"Partial Birth Abortion" Ban - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-22-2003, 10:34 PM
 
mommy2maya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SE PA
Posts: 1,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by grisandole
My opinion, and this will go a bit OT since I really want to address what Barbara is saying about crisis preg. centers.

I think that it's gross and wrong to have a partial birth abortion BUT in the medically necessary cases mentioned above, they should absolutely have that right.....though I wonder the same thing as Celestial- why can't they stop the heart before the actual procedure? So, imo, if it's medically necessary it should be legal. But, if it isn't, I don't agree with it. Just my opinion.


About crisis preg centers- I've been thinking about them alot lately because I really want to start one in my area. I feel that there are women who are scared/poor/confused, etc. that would certainly choose keeping the baby over having an abortion if they had help (both emotional and financial) from caring people at a crisis preg. center. That being said, the majority of centers that I'm aware of seem to offer mimimal financial assistance; and what help is offered has tons of strings attached, usually in the form of religion being shoved down the mom's throat. Now, I'm not anti religion, or anti Christianity; and I don't care if a preg center preaches or anything. BUT, a lot only offer help if the women start going to meetings or church or such; and if a family "takes in" a pregnant woman, they are again, usually very religious and force it on the woman. I say this not as a generalization; Ive seen it. One woman I know who did this (took in pregnant women, not teens but adults) had curfews for the moms, they HAD to go to church and bible study, and couldn't have men over at all. Now, I can agree with not wanting a buch of guys over your house, but curfews and "morality" standards for a grown woman, come on!!! The local crisis preg center doesn't give things away, the women have to earn them by earning what they call "mommie bucks"; each time the woman shows up for a parenting class, appointment, BIBLE STUDY, etc, they get $1 in mommie bucks. The can then spend them at the "store"; outfits are 1-2 dollars, car seats are 10; A heck of alot of crap to go through for used clothes and car seats. And ime, these women are also encouraged to give their babies up for adoption instead of keeping them.

So, my rambling point is that crisis preg centers don't help the way they need to. What would work is offering free clothes, strollers, cribs, etc; parenting/breastfeeding info; and most importantly- helping these women financially- and that can be as simple as helping them apply for state health care, welfare, food stamps, housing, etc. Many women aren't informed about their options, and if they had someone helping them maybe they could get some help and actually make it.

Ugh. I'm sorry, I do believe that crisis preg centers are well intended, but are pushing their own agenda; and to say "Well, they can get help there" is such a cop out. A few free outfits doesn't help pay the bills.

Sorry for rambling; this is my issue at the moment; I'd really like to start a "REAL" crisis preg center someday


Kristi
There is a pregnancy crisis center like this near my house- it is a home for pregnant mothers to live in while pregnant/ after the birth, and to help them learn to support themselves & their child. I have donated some of my unused baby equipment to them. They truly are grateful for all donations.




I don't think the Partial Birth Abortion is at all about the health of the mother. How can partially delivering your child & then killing it be of any benefit to the mother?
mommy2maya is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-22-2003, 10:55 PM
 
MotherNatrsSon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: OhiO
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by mahdokht
If you have something legitimate to contribute, then by all means do so. If you can do nothing but accuse those who disagree with of being ignorant and/or uneducated then you might as well keep your opinions to yourself. They really aren't worth being aired. :
It wasn't my opinion if you read at all. It was from NPr. They did a survey andthat was ne of the results they said onair during "All Things Considered" tonight.

Please do not accuse me of "my opinon" being "out of line" when I clearly stated it was from NPR

You can listen to it online here:

http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/index.html

It isn't just the media "hyping" it up. Thee co-author of the bill stated there is more restrictive legislation on the way. Maybe it is hype but based on the pattern of chipping away at rights, I'd call it a first step towards more restrictions.


MNS
MotherNatrsSon is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 12:12 AM
 
gardenmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: blooming where I'm planted
Posts: 4,213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Can someone please tell me why it is okay for one person to decide when it is acceptable to end another's life? Who has the right to decide that an individual, born or unborn, is not worthy to live? If an unborn child is not a person, than it does not matter what is done to the tissue growing within the woman's body. If an unborn child is a person, than it is wrong to end its life, even if that is accomplished using so-called "humane" methods.

