Debate: Partial Birth Abortion...

[poohandwendy]

Hopefully this can stay civil. This was inspired by the "Where you stand" thread, I didn't want to turn that ito a debate, so I figured I would start a new thread....

What was mentioned more than once on that thread was the opinion that "Partial Birth Abortion" is not a medical procedure, rather a political term. This basically describes what I have read about the 'partial birth' procedure:

"Partial birth abortion is a common term for the Intact Dilation and Extraction (D&X) abortion procedure. In the partial birth abortion (D&X) procedure, a physician delivers a baby to the point where only the head remains inside the womb but then punctures the back of the skull and removes the brain before completing delivery. Partial birth abortion (D&X) makes up only 1% of all abortions performed. "

Correct me if I am wrong, but the term seems to fit the procedure.

So, the first question for debate is this: Is the term 'partial birth abortion" a correct description of the procedure or is it just a political term coined to inflame the heated abortion issue?

IMO, the term fits the procedure, I think the true political aspect is that people do not want to know the messy details.

Second question:

People often say they support PBA if the mother's life is at risk. If a fetus is completely delivered in this procedure, then "birthing" that child obviously isn't life threatening to the mother. If carrying the child any longer is the risk, then why not deliver the child and give it the chance at life? Do you support aborting a viable, healthy late term fetus when delivery does not present danger to the mother?

I do not. IMO, if the fetus is viable and you are going to go to the lengths of actually delivering the baby, then it should be given a chance at survival.

And edited to add a 3rd question:

Do you think the medical community should try to find a more humane way to perform abortions?

What are your thoughts?

 

[CEDmom]

Wow, talk about a way to get the blood flowing in the morning .

I haven't seen the other thread so I'll just respond to the questions you posed.

As far as the term goes if it's a means to get people politically charged and doesn't accurately describe the procedure than what does the medical community refer to it as. I for one think it does describe the procedure and understood it to be exactly what you posted.

Like you I never fully understood how partially delivering a baby would not endanger a woman's life but fully delivering would. I think this procedure is used for women who were in denial about their condition until it was too far along to proceed with a more conventional abortion.

Although I am the mother of an adopted child I am strongly pro-choice. However, I think the line has to be drawn somewhere and for me that's with PBA.

In situations where the a womans only choice is PBA or full delivery than I think full delivery s/b attempted. Babies are often saved when born at 26+ weeks so I think these children would have a very real chance at a quality life.

As far as finding a more humane way I don't know how feasible this would be for an abortion performed so late. Perhaps the baby could be fully delivered and then giving medication to ends its life. However as pro-choice as I am I couldn't stomach the thought of that. Not that I can stomach the specifics of a PBA.

I really believe that better legislation needs to be enacted to eliminate PBA. There isn't any legitimate reason that I can see to continue the practice. Women have the right to choose an abortion but that decision can and should be made before the 3rd trimester.

 

[Cindy B]

I did this whole debate for a school project just two weeks ago.

I got an A on the project. !!!WARNING MORBID!!!

Personally if the medical staff uses the instrument to pierce the baby/fetus skull after 3/4 of the fetus/baby has been expelled through the birth canal, it is wrong.

After the skull is pierced, the medical staff then uses a vacuum type device to then suck up brain tissue/skull tissue.. it is so wrong.

Yes, I had to view slides of this for my school project. Personally I would have rather looked at penile warts anyday!

 

[wdwdvcdad]

It is murder, it is brutal, and anyone who does is should be charged accordingly.....not just partial birth abortion, all abortion.

 

[Son of the Morning]

'Partial birth' abortion is a political term meant to bring up images of natural labor, birth-canal termination, which an oversimplification.

What the term implies medically is very broad, and I support a woman's right to it.

 

[tiggersmom2]

I am pro-choice but the line is drawn at partial birth abortions IMO. To me partial birth abortions are legalized murder.

 

[Divamomto3]

I don't have any fancy political terms to throw around or any eloquent debates. **WARNING...judgemental...**

It's gross.

I wonder how anyone could make a living like that.

I can't imagine what woman would knowingly allow a "doctor" to pierce her child's skull and suck their brains out, then dispose the child's body in an incinerator. If she can do that, she wasn't cut out to be a mother in the first place. If she has a soul or a conscience, I can't imagine how she wouldn't be tormented for the rest of her life. But maybe tormented is better than being inconvenienced by an unplanned pregnancy.

This morning, my good friend is laying on the flat of her back in a hospital, hooked up to a Magnesium drip, hoping and praying and willing her 28 week fetus to stay inside a little longer.

 

[goofy4tink]

I don't usually get involved with these, but......partial birth abortions, IMO, should only be used if the fetus is not going to be born alive. By this I mean...say you find in your 6th month that the baby is not developing and is going to be born dead. Do you carry that child for another 2-3 months, only to have a dead baby? I don't think so. While I am avidly pro-choice, I have to believe this is wrong. Now, should a woman have the right to decide in her 6th-7nth month that she no longer wishes to carry this child and decide on a PBA? Nope. Make that choice 3 months sooner and I'll agree with your choice. But, IMHO, it is no longer a viable option after month 4.

I had a friend who found herself in just this position. She noticed lack of movement in her 7th month. Tests showed the baby was severly deformed and it's brain was hugely abnormal. No possible chance of a live birth. She agonized over this decision but finally decided to have the 'late-abortion'. The baby was, in fact, dead by the time the proceedure was to be done. How awful it would be to carry a dead child, waiting to go into natural labor.

