Log In Sign Up

Partial Birth abortion ruling


Abortion Debate

This forum is for Abortion debate only. If you are highly sensitive about this topic, read at your own discretion.

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to boards@justmommies.com.

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Abortion Debate LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #21  
April 19th, 2007, 07:44 AM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Doctors can still recommend this procedure if it is necessary for the mother's health........I don't understand the question.[/b]
Like I said, that's not how I read it ~ not this one. If that was true that doctors could still do the procedure, why would there be opposition by medical professionals?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
April 19th, 2007, 07:45 AM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE
<div class='quotemain'>At any rate, if doctors think a partial abortion is in the best interest of the patient, and the patient agrees why should politicans be making policies that contradict doctor's recommendations? Imagine if we outlawed epi's because natural births were more along the lines of what politicians wanted. It's crazy to have politics take over where medical procedures should be or not be taking place.[/b]
What about the best interest of the fully developed baby that is already capable of living outside the womb? It shouldn't be acceptable unless the mother would die from continuing the pregnancy. Just because she wakes up one day, at 30 weeks and realizes that she's scared to death to be a mother... she's going to have her baby ripped apart, limb by limb? What about THAT patient? If it's not life and death, then it shouldn't be allowed. I think the ruling is right on.
[/b][/quote]

((It's so hard to debate this. I feel like you aren't answering any of the questions I asked and because you see the fetus as a child, it's pointless to debate.))

How are we assuming it's a fully developed child capable of living outside the womb? Why assume at 30 weeks is when this is done? Why disregard the doctor's recommendations about the best way to remove the fetus?
[/b][/quote]

Because at 30 weeks (EVEN MUCH EARLIER!!! I have twin cousins that were born at 22 weeks! They were each only about a pound!), a baby can survive outside the womb. They need a respirator for their lungs for a little while, but heck... there are lots of people that need that occasionally. That doesn't mean you deserve to be ripped apart and killed...
Reply With Quote
  #23  
April 19th, 2007, 07:51 AM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,780
My understanding of it is that the procedure is to be used as follows:

Ok to do the procedure: mom's health or life is in danger
Not OK to do the procedure: mom just doesn't want to be pregnant anymore for whatever reason
__________________



Reply With Quote
  #24  
April 19th, 2007, 07:51 AM
donomama
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
I agree!
This procedure is just horrifying, and should only be used if the mother would die otherwise.

Outlawing this one procedure is not going to impact a woman's right to choose. Early abortions that do not use this procedure are still legal.[/b]
Please feel free to answer any of the questions I've asked numberous ladies about politicians forcing their political view over someone else in regards to medical procedures. They are poiticans, not doctors.
[/b]

If epidurals or formula KILLED babies then yes, I think both should be outlawed. Neither do, so they shouldn't.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
April 19th, 2007, 07:52 AM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Because at 30 weeks (EVEN MUCH EARLIER!!! I have twin cousins that were born at 22 weeks! They were each only about a pound!), a baby can survive outside the womb. They need a respirator for their lungs for a little while, but heck... there are lots of people that need that occasionally. That doesn't mean you deserve to be ripped apart and killed...[/b]
Here we go.. This is the problem. You are assume it's healthy babies. This procedure is rarely done that late and is usually done because something is drastically wrong with the fetus.

Quote:
Specifically, the ban encompasses what doctors call "intact dilation and evacuation" (also known as IDX), which Congress in its legislation termed inhumane.[/b]
Source

This is politicans putting their political view's on women's bodies.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
April 19th, 2007, 07:54 AM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
Besides that--political views are forced on people all the time in the form of laws...

One example: a man thinks that he has a right to beat his wife, after all, she took a vow to obey him. The law says he doesn't. They are forcing their views on this man, no?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
April 19th, 2007, 07:56 AM
donomama
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
Because at 30 weeks (EVEN MUCH EARLIER!!! I have twin cousins that were born at 22 weeks! They were each only about a pound!), a baby can survive outside the womb. They need a respirator for their lungs for a little while, but heck... there are lots of people that need that occasionally. That doesn't mean you deserve to be ripped apart and killed...[/b]
Here we go.. This is the problem. You are assume it's healthy babies. This procedure is rarely done that late and is usually done because something is drastically wrong with the fetus.

Quote:
Specifically, the ban encompasses what doctors call "intact dilation and evacuation" (also known as IDX), which Congress in its legislation termed inhumane.[/b]
Source

This is politicans putting their political view's on women's bodies.
[/b]

How is calling something "inhumane" putting their political views on a woman's body? It is done all the time with animal rights. These babes are partially birthed and THEN killed. How is that not inhumane?

This doesn't even classify as abortion to me. The baby is OUTSIDE the mother's body. How can the mother claim it as a part of her body at that point?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
April 19th, 2007, 07:56 AM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I agree!
This procedure is just horrifying, and should only be used if the mother would die otherwise.

