think that many wackos on both sides refuse to face facts that sometimes you need to do certain things....

IMO...

Personally I am against abortion unless it is life threating to the child/mother....a case of rape or incest...because the child was not concieved willingly.

Well said and understood. Abortion is not a pretty thing whether you are for or against a woman's right to choose.

But as you say.....there are sometimes....

 

[REDWAVE]

Women have the right to choose

The right to choose and to control one's own body is a fundamental human right. Furthermore, abortions should not be just a privilege available only to affluent women. For free abortion on demand!

 

[Silverluna]

Well said and understood. Abortion is not a pretty thing whether you are for or against a woman's right to choose.

But as you say.....there are sometimes....

thank you...I am always nervous about just posting on issues like this...I don't like to be misunderstood anymore than normal!

 

[bknight2602]

Pardon the question, but what is a partial abortion? Seems like as dumb a statement as partial pregnancy?

 

[RawHumor]

Re: Women have the right to choose

For free abortion on demand!

They should offer them at the drive-through window of Wendy's!

 

[crysede]

Thanks for this weed - this is a very good idea for a thread.

It drives me batty how partial birth abortions are brought up by the pro-life side, as though people who are pro-choice actually think it's perfectly fine to kill a fetus right up until the moment of birth (plus they have all those lovely pictures of fetal surgery that they try to pass off as partial birth abortions). The sort of conditions a mother or fetus would have to suffer from to make a partial birth abortion an option, are not the sort of things the majority on the pro-life side would actually want to force women or babies to endure.

Even when it comes to fetal abnormalities - which seems to be the more contentious issue (most people seem to agree that aborting to save the mother's life is acceptable) - there are some conditions which are just so horrific that I can't imagine anyone seriously arguing that a child who suffered from them wouldn't be better off not being born.

There are some things that modern science can simply cannot fix, and that it is just wrong to subject another living creature too - even if it would only live for a few days, even in the name of respecting the sanctity of life.

 

[Silverluna]

Re: Re: Women have the right to choose

They should offer them at the drive-through window of Wendy's!

LOL

would you like a hot apple pie with that???

 

[weed]

Re: Women have the right to choose

The right to choose and to control one's own body is a fundamental human right. Furthermore, abortions should not be just a privilege available only to affluent women. For free abortion on demand!

I posted to your thread.

 

[crysede]

Pardon the question, but what is a partial abortion? Seems like as dumb a statement as partial pregnancy?

A partial birth abortion is a late-term abortion.

 

[weed]

Pardon the question, but what is a partial abortion? Seems like as dumb a statement as partial pregnancy?

It means the fetus is alive and birth is induced. There are times when the fetus must be removed in stages. This is what the pro-lifers like to focus on. Show us pictures of.

 

[weed]

Thanks for this weed - this is a very good idea for a thread.

It drives me batty how partial birth abortions are brought up by the pro-life side, as though people who are pro-choice actually think it's perfectly fine to kill a fetus right up until the moment of birth (plus they have all those lovely pictures of fetal surgery that they try to pass off as partial birth abortions). The sort of conditions a mother or fetus would have to suffer from to make a partial birth abortion an option, are not the sort of things the majority on the pro-life side would actually want to force women or babies to endure.

Even when it comes to fetal abnormalities - which seems to be the more contentious issue (most people seem to agree that aborting to save the mother's life is acceptable) - there are some conditions which are just so horrific that I can't imagine anyone seriously arguing that a child who suffered from them wouldn't be better off not being born.

There are some things that modern science can simply cannot fix, and that it is just wrong to subject another living creature too - even if it would only live for a few days, even in the name of respecting the sanctity of life.

ty, crysede....I wish more people would recognize the differences between abortion and PBA. Nothing irks me more than the holy roller parked by the mall w/his pics of bloody fetuses of 23 weeks like it's representative of all abortions.

 

[weed]

A partial birth abortion is a late-term abortion.

Thank you, I forgot that part. It happens in the second or third trimester.

 

[bknight2602]

It means the fetus is alive and birth is induced. There are times when the fetus must be removed in stages. This is what the pro-lifers like to focus on. Show us pictures of.

Not to sound gross but the little vacuum cleaners do the same thing early on.

However, crysede and weed thank for informing me.

My take on abortions is that women have the right to choose, regardless of the circumstances. Not getting into any wrangling with the Pro-Lifers, just stating my opinion.

