Partial birth abortions?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Partial birth abortions?
125
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 12:39am
Do some of you actually believe that this procedure is acceptable and humane?

Not passing judgment, just curious.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 12:55am
My personal opinion is that abortion should be legal up until a reasonable point of viability outside the mother's body.

But there are some rare exceptions.

I read an article several years ago written by a devoutly Catholic couple who supported a group called Catholics for Choice or some such thing. They'd not previously supported abortion, but their view had changed. They had a planned pregnancy, but learned very late that the baby was anencephalic - it had no brain. They had a few choices:

continue the pregnancy and delivery naturally - more risk for mom to continue the pregnancy, emotionally devastating to go through childbirth knowing what was ahead, and the inhumane and again emotionally devastating experience of watching the baby wither away and die.

or they could have a c-section - way more risk to mom, could lead to problems with future pregnancies, and again watch the child be born live only to watch it die.

or they could have a late-term abortion - least risky of all their options, and (they felt) the most humane option for their child.

They wrote a very compelling and emotional piece about it, and speak regularly on the subject. They talked about how the medical staff brought the baby out with a cap on its head for them to hold and say goodbye to....very sad, but they felt the best option for their family.

I wouldn't support the procedure for just anyone if it were me making the call...but its for exceptions like these that I think making it illegal would be detrimental in rare circumstances.

`
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 12:55am
Absolutely not! I think it's barbaric and about the most inhumane and most cruel thing we do to our young. I can't even imagine how any mother could pay an abortionist to inflict this kind of pain on her child.

As Everett C. Koop put it, "It's just bad medicine"

Sue

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 12:58am
My question is, if they were insistent on a late term abortion, why a partial birth abortion? Why not just stop it's heart in utero and then deliver a dead baby? Why do they have to partially deliver the baby and crush it's skull? That is so cruel...in fact, why can't they do it this way with all late term abortions?
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-01-2003
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 1:13am
Your treading that dangerous path again toward trying to get PC's to sympathize with the fetus.;)

In the situation of an much wanted anacephalic baby, I would think the mother would want to hold her child, name it and hold services for it. No heroic lifesaving measures needed. A warm blanket and a pr of loving arms. It just is a more dignified end, but then again, your asking for respect for the fetus.

Now, if the woman is either A- having the head delivered, collapsing the head, and then pushing the rest of the fetus out, or B delivering the body and then collapsing the head prior to delivery of the head (both ways I have read this is done) it seems it wouldn't be harder to just deliver baby, say hello's and goodbyes, bury child. I mean, the woman would have given birth had the baby been OK. Why does giving birth (a natural process) become more risky with a dying fetus? The mother could induce immeditaly following confirmation of the disorder, no need to wait.

But then again, if you consider the fetus, you are dissing the mother(or something like that...)

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 1:21am
I completely agree. I would think that the parents would want to hold their child, possibly look into his/her eyes at the least, then saying a proper 'good-bye'. I guess some people couldn't deal with the trauma of that -- but how much less traumatic is it to handle the situation 'humanely' (although I strongly disagree with that term being used in the same sentence as this procedure).

I, personally, would be more traumatized knowing I chose to end my baby's life before nature (or God, whichever you choose) was ready for it to end.

Medical advances and technology are incredible. Sometimes I wonder if there are some things we just were not meant to know in advance.

Avatar for sati769
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 2:07am
partial birth abortion is performed almost always when the fetus is not going to survive. they are not perormed just becuase someone changed their mind somehow, woke up one day and said'hmmmmmI don't think i want to be pregnant anymore...I know, I will just ave it killed and pulled out" WHATEVER. ok? [partial birth abortion is mostly used to end a bad pregnancy so that the parents have something to hold and morn over.The fetus is ALWAYS given a lethal injection first so as to make sure it cannot suffer.
Avatar for sati769
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 2:09am
it is not a child. and it does not feel pain. it is given a lethal injection prior to the procedure being performed. also, NO ONE just goes and gets and abortion at that late of term for anything less than a situation such as in which the baby has no brainetc etc.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-21-2003
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 6:23am
It is a child. When the skull is being suctioned, it is only seconds from being completely born. 2/3 of the body is already out of the woman. And do tell, what lethal injection is given? How do they prevent it from being passed on to the mother? The lethal injection in this procedure is when whatever sharp instrument the doctor chooses is inserted into the skull.

You really should learn more about this procedure so you can discuss this.


Edited 6/5/2003 6:24:27 AM ET by cl-munchies

Kim 

Mom to Brad, Ma

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 1:17pm
Why does this particular procedure have to be used????????????

Whether or not the baby is going to survive is not the point, in my view. If the baby is viable enough for the mother to go into labor and delivery, then why kill the baby when it's half-way out of the birth canal?

And I have no idea why someone would decide to have this procedure done in the first place, and I sure would hope it's not because they just 'changed their mind'. But from everything I've read, there has not been any medical necessity to perform this particular procedure, so why?

Oh, and where did you hear that a lethal injection is given before this procedure so the baby can't feel? If the baby's already dead, why continue with this procedure? That doesn't make any sense at all.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 06-05-2003 - 1:24pm
Riiight! If her uterus is perforated during the dismemberment procedure ( one alternative you all are celebrating so much) and she can no longer bear children, no big deal. If she loses too much blood in the C-section (the other one) who cares? After all, the woman is just that unimportant thing that surrounds the Almighty Fetus.

Oh, oh, and my favorite: well, she's not dead so it's all ok.

Yeparooney, PC is all about not wanting the woman to be "dissed"

Could you be any more oblivious to actual facts???

Pages