We can't have it both ways: either the fetus is a person, with rights, or it isn't a person, in which case it doesn't matter what we do with it.

As far as PBA is concerned, it is extremely brutal. If I decided that my pregnant cat, horse, dog, cow could no longer support the fetus, and paid the vet to perform such an operation on the animal, I would be called an animal abuser. In fact, I highly doubt that my vet would perform such a barbaric procedure.

Why then, is it acceptable to perform it on the most vulnerable members of our society? If the baby is not viable (and who really knows? Doctors are not gods, as I've read in so many posts here on these boards), what does it hurt to perform a C-sec, or allow the mom to birth vaginally, and then let the baby die in its parents arms? Non-viability does not diminish a person's worth. It makes it all the more precious, since we know that that person's time on this earth is so very short.

All babies (wanted or not) deserve to be loved and cherished, simply because they are a human being. We do not have the right to decide that certain babies are not worth bringing into the world, even those of us with nice titles and letters attached to our names.
gardenmommy is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 01:06 AM
 
MotherNatrsSon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: OhiO
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by gardenmommy
Can someone please tell me why it is okay for one person to decide when it is acceptable to end another's life? Who has the right to decide that an individual, born or unborn, is not worthy to live? If an unborn child is not a person, than it does not matter what is done to the tissue growing within the woman's body. If an unborn child is a person, than it is wrong to end its life, even if that is accomplished using so-called "humane" methods.

We can't have it both ways: either the fetus is a person, with rights, or it isn't a person, in which case it doesn't matter what we do with it.
Why is it better for you to decide for any other person what is best in their particular circumstances? And you have pretty much hit the nail on the head of the whole issue. I asked the same question in an earlier post now I would like you to answer it.

Do the rights of the unborn fetus supercede the rights of the mother? Do the mother's rights disappea as soon as she becomes pregnant and the right of the fetus is the only right in existance at that time.

Here is another one:

Have you ever read "The Haindmaid's Tale"?

Your line of thought is relagating women to non-person status as soon as they are determined to be pregnant.

MNS
MotherNatrsSon is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 01:42 AM
 
MotherNatrsSon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: OhiO
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by Nursing Mother
You ask some good questions Gardenmommy.

Just imagine what PETA would say to someone who performed an abortion on an animal, just because the owner didn't want to bother with a baby animal. Good Gosh!! Can you imagine the outrage.

What determines if it is a "fetus" or "baby" is of course the will of the mother.

Way down deep I think many many women can and do see the damage that abortion does, not only to their psyche, but of course to the life of the baby.

Of course most won't ever admit that a death has been wrought at the hand of an abortion Dr.... its just to painful to admit.....and the biggest denial ever I believe is when abortion is pooh poohed as not a big deal, or not really "killing a baby".


The world (our country) will soon pay for the massacre and holocaust of millions of children....its just a matter of time as God said "vengence is mine............I pity and grieve for what is coming, but we humans who take things into our own hands and play god will deserve it, every bit of it.....that is unless there is forgiveness , repentance, and change, on the side of those who do these evil acts.


.....but of course most of you know my POV,

I have a sister who is a director of a CPC ( Crisis preg. center).... and believe me they DO support, care, and minister to the pregnant women up and through until the baby is born and then help the women with adoption and/or single motherhood. They even pay for medical care, transportation, etc. SHe (my sister) has had many young mothers stay at her home and has arranged hundreds of mothers to stay in home of caring people who actually pay and provide financial and emotional support. I personally know many families who minister in that way. It is a quiet ministry happening all over this country, yet you hear nothing about it, because the people are not out for publicity. Just out to back up their words of with actions.
You almostsound like GW..."You are either with us or against us." "Them evildoers."

It is not an appropriate place to lay your xian guilt trip on people like is done when you "minister" to the confused women at your special care centers.

Maybe you should not pass such quick judgements and re read the book you quote from so adamantly in your defense. There is a "special" place for those that "show a "form" of godly devotion and prove false to it's power" as well.