 

[tyme]

ty, crysede....I wish more people would recognize the differences between abortion and PBA. Nothing irks me more than the holy roller parked by the mall w/his pics of bloody fetuses of 23 weeks like it's representative of all abortions

I agree while my own views would notlet me get one if I had ever needed one I would not stop another women from getting one if she wanted/needed one. I do think there should be a time line for the normal abortion. But if you have a reason that the DR. thinks falls within set rules I think you should be able to get one later if needed. (rape, finding something wrong with the baby, danger to mother/baby's life)

 

[Ishmael]

This is often heralded as the Pro-Lifer's most sensational ploy against a woman's right to abortion.

I will admit it's a horrible procedure. As someone who takes care of premies the idea of destroying a healthy fetus beyond 22 weeks seems irresponsible but having worked in this field I also realize their are times when it is appropriate, when the mother is threatened or the fetus unviable. Thankfully, rarely although pro-lifers would have us think it happens all the time and use their graphic pictures to strike at the hearts of those who do not understand.



The only current statistics I can find say that the procedure is actually taking place in less than 0.05% of all abortions in the US. That's approximately 650/year. Only about 14 institutions perform the procedure.


http://www.crlp.org/pr_98_1210abstats.html

If anyone else has some statistics to share I'd be interested in hearing.

Your numbers are about right. The range that I heard in the Senate and House floor debates ranged from the 600 you stated to a high of about 1000. So it is NOT a heavily used procedure.

It is estimated that of the number that you mentioned approx. 30% are not performed because of any danger to the mother or because of an unviable fetus.

The issue is that with modern neo-natal techniques these fetus's are potentially viable live births, be they natural means or 'C'-section. We are no longer talking about abortion in the conventional sense here. We are talking nothing short of murder for those 30% cases.

I still can see why there is an objection to outlawing those small number of procedures that are actually subject to the law as proposed.

Ishmael

 

[crysede]

ty, crysede....I wish more people would recognize the differences between abortion and PBA. Nothing irks me more than the holy roller parked by the mall w/his pics of bloody fetuses of 23 weeks like it's representative of all abortions.

I know what you mean - god I hate those pictures, I find them especially frustrating given that so many of them represent the success of modern in-utero surgery - it's really pretty sick to use pictures of babies being saved by medicine to stir up hatred against doctors.

It might also be good to add that partial birth abortions are not conducted in the manner of a regular abortion. Some pro-lifers (I should be careful not to tar all pro-lifers with the same brush) paint a pretty grizzly picture of babies being callously tortured. PBA's are conducted with the recognition that the fetus is quite likely aware in at least some sense, and everything possible is done to spare the fetus any suffering.

PBA is really more like passive euthanasia than abortion: it is the withdrawing of life supporting treatment from a premmie (the live supporting treatment being the woman's body). We do allow parents to decide to withdraw treatment from their children in some circumstances - the pro-life movement should be protesting that as well, if they are against PBA.

 

[crysede]

Re: Re: Partial Birth Abortion

Your numbers are about right. The range that I heard in the Senate and House floor debates ranged from the 600 you stated to a high of about 1000. So it is NOT a heavily used procedure.

It is estimated that of the number that you mentioned approx. 30% are not performed because of any danger to the mother or because of an unviable fetus.

The issue is that with modern neo-natal techniques these fetus's are potentially viable live births, be they natural means or 'C'-section. We are no longer talking about abortion in the conventional sense here. We are talking nothing short of murder for those 30% cases.

I still can see why there is an objection to outlawing those small number of procedures that are actually subject to the law as proposed.

Ishmael

I think you have to ask what constitutes a fetus being 'viable.' Literally it just means that modern medicine could keep that baby alive - but the fact that modern medicine could keep someone alive for some period of time, doesn't mean that it would be morally right to do so.

There are some conditions where I just don't think one could claim that there was any justification for keeping a baby alive - in fact, I think there are some conditions in which it would quite simply be wrong for us to keep them alive.

Euthanasia is not the same as murder - we recognize this socially, and legally (the comparatively light prison sentences imposed on those convicted of active euthanasia testifies to this - plus the fact that passive euthansia is legal). I think it is important to keep in mind, that murder is not something that is done for the purpose of benefiting the victim. PBA's are done when they are required to save the mother, and when they are morally required by what is in the best interest of the fetus.

(And yes, I do realize that you are not really arguing against this, since you say you do recognize that there is an argument to be made against banning PBA's even in these cases - but I disagree with your label of 'murder')

As horrible as it sounds to those of us who derive pleasure and satisfaction from our lives, sometimes living is not in someone's best interest.

 

[Ishmael]

Re: Re: Re: Partial Birth Abortion

I think you have to ask what constitutes a fetus being 'viable.' Literally it just means that modern medicine could keep that baby alive - but the fact that modern medicine could keep someone alive for some period of time, doesn't mean that it would be morally right to do so.

