Former abortionist: Abortion is never medically necessary to save the life of the mother

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: reldra

There is NO pro-abortion crowd.

The so called "pro-choice" crowd is never about saving the life of the child, it is always about abortion no matter what and making it sound like choosing abortion is "for the freedom of the woman". It is in reality a pro-abortion camp.

It is a choice. Definitely. Up to a cetain point, it is always the female's choice. States decide at which point it is no longer just the female's choice alone. At that point, I agree we are then talking about a baby vs. a fetus.

But your OP is about rare 3rd trimester abortion, done to save the mother. Though even risky for her. Would youi rather both die?

I am simply not following your reasoning.




And again, as fetal surgery and obstetrics advance, this may become something that never happens.

a reply to: reldra

That is insane. Third trimester abortions are rare and illegal almost everywhere unless to save the life of the mother.

How do you know?

Only Kansas reports figures on abortions specifically identified as partial-birth abortions. Kansas reported 58 PBAs in 1998, 182 for Jan.-Oct. 1999, and none since Oct. 1999 (through the end of 2006). This is out of 11,000 to 12,000 total abortions per year reported in Kansas. Of the 240 reported PBAs in Kansas, all but 7 were for out-of-state residents.[3] [/quote

If Kansas is an base line or average (out of state included), 2500 to 10000 babies die/eliminated by the partial birth abortion in the US annually. Is that rare? Oh and they can sell the parts if everyone is cool with it.



[url=http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/pba.html]http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion

edit on 22-10-2016 by seasonal because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-10-2016 by seasonal because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Hazardous1408

How isn't it relevant? In your opinion.

Roe vs. Wade takes no position on late term abortion other than leaving it up to the states.

You taught me something.

Not for the first time, sir.

originally posted by: reldra
...
But your OP is about rare 3rd trimester abortion, done to save the mother. Though even risky for her. Would youi rather both die?

I am simply not following your reasoning.



And again, as fetal surgery and obstetrics advance, this may become something that never happens.

Roe vs Wade gives the right to the woman to decide up to the second trimester.

On the third trimester it is not viable to perform an abortion to save a woman's life, because abortion takes too long and would in fact increase the risks to the woman's life. The procedure most often used to save a woman's life, which also in most cases can save the child, during the third trimester is a Cesarean section.

a reply to: seasonal

Your numbers do not add up. And they are old stats. It is not possibly 10,000. The laws are too strict on PBA.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Roe vs Wade gives the right to the woman to decide up to the second trimester.

Exactly, which is why it's absurd for the pro-life crowd to constantly use the issue of third trimester abortions as an argument to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: reldra
...
But your OP is about rare 3rd trimester abortion, done to save the mother. Though even risky for her. Would youi rather both die?

I am simply not following your reasoning.



And again, as fetal surgery and obstetrics advance, this may become something that never happens.

Roe vs Wade gives the right to the woman to decide up to the second trimester.

On the third trimester it is not viable to perform an abortion to save a woman's life, because abortion takes too long and would in fact increase the risks to the woman's life. The procedure most often used to save a woman's life, which also in most cases can save the child, during the third trimester is a Cesarean section.

According to statistics given on this thread, it is, in fact, possible to abort in the third trimester.

Cesarean section is not always possible. The female has a serious health condition to begin with, so a doctor would decide what method is best to save her life.

a reply to: reldra

Numbers are hard, this is a floating average. There are no hard #'s for some reason.

About 8,500 partial-birth abortions in the U.S. up to 2005 can be documented; the actual number is significantly higher. Reasonable estimates of the annual number of PBAs in the U.S. range from 2,200 to 5,000, with somewhat higher numbers possible. This would imply 22,000 to 50,000 PBAs performed in the last decade.

Does seem like a little more than rare, to me. But what do you think?

www.johnstonsarchive.net...

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: reldra

Numbers are hard, this is a floating average. There are no hard #'s for some reason.

About 8,500 partial-birth abortions in the U.S. up to 2005 can be documented; the actual number is significantly higher. Reasonable estimates of the annual number of PBAs in the U.S. range from 2,200 to 5,000, with somewhat higher numbers possible. This would imply 22,000 to 50,000 PBAs performed in the last decade.