You hear nothing about it? I am quite aware of the "ministry" that these women go through. The good old fashioned "Fire and Brimstone" xian guilt trip, fundamentalist kind of ministry.

The red word is the key word in the post imho. It is a fundamentalist xian agenda that fuels the wole "pro-life" agenda.

The fact that women become non person's with this line of thought is of no concern to these people. All that matters IS the fetus.

Maybe that is because some fundamental xians view women as "property" of the husband and not really having personhood of their own to begin with. They are submissive and subservient, on a par with livestock a "husband" may keep in his barn. Isn't that where "husbandry" came from? Animal husbandry, seeing how we are now comparing people and animals. Women to cows or horses...

I wonder if these same women would be so quick to pass judgement on others if it were actually a matter of women once again having no rights at all. Being relegated to non-person status as soon as they become pregnant.

MNS
MotherNatrsSon is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 02:17 AM
 
Greaseball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 8,570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Sorry, but I just don't get why this would be necessary. I consider myself pro-choice (though I would NEVER have an abortion!) but I think if there really is a medical reason for this, why does the baby's skull have to be evacuated?

My stepmother was 29 weeks pg and it was a danger to her life and the life of the baby. Rather than having a partial birth abortion, she had a c/s, though the baby was not expected to live anyway. Well, it lived. She was then told the baby would be brain-damaged. She's a normal 14-year-old.

That's what I would do - if my pregnancy was risking my life, I would have the baby delivered and hope for the best. If I were carrying a fetus that had no chance of surviving soon after delivery, I would deliver it anyway. I think a baby who is going to die at birth deserves to die in a loving, respectful environment and in a painless way. I'd want to hold it for the few minutes we could have together.

I read the example of the 20-inch head thing, but I would rather have a c/s even if the baby was going to die. (If it was already dead, I'd go for the vaginal delivery.) Remember, babies do feel pain! Even unborn ones! I would not put my unborn child through pain just because I wanted to avoid surgery or see a normal looking baby.

The only way I could possibly think of having an abortion is in the case of ectopic pregnancy, when there really is no chance of the baby surviving, and a good chance of the mother dying if it's not done. I'd make them be gentle though.

I'm sure I will now be thought of as a disgrace to the pro-choice movement. But if a mother has the choice of delivering a dead baby and a live one, and in either case does not have to go any farther along in her pregnancy, why on earth would she choose the dead one?
Greaseball is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 02:19 AM
 
joesmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wherever Joe is!
Posts: 3,157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
NM, i think i understand where you are coming from & kudos to your sister, the job she does is SO important. hafta go, joe is ready to hit the sack, but i wanted to jump in with a for ya!

ministering to those who need it can be done by anyone of any religion, imo.
joesmom is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 02:46 AM
 
lotusdebi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Facebook
Posts: 6,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
*

You can find me on Facebook. PM for info.
lotusdebi is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 03:21 AM - Thread Starter
 
TiredX2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: it appears to be a handbasket
Posts: 20,029
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by skellbelle
I don't believe that. Do you have objective stats to back up that statement?
This regarding my statement:

The vast majority of "social" abortions occur before 12 weeks, partial birth abortions are generally only given in extream situation with much trepidation, agony and grief.

What part don't you believe/want backed up.

 

 

TiredX2 is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 04:31 AM
 
Tigerchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle Eastside
Posts: 4,737
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Just to add something in here...

Just because the D&X procedure is used doesn't mean that something can't be done first.

At the worst point of my boys' TTTS, when we were getting pressure to sacrifice Dylan so that at least Tom would make it, we were told that they would do a cord ligation or an injection into his heart to stop it. I don't see why a compassionate doctor would not offer the injection to a grieving couple. Perhaps they do...but where would it be recorded?

As a buddhist, I have very strong pro-life leanings (and not just about abortion). However...having faced a very difficult situation, I cannot in good conscience villianize parents who have had to make that choice now that I have had a very small taste of what they have to go through.