 

[Divamomto3]

Originally posted by goofy4tink
I don't usually get involved with these, but......partial birth abortions, IMO, should only be used if the fetus is not going to be born alive. By this I mean...say you find in your 6th month that the baby is not developing and is going to be born dead. Do you carry that child for another 2-3 months, only to have a dead baby? I don't think so. While I am avidly pro-choice, I have to believe this is wrong. Now, should a woman have the right to decide in her 6th-7nth month that she no longer wishes to carry this child and decide on a PBA? Nope. Make that choice 3 months sooner and I'll agree with your choice. But, IMHO, it is no longer a viable option after month 4.

I had a friend who found herself in just this position. She noticed lack of movement in her 7th month. Tests showed the baby was severly deformed and it's brain was hugely abnormal. No possible chance of a live birth. She agonized over this decision but finally decided to have the 'late-abortion'. The baby was, in fact, dead by the time the proceedure was to be done. How awful it would be to carry a dead child, waiting to go into natural labor.

I couldn't agree more, but I just don't think it's only used when fetuses are going to be severely deformed. It's the late form of birth control that makes me sick.

 

[goofy4tink]

Originally posted by Divamomto3
I couldn't agree more, but I just don't think it's only used when fetuses are going to be severely deformed. It's the late form of birth control that makes me sick.

ITA....this is not, or at least should not be, used as birth control!!!!

 

[Serena]

I am very pro choice, but I think PBA's should be severely restricted to when the baby is no longer alive.

 

[MHopkins2]

NOMB. Although I will say that I seriously doubt very many of these are performed as "birth control abortions" - it's gone way too far by that point for that to be the case.

Why not just fully birth and try to save the baby? If the mother is totally uninterested in raising the child, who's going to pay for that? No one wants to talk money when it comes to medical procedures, but saving a micro preemie is HUGELY expensive. When the parents want the child, it may be worth the cost, but in this scenario?

Re the "humane" question, I'm not sure what's so inhumane about this procedure. Do we have any evidence that the fetus (or baby, if you prefer) suffers? I know that if I had to choose a way to die, a brain stem puncture causing instant death would be high on the list.

 

[wdwdvcdad]

Originally posted by MHopkins2

Re the "humane" question, I'm not sure what's so inhumane about this procedure. Do we have any evidence that the fetus (or baby, if you prefer) suffers? I know that if I had to choose a way to die, a brain stem puncture causing instant death would be high on the list.

I could not choose which smilie best describe my feelings about this comment. So, I'll choose this one:

 

[EsmeraldaX]

I said I would not post in this but I will , and I'll keep it short.

First, as the OP of the Where do you Stand (Not a Debate!) thread, I salute you for keeping this oustide of that thread. Thank you!

Now , my opinion, I was a preemie. I was born and quite healthy at 7 months into my mothers pregnancy, as was my brother.

Therefore, no. I can not support any late form of late term abortion because I am living proof that baby in the last trimester of pregnancy is a living being capable of life outside the womb.

If it were to ever come down to an ethical decision where the life of the mother would be in serious danger were she to give birth via C-section or natural delivery, I would probably say the mothers life should come first, because the mother may have other children who need her.

But you're right, if the woman can partially deliver the baby (hence the non political term partial birth abortion) then her life is probably not in danger. It seems like if you are going to go through all that, why not give the baby up for adoption.

I DO support abortion in the first trimester and I'm torn on whether or not I support the second. But IMO, a viable baby should not be killed.

 

[MHopkins2]

Originally posted by wdwdvcdad


I could not choose which smilie best describe my feelings about this comment. So, I'll choose this one:

Thank you for the parade of smilies, but you didn't really address the point I was making. You obviously don't agree with it, and that's fine, but why?

 

[MosMom]

Abortion is one of those issues that I am completely on the fence on. I am pretty much pro-choice but partial birth abortion seems very wrong to me. If a baby can live outside the womb I'm not sure it is just up to the mother at that point, I don't think it matters how humane the death is....

I think some pro-choice activists are afraid a ban on partial birth will turn into a slippery slope and lead to the abolishment of abortion in general. I don't necessarily see that to be true. There are many issues in life we have drawn a line on.

Like I said...on the fence.

 

[DawnCt1]

Originally posted by Son of the Morning
'Partial birth' abortion is a political term meant to bring up images of natural labor, birth-canal termination, which an oversimplification.

What the term implies medically is very broad, and I support a woman's right to it.

As Ronald Reagan said; "I notice that all of those folks who are for abortion have already been born". Images of natural labor? The uterus is stimulated to go into labor so yes, its natural in that the uterus contracts to expell a baby. The baby is turned in utero so it cannot take a breath, and the rest you already know. Its infanticide, plain and simple.

 

[southernclass]

Originally posted by wdwdvcdad
It is murder, it is brutal, and anyone who does is should be charged accordingly.....not just partial birth abortion, all abortion.

AMEN!!!! I could not have said it better myself. Who cares if it medical or political for christ sake!!! We are talking about babies lives and I for one think if you can be sent to jail for smoking weed than they should lock your skank butt up for killing your baby.

The way I see it is if you can't handle the responsibility than keep your freaking legs closed!!!!

 

[Son of the Morning]

Oh please: If it was so "plain and simple," then it would not be a debatable issue.

Furthermore:

The uterus is stimulated to go into labor so yes, its natural in that the uterus contracts to expell a baby.

If someone slips me some Ex-Lax, or sticks an electrode up my ***, am I taking a 'natural ****?'

 

[MHopkins2]

Originally posted by southernclass
The way I see it is if you can't handle the responsibility than keep your freaking legs closed!!!!

I agree - which is why I would take the responsibility for having an abortion.