No reason for late-term abortion

No reason for late-term abortion

There are 654 comments on the The York Daily Record story from Jun 15, 2009, titled No reason for late-term abortion. In it, The York Daily Record reports that:

Many viewpoints have been expressed regarding the shooting of Dr. Tiller, mega-abortionist. However, all fail to mention one fact -- both the American Medical Association and former Surgeon General, Dr.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The York Daily Record.

First Prev
of 33
Next Last
mark

Englewood, CO

#1 Jun 15, 2009
There are indeed medical reasons for having late-term abortions. For example, the case of a woman pregnant with twins, where one twin died, and the woman quickly developed preeclampsia ( http://www.uppercasewoman.com/wastedbirthcont... ). The late-term abortion saved her life. Many women who underwent late-term abortions were looking forward to their new babies and were devastated by their loss. Perhaps a C-section could be performed in some cases, but when a fetus has developed without a brain, or without a face, or any other abnormality that will cause certain death shortly after birth, why risk a C-section? How about considering those women who were able to try again to have a baby and, indeed, were able to raise a happy, healthy child?
Chris Hutton

Marion, VA

#2 Jun 15, 2009
Now don't go clouding her argument with facts!
Dan

Omaha, NE

#3 Jun 15, 2009
mark wrote:
There are indeed medical reasons for having late-term abortions. For example, the case of a woman pregnant with twins, where one twin died, and the woman quickly developed preeclampsia ( http://www.uppercasewoman.com/wastedbirthcont... ). The late-term abortion saved her life. Many women who underwent late-term abortions were looking forward to their new babies and were devastated by their loss. Perhaps a C-section could be performed in some cases, but when a fetus has developed without a brain, or without a face, or any other abnormality that will cause certain death shortly after birth, why risk a C-section? How about considering those women who were able to try again to have a baby and, indeed, were able to raise a happy, healthy child?
The first scenario obviously is a medical emergency and the woman assumptively was in a delivery room. Let me know if I'm wrong on that.

If a baby suffers a life threatening deformity or malady, it does not have to be aborted prior to live birth to save the mother's life.
Jessica

York, PA

#4 Jun 16, 2009
Chris Hutton wrote:
Now don't go clouding her argument with facts!
It is the two of you who will not face the facts. The fact is that the AMA and Dr. Koop said there is NO medical reason for a partial birth abortion, I did not make the statement. Please refrain from killing the messenger of facts because they fail to uphold your skewed opinion.
Jessica

York, PA

#5 Jun 16, 2009
mark wrote:
There are indeed medical reasons for having late-term abortions. For example, the case of a woman pregnant with twins, where one twin died, and the woman quickly developed preeclampsia ( http://www.uppercasewoman.com/wastedbirthcont... ). The late-term abortion saved her life. Many women who underwent late-term abortions were looking forward to their new babies and were devastated by their loss. Perhaps a C-section could be performed in some cases, but when a fetus has developed without a brain, or without a face, or any other abnormality that will cause certain death shortly after birth, why risk a C-section? How about considering those women who were able to try again to have a baby and, indeed, were able to raise a happy, healthy child?
The abnormalities you cite would most assuredly be discovered early in the pregnancy, not "at the last minute" as you suggest, thus ruling out the necessity for a late-term abortion. Upon discovery, an early abortion would be the logical choice of any competent doctor for his patient.
Jasper

Mount Laurel, NJ

#6 Jun 16, 2009
What if the women gets laid off or her husband/sperm donor loses his job?
mark

Englewood, CO

#9 Jun 16, 2009
Those abnormalities are not always discovered early in a pregnancy. Furthermore, some situations, such as the death of a twin or a conjoined twin in utero, might not occur until late in the pregnancy. The point is, one cannot simply say there is no reason to undergo a late-term abortion--life is not always so simple. Many of the women whom Dr. Tiller cared for wanted very much to have the baby they were expecting.
Tony

Mount Laurel, NJ

#10 Jun 16, 2009
Dr. Killer must have found 60,000 such abnormalities in his practice.
OHsooSweetJM

Mamaroneck, NY

#11 Jun 16, 2009
mark wrote:
Those abnormalities are not always discovered early in a pregnancy. Furthermore, some situations, such as the death of a twin or a conjoined twin in utero, might not occur until late in the pregnancy. The point is, one cannot simply say there is no reason to undergo a late-term abortion--life is not always so simple. Many of the women whom Dr. Tiller cared for wanted very much to have the baby they were expecting.
Wake up darling.