I believe those who have not faced a situation where they were offered the D&X or a late term abortion should not speak ill of those that have. Period. You don't know how agonizing it is. You don't bother to see that the vast majority of those folks would have traded places with those longed-for children in a heartbeat. If you can't have compassion, if you can only make accusatory statements and want to hurt those folks even more...then perhaps this concern solely for the children is a shield rather than a true motivation.

Knocked up college students wanting a way out don't have late term abortions. It's very hard to get one. Don't believe everything that Focus on the Family and other similar groups upchuck on this one. If you want to save these babies, then start donating to the March of Dimes, and research organizations, that maybe will provide answers and perhaps even prevention.

But sometimes really horrible things happen, naturally. And it makes me sick that people already horribly, horribly wounded should have to deal with others who are all too easily able to distance themselves from the situation and see it as black and white.
Tigerchild is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 05:21 AM
 
*~*SewHappyNow*~*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 2,122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My opinion... I think PBS is a disgusting practice, turns my stomach to imagine the pain that fetus sustains. I see no difference in carrying the baby to term, giving birth, killing it, tossing it into a duffel bag and throwing it into the trash and PBA. The only difference is one is considered homicide and abuse of a corpse and the other is a medical procedure.

I have no plans to read this entire thread and your flames back and forth, but the OP asked if anyone had an opinion and this is mine.

Karen Mommy of McKenna 2003 & Alysson 2004 homebirth.jpg Expecting stork-girl.gif an early Christmas Present
*~*SewHappyNow*~* is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 09:41 AM
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by Nursing Mother
.

Just imagine what PETA would say to someone who performed an abortion on an animal, just because the owner didn't want to bother with a baby animal. Good Gosh!! Can you imagine the outrage.

.
Not sure where you get this idea. When you have a fertile sexually active outdoor cat spayed, there may be another litter in the uterus. It is disposed of along with the animal's reproductive organs.
DaryLLL is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 01:12 PM
 
barbara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
TiredX2 wrote:
Quote:
Why should a mother HAVE to have major abdominal surgery to allow a child to be born alive that can't live?
So that her child doesn't have to experience a painful and agonizing death by being stabbed in the head and ripped apart while still alive! I should hope that a compassionate woman would want her child's only moments outside of her womb to be as peaceful as possible and allow her child to die with dignity.
barbara is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 01:19 PM
 
barbara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
AmyB wrote:
Quote:
I find the pro-lifers' support of this bill morally repugnant and horrifying. I can not immagine anything more evil than being willing to kill a woman for the sake of rigid adherance to pro-life ideology.
This is not an educated statement. There are many ways to save the mother's life without brutally killing the child! In the stated cases where the mother's life was in danger it was because she could not carry the pregnancy to term. There is no reason that this type of inhumane abortion has to be performed. It is simply emotional propaganda.
barbara is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 01:32 PM
 
barbara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
T
Quote:
What would work is offering free clothes, strollers, cribs, etc; parenting/breastfeeding info; and most importantly- helping these women financially- and that can be as simple as helping them apply for state health care, welfare, food stamps, housing, etc.
The crisis pregnancy centers in the greater metropolitian area where I live do offer this assistance free.

I understand the concern that these centers are often religious and many woman don't want to be preached at, however the help is offered free. Also if a woman is living with another family I don't think it is too much to ask her to be home by a reasonable hour, and follow the house rules, afterall, everyone in the household will also be making concessions to accommodate having her and her child living with them.

I do agree with you that centers and homes that are not religious would be great, but the fact is that it almost always has been religious groups that have reached out to those in need.

Sorry...back to the PBA topic...
barbara is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 01:40 PM
 
barbara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query...p/~c108umnmPa::
Quote:
the person performing the abortion --
`(A) deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and
`(B) performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus
Ladies, after reading exactly what this bill is banning can you still say that you find the pro-lifers' support of this bill morally repugnant and horrifying?
barbara is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 01:52 PM
 
Potty Diva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
A few pages back someone asked how a GD/AP mama could be pro-choice.

Well, for one, I don't believe a fetus is a viable human until after 28 weeks(or whatever the age of true viability occurs- this meaning no interference from doctors with huge life savings measures).