There are some conditions where I just don't think one could claim that there was any justification for keeping a baby alive - in fact, I think there are some conditions in which it would quite simply be wrong for us to keep them alive.

Euthanasia is not the same as murder - we recognize this socially, and legally (the comparatively light prison sentences imposed on those convicted of active euthanasia testifies to this - plus the fact that passive euthansia is legal). I think it is important to keep in mind, that murder is not something that is done for the purpose of benefiting the victim. PBA's are done when they are required to save the mother, and when they are morally required by what is in the best interest of the fetus.

(And yes, I do realize that you are not really arguing against this, since you say you do recognize that there is an argument to be made against banning PBA's even in these cases - but I disagree with your label of 'murder')

As horrible as it sounds to those of us who derive pleasure and satisfaction from our lives, sometimes living is not in someone's best interest.

Sorry, won't buy that argument at all. These women in the 30% had more than ample time to decide as to whether a child would 'inconvenience' them or not.

It is arguable that children in and of themselves are an inconvenience and burden until such time as they leave the house. Shall we return to pagan Roman practices children and the disposition thereof?

We are talking about fetus's in post 22 week portion of the pregnancy here. These babies are routinely saved. Further, except for the legitmate reasons for this procedure that weed has pointed out there is no reason that these children cannot be carried full term and put up for adoption should the mother decide that she doesn't want to be burdened with child rearing.

Most of the physiological changes associated with pregnancy have already occured to the womans body so that is no longer an issue either.

Sorry, the 30% that are performed for the convenience of the mother are not morally supportable.

Ishmael

 

[REDWAVE]

Funny

It's always amusing to hear someone like Ishmael, who defends such obscenities as bloated CEO compensation, and openly advocates a policy of across the boards discrimination against women in employment, talk about morality . . . "You strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel!"

The proposed ban on "partial birth" abortions is just the opening wedge in an ongoing campaign by the women-hating bigots to outlaw abortion altogether, roll back the gains of the women's movement, and reduce women to their traditional condition of subservience to and dependence upon men.

Remember-- this is the guy who once did a thread dedicated to bashing women.

 

[RawHumor]

FYI RED

Not all people who oppose abortions on demand are men.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

Remember, PBAs only make up some tiny fraction of all abortions, they are usually done to remove stillborn or brain damaged fetuses, or those which are so disfigured taht their lifespan would probably be measured in hours or days at most. Children born with their spines outside their body, without brains, that sort of thing. It is a purely political issue, used in order to control a woman's body.
I want to control a woman's body too, but in a much nicer way...back rubs, for instance.

 

[crysede]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Partial Birth Abortion

Sorry, won't buy that argument at all. These women in the 30% had more than ample time to decide as to whether a child would 'inconvenience' them or not.

It is arguable that children in and of themselves are an inconvenience and burden until such time as they leave the house. Shall we return to pagan Roman practices children and the disposition thereof?

We are talking about fetus's in post 22 week portion of the pregnancy here. These babies are routinely saved. Further, except for the legitmate reasons for this procedure that weed has pointed out there is no reason that these children cannot be carried full term and put up for adoption should the mother decide that she doesn't want to be burdened with child rearing.

Most of the physiological changes associated with pregnancy have already occured to the womans body so that is no longer an issue either.

Sorry, the 30% that are performed for the convenience of the mother are not morally supportable.

Ishmael

I'm not talking about for the inconvenience of the mother - I'm talking about avoiding the immoral inflection of pain and suffering on a baby.

I'd like to see you find a doctor who would perform a partial birth abortion in order to avoid 'inconveniencing' a mother!

Taking my child off life support because it's existence is nothing but unending and untreatable pain and suffering, is not killing it for my 'convenience' - it's killing it because it would be wrong to keep someone alive in that state.

The suffering of others does not 'inconvenience' me - I help people who are suffering because I know that it's the right thing to do. If killing someone is the only way I can help them - then I won't enjoy doing it, I won't do it lightly, it will not be 'convenient' for me to have to do it, but if there's no other option you can bet that I will do it.

 

[Ishmael]

Remember, PBAs only make up some tiny fraction of all abortions, they are usually done to remove stillborn or brain damaged fetuses, or those which are so disfigured taht their lifespan would probably be measured in hours or days at most. Children born with their spines outside their body, without brains, that sort of thing. It is a purely political issue, used in order to control a woman's body.
I want to control a woman's body too, but in a much nicer way...back rubs, for instance.

Why don't you read the thread before responding?

Ishmael