Judge Rules Against Ban on Partial-Birth Abortion

Well, it's not crucial to me, it's simply that i had heard about testimony that it is not a commonly performed procedure. I recall that in this latest ruling, the judge described this as a barbaric procedure, but felt obliged to strike it down, because of the lack of a provision for the health of the woman.

0 Replies

I can understand that, Set. A lot of people believe the story that PBAs are not done often enough to warrant legislation.

But, Planned Parenthood and some unethical doctors, who want to be able to continue performing this procedure with minimal legal threat--are lying about how often the procedure is performed. Ron Fitzsimmons had lied with a figure that was 100 times smaller than what he admitted to later.

Re the provision for the health of the woman: There are many doctors who say this PBA procedure is NEVER necessary to save the mother's life. The baby can be born through Cesarean, if for some reason it cannot be delivered vaginally.

If you look at the procedure--the baby is born, except the head is left inside the mother. The best argument for a PBA, IMO, is the baby's head is enormous due to hydroencephalicy (sp), resulting in a huge head that can't be delivered vaginally.

A woman who wants this baby, can have a shunt installed in the baby's head, in utero, which drains the liquid. The baby can then be born normally, or through Cesarean. This malformation is easily seen months ahead of time on a sonogram. Or for a mother who hasn't had healthcare, this malformation can be picked up before any procedure is done, and her baby (if alive) can be born through surgery.

So, it really boils down to the mother not wanting the child.

They, and I (and others) see this 'to save the mother' as a smoke-screen to enable the procedure to go on on demand. I would even say put in a clause to allow a hydroencephalitic baby to undergo the procedure--after ending its' life in a humane manner. That specific clause, I would support. If the general clause 'to save the mother' is added, the PBAs won't stop, or decrease. The clause makes the unwarranted procedure easy to justify with some fancy paperwork.

Abortion is just not regulated. It has become a womens' right issue, when it should be a healthcare issue.

(Apologies for long post. You likely didn't require all that information/opinion. Just wanted to clarify, in case you were interested.)

0 Replies

Wait a minute, Sofia, if you want to retain your own credibility, you have to do better math . . .

Sofia wrote:

Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers testified in government hearings that only about 450 D&Xs were performed annually in the United States. Later, on ABC's Nightline program, he admitted that he had lied about this figure in order to match the the lies and rhetoric by the other side in the debate. He now estimates that 3 to 4 thousand is a more accurate value.

Then, Sofia wrote:

Ron Fitzsimmons had lied with a figure that was 100 times smaller than what he admitted to later.

One hundred times 450 is 45,000, not three or four thousands. Keep in mind that this sort of hyperbole is what ratchets up the rhetoric of both sides to the level of hysteria.

0 Replies

Oops. Not hyperbole. Really off the cuff, poor math.

Ok. 10 times smaller.

<mathematical midget...>

0 Replies

sofia, I've told you a billion times "Don't exagerate!"

0 Replies

Surely, you meant 'a million'.

Hmph.

0 Replies

wait a minute, I have to take my socks off to count that high.

0 Replies

Quote:

So, it really boils down to the mother not wanting the child.

The fact is that the procedure may even be harmful to the health of the mother (from the pbs.org article I posted earlier):

GWEN IFILL: Dr. Cook, she is correct, this law doesn't say that there are exceptions made for a woman's health -- for a woman's life, but not her health. Is that something -- why wouldn't that be acceptable? DR. CURTIS COOK: Well, there is a very specific reason. There's no demonstration anywhere in any medical literature or any expert's testimony that this procedure in any way enhances or protects a woman's health versus any other procedure.

And in fact there is evidence that it potentially endangers a woman's health not only during that pregnancy but potentially future fertility with the massive over dilatation of the cervix that's involved in this procedure.

GWEN IFILL: What is the evidence of that?

DR. CURTIS COOK: The evidence being that they are putting up to 30-plus dilators at a time into a woman's cervix, a massive mechanical over dilatation of the cervix. We know that people that have mid trimester abortions that are done with less dilation are at increased risk for cervical incompetence with later pregnancies. So even greater dilation would put them at greater risk.

0 Replies

Don't forget that he is polydactil...

0 Replies

A math joke.