Does seem like a little more than rare, to me. But what do you think?

www.johnstonsarchive.net...

Because Robert Johnston says this? the laws have only become more strict for PBA.

reason.com

There's also little evidence that anyone actually chooses to terminate a pregnancy "at nine months." Just a little over 1 percent of U.S. abortions take place at any point after around five months pregnancy.

For 13 years, since 2003, federal law has prohibited physicians from performing D&X procedures, aka partial birth abortions, at any point in a pregnancy. Almost a decade ago, in 2007, the Supreme Court upheld the ban as constitutional. In addition, 19 states have their own laws against these sorts of abortions. While the federal ban does include an exception for situations where the mother's life is endangered, abortion doctors claim they avoid the procedure anyway, as there are other options with less liklihood of legal repercussions.

originally posted by: reldra


According to statistics given on this thread, it is, in fact, possible to abort in the third trimester.

Cesarean section is not always possible. The female has a serious health condition to begin with, so a doctor would decide what method is best to save her life.

Abortion on the third trimester is not done to save a woman's life. At that stage the woman doesn't have a lot of time if her life needs to be saved hence performing an abortion is not viable. Did you not watch the video at all?

On the third trimester, in a life or death situation a woman more often does not have 36 hours to save her life if there are complications in her pregnancy that late in the term. Hence a cesarean section is the most often used procedure to save a woman's life that late in the pregnancy.

Yes, women can have abortions on the third trimester, but not to save their lives.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Did you not watch the video at all?

Are youtube videos your only source of information?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Did you not watch the video at all?

Are youtube videos your only source of information?

No, a doctor who performed over 1,200 abortions and has testified before Congress on this issue.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Again

For 13 years, since 2003, federal law has prohibited physicians from performing D&X procedures, aka partial birth abortions, at any point in a pregnancy. Almost a decade ago, in 2007, the Supreme Court upheld the ban as constitutional. In addition, 19 states have their own laws against these sorts of abortions. While the federal ban does include an exception where the mother's life is endangered, abortion doctors claim they avoid the procedure anyway, as there are other options with less liklihood of legal repercussions.

and again

There's also little evidence that anyone actually chooses to terminate a pregnancy "at nine months." Just a little over 1 percent of U.S. abortions take place at any point after around five months pregnancy.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Oh.
A doctor. One.

a reply to: reldra

You obviously don't seem to understand that I made this thread to respond to the claims from pro-choice/pro-abortioninsts in the forums who claim most third trimester abortions are made to save a woman's life. Not to mention the fact that Hillary Clinton herself, among others, claims that Roe vs Wade gives the right to a woman to decide to abort up to the day she is due, which is a lie.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: reldra

You obviously don't seem to understand that I made this thread to respond to the claims from pro-choice/pro-abortioninsts in the forums who claim most third trimester abortions are made to save a woman's life. Not to mention the fact that Hillary Clinton herself, among others, claims that Roe vs Wade gives the right to a woman to decide to abort up to the day she is due, which is a lie.

They are. Any that are performed, are. It is the law.

I have not seen Clinton say that. If you have a quote, did she mean as elective or to save the mother's life?

originally posted by: Phage

Oh.
A doctor. One.

Ah, so once again you don't have a valid counter-argument, hence resort to attacking the messenger...

Have any valid counter-argument Phage that would contradict the statements made by this doctor? No?... Ok...

originally posted by: jellyrev
It's a horrifying and disgusting act yet I don't much care either way.
The natural rights in me tells me its wrong, that those persons are murdered.
The utilitarian in me tells me that most women who have abortions do not have long term thinking patterns, cannot judge risk, are of lower IQ, and my taxes will have to pay for them so it is a good thing those women do not have offspring.
The authoritarian in me simply says to tie tubes/snip people when they have multiple children out of wedlock and then we don't have to deal with this issue as much.

Ok, besides your personal beliefs, which you can have about abortion- the rest was was misogyny.

So why does this one doctor override any other doctor that would say it is medically necessary?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Have any valid counter-argument Phage that would contradict the statements made by this doctor? No?... Ok...

Not being a physician, no I don't. That's why I don't depend on the opinion of a single physician when it comes to important health decisions. Nor or I depend upon the opinion of anyone who make broad generalizations which exclude exception.