Outlawing this one procedure is not going to impact a woman's right to choose. Early abortions that do not use this procedure are still legal.[/b]
Please feel free to answer any of the questions I've asked numberous ladies about politicians forcing their political view over someone else in regards to medical procedures. They are poiticans, not doctors.
[/b]
If epidurals or formula KILLED babies then yes, I think both should be outlawed. Neither do, so they shouldn't.
[/b]
Thank you for answering this! If there were enough people saying what is the "better" medical way for babies for political votes, you would bet in a heartbeat these things would be outlawed because politicans are more concerned about votes and pushing their morals than giving you a choice.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
April 19th, 2007, 07:57 AM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Here we go.. This is the problem. You are assume it's healthy babies. This procedure is rarely done that late and is usually done because something is drastically wrong with the fetus.[/b]

Something was drastically wrong with my baby! Had they found out in-utero, they would have recommended that I get an abortion. As it happens we didn't find out until she was nearly a year old that she had somehow survived without having a pulmonary artery, a pulmonary valve, a wall between her lower two chambers, etc...

Yet they fixed her up almost good as new. Imagine if I had killed her at 24 weeks or whatever [if they had discovered it]. I would have killed a baby that would have gone on to live!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
April 19th, 2007, 07:58 AM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,780
The mom still has the right to choose. She will just have to have an abortion EARLY ON if she wants one.
__________________



Reply With Quote
  #31  
April 19th, 2007, 08:00 AM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Besides that--political views are forced on people all the time in the form of laws...

One example: a man thinks that he has a right to beat his wife, after all, she took a vow to obey him. The law says he doesn't. They are forcing their views on this man, no?[/b]
Well, prior to that they were forcing their political view on the woman.

Quote:
How is calling something "inhumane" putting their political views on a woman's body? It is done all the time with animal rights. These babes are partially birthed and THEN killed. How is that not inhumane?[/b]
It's the same as calling it killing when it's abortion.. IDX is also just a medical procedure.

Quote:
This doesn't even classify as abortion to me. The baby is OUTSIDE the mother's body. How can the mother claim it as a part of her body at that point?[/b]
Because you assume the fetus to be healthy and viable at this point.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
April 19th, 2007, 08:02 AM
donomama
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
Besides that--political views are forced on people all the time in the form of laws...

One example: a man thinks that he has a right to beat his wife, after all, she took a vow to obey him. The law says he doesn't. They are forcing their views on this man, no?[/b]
Well, prior to that they were forcing their political view on the woman.

Quote:
How is calling something "inhumane" putting their political views on a woman's body? It is done all the time with animal rights. These babes are partially birthed and THEN killed. How is that not inhumane?[/b]
It's the same as calling it killing when it's abortion.. IDX is also just a medical procedure.

Quote:
This doesn't even classify as abortion to me. The baby is OUTSIDE the mother's body. How can the mother claim it as a part of her body at that point?[/b]
Because you assume the fetus to be healthy and viable at this point.
[/b]
I'm not assuming anything except that the baby is no longer inside it's mother's body. At that point, it is an individual human, not some part of the mother. And how do you know that the baby is not healthy? Kim pointed out a great example of a baby that would have thought to be unviable but survived just fine on her own.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
April 19th, 2007, 08:02 AM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Well, prior to that they were forcing their political view on the woman.[/b]
And prior to partial birth abortion being banned, they were forcing political views on innocent babies...
Reply With Quote
  #34  
April 19th, 2007, 08:03 AM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,780
Why assume that the fetus is NOT healthy?
Are there any stats on this?

Why is this procedure USUALLY performed? It is usually performed because mom just changed her mind? Or is it usually performed because there is some defect to the baby and it won't live anyway?
__________________



Reply With Quote
  #35  
April 19th, 2007, 08:03 AM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE
Quote:
Here we go.. This is the problem. You are assume it's healthy babies. This procedure is rarely done that late and is usually done because something is drastically wrong with the fetus.[/b]
Something was drastically wrong with my baby! Had they found out in-utero, they would have recommended that I get an abortion. As it happens we didn't find out until she was nearly a year old that she had somehow survived without having a pulmonary artery, a pulmonary valve, a wall between her lower two chambers, etc...

Yet they fixed her up almost good as new. Imagine if I had killed her at 24 weeks or whatever [if they had discovered it]. I would have killed a baby that would have gone on to live!
[/b][/quote]
Of course not every patient wants to believe the doctors.. many women still would rather do what you did and have the baby. No one is forcing an abortion. You (luckily) have that right.