<cruel!>

<Runs from room, arms flailing above my head>

0 Replies

IMHO,

It simply cannot be against the law to make a mother choose between her life and the life of her child.

Even if it does only happen in 1/10,000 mothers who become pregnant, they still shouldn't be forced to make that choice by the law. Therefore. there must be a health exclusion. End of story.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I could never condone a law that sanctions a procedure that is cold-blooded murder, so cruel and inhumane that even the AMA and many liberal Democrats are against it. It's nothing more than a barbaric form of infanticide.

Just my opinion.

0 Replies

Like it would be... Don't buy that crap, cyclop.

If a woman was rushed into the hospital, and it was a choice between her life and her child's--she and her husband or doctor make that choice--and it's always for the woman--unless the woman chooses otherwise.

We're talking about abortions. Plain and simple.

0 Replies

For me and many women who appreciate the legality of abortions (especially those of us who are old enough to have had friends who died of septicemia from botched abortions), having a PBA isn't a decision that could possibly come easily.

I personally think that PBA's are abhorrent. My main worry is that the Bush administration is set on making all abortions illegal and this is the wedge they need to further their goal. Unless the legislation is worded in such a way that first and second trimenter abortions are not questioned, I would never trust them not to try additional legislation that would enact a total ban on abortions.

This is from the Gwen Ifill interview:

Quote:

The law is vague enough that it could conceivably be construed as applying to a much more commonly performed procedure called a dilation and evacuation, a D&E, which is performed between twelve and twenty weeks of gestation. So this law is not specific to a single type of procedure. In fact, the term -- the so-called partial birth abortion procedure is not recognized as a medical procedure per se.

0 Replies

That's interesting Miss Nun . . . as Sofia quoted remarks about D & E's, i now wonder if those who oppose abortions are not conflating the procedures to raise the level of the rhetoric, and make a case by willfully confusing procedures.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

I agree -- and I, personally, wouldn't object to laws that make third trimester abortions illegal -- except for preserving the mother's life or health. Of the Wikipedia list of indications that Sozobe linked to earlier, the last item seems unacceptable to me for any third trimester abortion. ("The fetus is alive, but the woman wishes to end her pregnancy for non-medical/psychological reasons.")

The point I was trying to make in the post you responded to is this: I don't think the arguments supporting my judgment are so compelling that other people must necessarily accept them.

Another problem I have is with the particular law in question. I don't understand why the Republicans who crafted it didn't make it a law against third trimester abortions in general. Why micromanage doctors, when your party is ideologically opposed to micromanagement by government? It's clear that there is no nice, gentle, pleasant way to kill an embryo in the third trimester, so why single out this procedure? What makes the other techniques for third trimester abortions so much better? It would be nice if you, or Sophia, or anyone else could explain this to me.

Thomas

The "health of the mother" can cover an incredibly broad range of circumstances. Quite a few women experience physical complications from pregnancy: nausea, high blood pressure, heart burn and hemorrhoids. Without carrying the fetus, they would not experience these health effects. Abortions warranted?

Even more worrisome is the possibility that under an exception for "the health of the mother," an argument can easily be made that the depression that would result from the unwanted pregnancy will have a negative impact on the health of the mother, and thus an abortion is warranted.

Some guidelines need to be agreed upon and imagine the endless debate on such a question.

I have no problem with "health of the mother" wording providing it has actual limitations, and can't be manipulated to allow for abortion on demand.

I don't know that I've ever heard any argument that is so compelling that everyone must necessarily accept it, so you're not alone with yours. These issues, though, must be decided one way or the other and no compromise is going to satisfy everyone. Personally, I think the issue should be decided by state legislatures. The Supreme Court overreached in Roe v Wade, but it made the law of the land.

The issue is so polarizing and has been so politicized (here in the US), that I find it hard to imagine how it might ever fade into the background. Pro-lifers are not going to give up their battle to outlaw abortion, and if they prove successful, Pro-choicers are not going to give up in a battle to again legalize it.

I think Sofia has answered your question on why Partial Birth and not all trimester abortions: Political expediency, and a strategy of incremental gains.

0 Replies

Judge Rules Against Ban on Partial-Birth Abortion

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know