The fetus, until this point is an attached part of the woman carrying it. Not separate because it cannot sustain life on its own by breathing.

Did I believe Kailey was a child while I was pregnant with her? No..but I knew she would grow into one. Was I careful during pregnancy? Definitely. Because she was a wanted child(as in WOULD BECOME a child).

I believe in a woman's right to choose and feel extremely confident that this will be overturned because it fails to leave a clause to protect the mothers life.
Potty Diva is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 02:08 PM
 
merpk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 14,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
:stretch

Aaahhh, the air feels good in here.

Anyway, will stay out of the abortion part of the debate.

Will, however, point out that there was an attempt to submit the same bill *but* with the exception included for the mother's health.

The Republicans/backers of the current bill would not allow it to go through with the mother's health exclusion.

This speaks volumes to me about the true intentions here.
merpk is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 02:23 PM
 
Ilaria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Currently living in Beijing, China
Posts: 2,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
The Republicans/backers of the current bill would not allow it to go through with the mother's health exclusion.

This speaks volumes to me about the true intentions here.
Yep, it sure does...

Ilaria mamma to Owen, Caroline & Patrick .... loving life as expats in Asia intactlact.gifnovaxnocirc.gifuc.jpgnamaste.gif
Ilaria is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 02:42 PM
 
Greaseball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 8,570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
There are "animal abortions." A friend's purebred dog got knocked up by a mutt and she was concerned the dog's value would go down if "word got out" so the vet removed all the fetuses.

My dh is very pro-choice, including partial-birth. He believes that the fetus is part of a woman's body and nothing more. (Though he does show inconsistency with this belief, by expressing disapproval toward pg women who smoke.) The problem is, where do you draw the line? When is it its own person? Apparently not when it's a viable fetus (child) with the head out...when the rest of the body is out? When the cord is cut? What if the baby shot out so fast the doctor couldn't perform the evacuation...would he then suck out the skull of the whole baby in front of him?

When can this procedure not be preformed? 37 weeks? 42 weeks? Or anytime?

Again, I don't know much about these genetic disorders but I don't see why the baby can't be delivered and then hope for the best. If a mother just can't (or won't) have surgery it can be delivered with Pitocin (the way they are in some 2nd trimester abortions) and then if it is born alive, it can go to the NICU. Why doesn't the doctor first check that the fetus can or cannot survive, instead of just assuming it can't?
Greaseball is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 03:19 PM
 
Wendydagny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by Greaseball
The problem is, where do you draw the line? When is it its own person? Apparently not when it's a viable fetus (child) with the head out...when the rest of the body is out? When the cord is cut? What if the baby shot out so fast the doctor couldn't perform the evacuation...would he then suck out the skull of the whole baby in front of him?
Thought you may be interested in reading some of the actual floor debate from the senate on this particular subject at:

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=1707

My personal favorite part is when Senator Boxer says: "I think when you bring your baby home, when your baby is born--and there is no such thing as partial-birth--the baby belongs to your family and has the rights."

Also, to the lack of health of the mother clause. Dh informed me (so no I have no link or proof, but I'll be checking now.) that the reason the Republicans declined to include this was that it was not a clause intended to prevent a mother from dying-- it included mental health, etc. as an option for aborting via this method.

Regardless, there are other methods that are more humane that can be used besides this one. Technically, this law would not even ban this procedure if the child were first administered some heart stopping medication (as Marlena mentioned), since the baby would no longer be alive when it was delivered.

And I have yet to hear an explanation as to how it helps the health of a mother to suck out a baby's brain after she has already gone through the birth process. Anyone?
Wendydagny is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 03:51 PM
 
joesmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wherever Joe is!
Posts: 3,157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by Potty Diva
A few pages back someone asked how a GD/AP mama could be pro-choice.

Well, for one, I don't believe a fetus is a viable human until after 28 weeks(or whatever the age of true viability occurs- this meaning no interference from doctors with huge life savings measures).

The fetus, until this point is an attached part of the woman carrying it. Not separate because it cannot sustain life on its own by breathing.