"In my particular case, probably 20% are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective.” An article in the L.A. Times (8/28/96) listed some of the medical reasons for this type of abortion. They included cleft palates, cystic hygroma,(both easily corrected problems) and cystic fibrosis. The medical conditions present in the mother that warranted this type of abortion were,“depression, chicken pox, diabetes, vomiting ...” In other words, even those partial birth abortions that are done for the “health of the mother” or because of a “defective fetus” are often performed for minor, easily correctable conditions. Dr. C. Everett Coop, former U.S. Surgeon General, stated,“... in no way can I twist my mind to see that the late-term abortion as described is a medical necessity for the mother. It certainly can’t be a necessity for the baby.”

Since: Mar 09

New Orleans, LA

#12 Jun 16, 2009
Jessica wrote:
<quoted text>
It is the two of you who will not face the facts. The fact is that the AMA and Dr. Koop said there is NO medical reason for a partial birth abortion, I did not make the statement. Please refrain from killing the messenger of facts because they fail to uphold your skewed opinion.
Yes, but Koop was known to be anti-woman and anti-choice. His opinion is in no way based on medical fact. As for your cute statement about the AMA, which may be true, by not giving any kind of reference to when they stated this brings your entire argument into question. I think it's strange because when we were protesting a partial-birth abortion ban here there was a rep from the AMA who was here to official disapprove of it. Interesting.
Citizen

Philadelphia, PA

#13 Jun 16, 2009
My question to all of these people that are pro life: How many of these fetuses ( if they were not aborted) would you be willing to adopt? Are you willing to support these children until they are old enough to fend for themselves? Or are you just trying to stick your nose in someone else's uterus? If you do not want abortions to happen, then you must be willing to support the unwanted babies that will be born and be willing to pay for any medical care and food they will ever need.

You spout about "morality" and what is right for the fetus yet you fail to see beyond your twisted sense of morality. Someone somewhere must pay for the care of the child once it is born. Where is the money coming from? The Church? The State? Your pocket? Where? Money does not grow on trees and there are a lot of better uses than paying for a baby because some busy body cannot keep out of others personal lives.
mark

Englewood, CO

#14 Jun 17, 2009
I'm not sure JoyofLife's characterization of former Surgeon General Koop is accurate. After all, he refused to go along with the Reagan Administration's contention that having an abortion resulted in psychological ill effects, pointing out that there was no scientific evidence to support that contention.

“Text OR drive...can't do both!”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#15 Jun 17, 2009
Jessica wrote:
<quoted text>
It is the two of you who will not face the facts. The fact is that the AMA and Dr. Koop said there is NO medical reason for a partial birth abortion, I did not make the statement. Please refrain from killing the messenger of facts because they fail to uphold your skewed opinion.
Partial birth abortion and late term abortion are not the same thing.

“Text OR drive...can't do both!”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#16 Jun 17, 2009
Jessica wrote:
<quoted text>
The abnormalities you cite would most assuredly be discovered early in the pregnancy, not "at the last minute" as you suggest, thus ruling out the necessity for a late-term abortion. Upon discovery, an early abortion would be the logical choice of any competent doctor for his patient.
Jessica, like it or not. Abortion is legal and available to women in the second trimester of pregnancy under certain conditions. It's none of your business.

Besides, there are conditions that would not be discovered until later in the pregnancy. You know...when the fetus is more developed than it is the first trimester?

“Text OR drive...can't do both!”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#17 Jun 17, 2009
OHsooSweetJM wrote:
<quoted text>
Wake up darling.
"In my particular case, probably 20% are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective.” An article in the L.A. Times (8/28/96) listed some of the medical reasons for this type of abortion. They included cleft palates, cystic hygroma,(both easily corrected problems) and cystic fibrosis. The medical conditions present in the mother that warranted this type of abortion were,“depression, chicken pox, diabetes, vomiting ...” In other words, even those partial birth abortions that are done for the “health of the mother” or because of a “defective fetus” are often performed for minor, easily correctable conditions. Dr. C. Everett Coop, former U.S. Surgeon General, stated,“... in no way can I twist my mind to see that the late-term abortion as described is a medical necessity for the mother. It certainly can’t be a necessity for the baby.”
Got anything more recent than 13 years ago?