Did I believe Kailey was a child while I was pregnant with her? No..but I knew she would grow into one. Was I careful during pregnancy? Definitely. Because she was a wanted child(as in WOULD BECOME a child).

I believe in a woman's right to choose and feel extremely confident that this will be overturned because it fails to leave a clause to protect the mothers life.
thank you for explaining that, potty diva. i guess that is the main difference between the opposing sides: i believe that my son was a person from the second he was conceived. even though a baby could not survive on his own in the early weeks of a pregnancy, he is STILL a person.

really, joe is four now. if left ON HIS OWN, he would not survive for very long, right? so should the murder of children be legalized? maybe until they reach the teen years?

obviously i am exaggerating. but to me it really IS the same thing. one minute it is a lump of flesh whose brain can be sucked out without a thought, but if left to be borne into this world, it is a BABY? that is unbelievable to me.
joesmom is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 03:52 PM
Banned
 
Marlena's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,626
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I can't vouch for the source, but I couldn't spend much time looking, and the information it contains is, at least to my understanding, basically correct:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intact_...and_extraction

Quote:
D & X procedures are performed during the third trimester of pregnancy if:
The fetus is dead.
The fetus is alive, but continued pregnancy would place the woman's life in severe danger.
The fetus is alive, but continued pregnancy would grievously damage the woman's health and/or disable her.
The fetus is so malformed that it can never gain consciousness and will die shortly after birth.

Many of the fetuses which fall into this category have developed hydrocephalus. Approximately 1 in 2,000 fetuses develop hydrocephalus while in the womb; this is about 5,000 a year in the United States. The defect is not usually discovered until late in the second trimester of pregnancy.

If a fetus develops hydrocephalus, the head may expand to a size of up to 250% of the radius of an adult skull, making it impossible for it to pass through the birth canal. In such a case, the physician may elect to perform a D & X procedure by draining off the fluid from the brain area, collapsing the fetal skull and withdrawing the dead fetus. Allowing a woman to continue in labor with a severely hydrocephalic fetus is not an option; attempted birth would kill her.
According to the entry (as it continues from the quote given above), the procedure is used in order to collapse the head prior to withdrawing the head from the uterus through the cervix and into the vagina.
Marlena is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 03:55 PM
 
spero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: the back of beyond
Posts: 9,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by Greaseball
The problem is, where do you draw the line? When is it its own person? Apparently not when it's a viable fetus (child) with the head out...when the rest of the body is out? When the cord is cut?

...Why doesn't the doctor first check that the fetus can or cannot survive, instead of just assuming it can't?
Absolutely. As someone mentioned before, so many of you ladies are always complaining about doctors who play God...well this is a prime example. I would never put that much blind faith in a doctor, as far as my child's life was concerned. My life would be secondary...by choice.

NM, joesmom, Greaseball...

Every baptized Christian is, or should be, someone with an actual (disturbing) experience, ... a close encounter, with God; someone who, as a result, becomes a disturbing presence to others. - Fr. Anthony J. Gittins, A Presence That Disturbs
spero is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 04:02 PM
 
Potty Diva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by skellbelle
as far as my child's life was concerned. My life would be secondary...by choice.
This is insane to me. I have been in a debate where other women have said the same thing, that in a life or death situation, they would want their child to live(meaning in a pregnancy situation), if they had to choose between their life and the infants.

Not me. I would never purposefully let my life end so my child or other children would be motherless, or homeless. Nor would I burden my family with the care of this baby. What about breastfeeding? You would deny this child your milk simply to prove a point?

In the end, it is my life and the lives of my existing family and children who are more important than a fetus.
Potty Diva is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 04:13 PM
 
hmpc2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: the road less traveled
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This is going to be a rambling here...so read if you want, go to the next post if you don't. I will get to the topic of this thread once I explain myself.

I for years have struggled between pro-life and pro-choice. I have decieded that I am pro-adoption. I don't think abortions should be outlawed until all these children in foster care who are deemed unadoptable find permant families. If you are gung-ho pro-life please adopt these children who weren't aborted...

Now to the topic...I am not fully educated on partial birth abortions-just what I have read recently and this thread. Being a mother to a baby that died during labor @ 40.5 wks...I am appalled that such a procedure exists. I believe partial birth abortions should be illegial... If the fetus is not viable and the woman cannot endure the emotional pain of carrying to term a baby she has been told will not survive...how will her emotional pain be any less knowing this procedure was done to her infant? If she cannot handle the emotional tramua of carrying a non-viable pregnacy...she can be induced and deliver the baby and if the child lives without xtra life support- fantastic, if not the baby dies in a less tramautic way.

This topic may be personal to me because of my loss, but I know other moms who have chosen to abort and grieve the same as I do. I just cannot imagine the pain and tramua that the child is going through...I cry knowing that my daughter died from suffication (cord around her neck), No this procedure is not humane...and yes the child even if they are non-viable can still feel...Will I ever blame the mother that makes this choice- no...I do blame the doctors that do this procedure knowing they can just deliver the baby. Isn't that what pro-choice is about... knowing ALL of our choices? I don't think any of us would chose to have this procedure if we were given other humane choices.
hmpc2 is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 04:23 PM
 
Wendydagny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Marlena,

First off, I keep meaning to give you a big hand for your ability to come out and say that the actual procedure is inhumane, even though you are pro-choice.

Thanks for the info on the hydrocephalic babies, which is technically true.

However, just because a baby has hydrocephalus, it doesn't mean that the baby will die or even be less than normal. There are pre and post delivery treatment options for it. See here:

http://fetalsurgery.chop.edu/HYDRint7.shtml

What strikes me is the normal outcomes they quote (48% for fetal, and between 50 and 80% for neonatal hydrocephalus.) There are many other sites on the web that have similar numbers.

I do understand the point that if the baby were delivered vaginally with a 250% sized head, that the mother would die. But delivering vaginally is not the only option, especially considering that doing a c-section could also save the life of the baby.

Should I have the option (in 4 weeks when I deliver baby #4) to have a quicky PBA if she's in a transverse position, just to save myself from a c-section? I really don't see how it's any different. : My mental health would certainly be at stake if I had to go under the knife.
Wendydagny is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 04:24 PM
 
spero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: the back of beyond
Posts: 9,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Most women (pro-life and pro-choice alike) I know would give their own lives to protect the life of one of their existing (already born) children. Why should it be any different just b/c the child is still in utero? Because the "fetus" is "not viable"?

Not IMO.

Quote:
Originally posted by Potty Diva
I would never purposefully let my life end so my child or other children would be motherless, or homeless. Nor would I burden my family with the care of this baby. What about breastfeeding? You would deny this child your milk simply to prove a point?

In the end, it is my life and the lives of my existing family and children who are more important than a fetus.
My unborn child would become a member of my existing family the moment he/she was conceived.

Denying this child my milk would be worse than denying this child his or her own life?!? Please :

If, by some tragic circumstance, I were to pass away in childbirth, my children would be lovingly cared for by their father, with the help of our large, extended family. They would not be homeless. The baby would not die from formula feeding. And my children would grow up knowing that their mother loved them so much that she would give her own life for one of theirs.

Every baptized Christian is, or should be, someone with an actual (disturbing) experience, ... a close encounter, with God; someone who, as a result, becomes a disturbing presence to others. - Fr. Anthony J. Gittins, A Presence That Disturbs
spero is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 04:31 PM
 
spero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: the back of beyond
Posts: 9,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by TiredX2
...regarding my statement:

The vast majority of "social" abortions occur before 12 weeks, partial birth abortions are generally only given in extream situation with much trepidation, agony and grief.

What part don't you believe/want backed up.
All of it...where are you getting your stats?

Every baptized Christian is, or should be, someone with an actual (disturbing) experience, ... a close encounter, with God; someone who, as a result, becomes a disturbing presence to others. - Fr. Anthony J. Gittins, A Presence That Disturbs
spero is offline  
Old 10-23-2003, 04:32 PM
 
lotusdebi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Facebook
Posts: 6,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
*

You can find me on Facebook. PM for info.
lotusdebi is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off