Besides, why women abort is none of your business...right?
Ed17406W

Camp Hill, PA

#18 Jun 19, 2009
Tony wrote:
Dr. Killer must have found 60,000 such abnormalities in his practice.
You wouldn't happen to have a reference for that figure, would you? Over how many years did Dr. Tiller allegedly perform 60,000 late-term abortions? Or is the figure for all abortions, not just late-term abortions?

It would also be nice to know what percentage of pregnancies each year result in late-term abortions, second trimester abortions, first trimester abortions, spontaneous abortions (a.k.a., miscarriages), ectopic pregnancies, failure of the fertilized egg to implant properly and, at the other end of the pipe, live births; and of the live births, how many babies died within the first 24 hours, within the first 48 hours, within the first week and so forth. Data do tend to put matters in perspective.
MUIM

Toronto, Canada

#19 Jun 19, 2009
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
The first scenario obviously is a medical emergency and the woman assumptively was in a delivery room. Let me know if I'm wrong on that.
If a baby suffers a life threatening deformity or malady, it does not have to be aborted prior to live birth to save the mother's life.
Well that sounds humane Dan...keep the baby and let it live its life never knowing anything but extreme pain and suffering.
Jessica

York, PA

#20 Jun 19, 2009
Citizen wrote:
My question to all of these people that are pro life: How many of these fetuses ( if they were not aborted) would you be willing to adopt? Are you willing to support these children until they are old enough to fend for themselves? Or are you just trying to stick your nose in someone else's uterus? If you do not want abortions to happen, then you must be willing to support the unwanted babies that will be born and be willing to pay for any medical care and food they will ever need.
You spout about "morality" and what is right for the fetus yet you fail to see beyond your twisted sense of morality. Someone somewhere must pay for the care of the child once it is born. Where is the money coming from? The Church? The State? Your pocket? Where? Money does not grow on trees and there are a lot of better uses than paying for a baby because some busy body cannot keep out of others personal lives.
I don't have to pay for your abortions or your bastards. Whatever happened to sexual accountabililty?
Ed17406W

Camp Hill, PA

#21 Jun 19, 2009
Jessica wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have to pay for your abortions or your bastards. Whatever happened to sexual accountabililty?
Bastards? Are you saying that only unmarried women have late-term abortions? If so, please provide some data to support that contention.

What does sexual accountability have to do with fetal abnormalities, which are the cause of the vast majority of late-term abortions?

If a woman is carrying a defective fetus that won't be able to survive outside the womb or will be able to survive, in pain, for only a short time, what is the point in forcing her to carry that fetus to term against her will? What purpose is served? Don't try to tell me that it's God's will that all pregnancies be carried to term unless you can explain why such a large proportion of pregnancies end in spontaneous abortions (a.k.a., miscarriages), why so many fertilized eggs don't implant or implant in the wrong place (i.e., ectopic pregnancies) and why so many children are born with abnormalities that result in their death shortly after they are born.

Whatever happened to compassion and common sense?

Why are you so filled with hate?
Ed17406W

Camp Hill, PA

#22 Jun 19, 2009
MUIM wrote:
<quoted text>
Well that sounds humane Dan...keep the baby and let it live its life never knowing anything but extreme pain and suffering.
You've got to admit that Dan gave several compelling reasons why it's both compassionate and sensible to prevent women from ending disastrous pregnancies that don't happen to be life-threatening to them. Oh wait, he didn't give any reasons at all. My mistake.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 33
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Abortion Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) Sat Choicerocks 314,354
News Oklahoma House Declares Abortion 'Murder' May 23 bohart 7
Abortition Pros & Cons - What do you think May 23 Uncle Joe 2
News Woman had 15 abortions over 17 years (Oct '09) May 23 Uncle Joe 3
News Feminist icon Gloria Steinem adored, reviled in... May 22 They cannot kill ... 8
News Abortion clinic case summons a separate issue :... (Apr '07) May 22 silly rabbit 161
News Planned Parenthood to close 4 Iowa clinics afte... May 21 Lawrence Wolf 29
More from around the web