Quote:
The mom still has the right to choose. She will just have to have an abortion EARLY ON if she wants one.[/b]
The whole reason why they have late term abortions is because they find out something is wrong with the fetus. This isn't about women who want abortions and do it too late. This is about women (who likely wanted the pregnancy) to have the best medical care which emcompasses partial birth abortions.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
April 19th, 2007, 08:05 AM
donomama
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE
<div class='quotemain'>Here we go.. This is the problem. You are assume it's healthy babies. This procedure is rarely done that late and is usually done because something is drastically wrong with the fetus.[/b]
Something was drastically wrong with my baby! Had they found out in-utero, they would have recommended that I get an abortion. As it happens we didn't find out until she was nearly a year old that she had somehow survived without having a pulmonary artery, a pulmonary valve, a wall between her lower two chambers, etc...

Yet they fixed her up almost good as new. Imagine if I had killed her at 24 weeks or whatever [if they had discovered it]. I would have killed a baby that would have gone on to live!
[/b][/quote]
Of course not every patient wants to believe the doctors.. many women still would rather do what you did and have the baby. No one is forcing an abortion. You (luckily) have that right.

Quote:
The mom still has the right to choose. She will just have to have an abortion EARLY ON if she wants one.[/b]
The whole reason why they have late term abortions is because they find out something is wrong with the fetus. This isn't about women who want abortions and do it too late. This is about women (who likely wanted the pregnancy) to have the best medical care which emcompasses partial birth abortions.
[/b][/quote]

But this doesn't outlaw all late term abortions, just those where the baby is delivered and THEN killed - in a completely barbaric way. I don't know how even the most pro-abortion person in the world can see that as a woman's right to choose after the baby has passed through the birth canal.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
April 19th, 2007, 08:09 AM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
I'm not assuming anything except that the baby is no longer inside it's mother's body. At that point, it is an individual human, not some part of the mother. And how do you know that the baby is not healthy? Kim pointed out a great example of a baby that would have thought to be unviable but survived just fine on her own.[/b]
I answered Kim. (You guys have to give me a few seconds!)

Quote:
And prior to partial birth abortion being banned, they were forcing political views on innocent babies...[/b]
Again, you see it as a baby.. the medical community is working on the health of the mother. She made the choice to do what her doctor's recommended.

Quote:
Why assume that the fetus is NOT healthy?
Are there any stats on this?

Why is this procedure USUALLY performed? It is usually performed because mom just changed her mind? Or is it usually performed because there is some defect to the baby and it won't live anyway?[/b]
Yes and this is from the link I already posted:
Quote:
It is a rarely used second-trimester procedure, designed to reduce complications to the woman. More common is "dilation and evacuation" (D&E), used in 95 percent of pre-viability second-trimester abortions, according to Planned Parenthood. Both are generally performed after the 21st week of pregnancy.[/b]


Quote:
But this doesn't outlaw all late term abortions, just those where the baby is delivered and THEN killed - in a completely barbaric way. I don't know how even the most pro-abortion person in the world can see that as a woman's right to choose after the baby has passed through the birth canal.[/b]
Because if the doctors use it because it benefits the health of the mother, it should be used.. like any other medical procedure that benefits the patient.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
April 19th, 2007, 08:09 AM
donomama
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not assuming anything except that the baby is no longer inside it's mother's body. At that point, it is an individual human, not some part of the mother. And how do you know that the baby is not healthy? Kim pointed out a great example of a baby that would have thought to be unviable but survived just fine on her own.[/b]
I answered Kim. (You guys have to give me a few seconds!)
[/b]

I see how you feel alone today! It kind of sucks when you're the only one debating your side and there are 2 or 3 others on the other side. I had it yesterday with the gun control.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
April 19th, 2007, 08:12 AM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
This is a baby that would have "qualified" for a partial birth abortion...




So she has a scar on her chest... I would say that's better than having been ripped apart limb by limb...

If a mother is in danger, they still allow it... there are SO MANY TIMES that women are told their baby is sick, gong to die after birth... and they don't believe in abortion, so they have the baby and guess what? It's COMPLETELY NORMAL. Their tests were wrong! Or it isn't as severe, so they can fix the baby up easily. Or it is severe and they STILL fix the baby up easily (as is the case with my Madeline). Just because they make an educated GUESS that the baby isn't viable doesn't mean it's true!

Quote:
Because if the doctors use it because it benefits the health of the mother, it should be used.. like any other medical procedure that benefits the patient.[/b]

And it is: if it's used as a means of benefit whether she lives or dies. But a benefit just because she decides she doesn't want to be a mother after all? Well--she should have thought about that a looooong time before!
Reply With Quote
  #40  
April 19th, 2007, 08:15 AM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not assuming anything except that the baby is no longer inside it's mother's body. At that point, it is an individual human, not some part of the mother. And how do you know that the baby is not healthy? Kim pointed out a great example of a baby that would have thought to be unviable but survived just fine on her own.[/b]
I answered Kim. (You guys have to give me a few seconds!)
[/b]
I see how you feel alone today! It kind of sucks when you're the only one debating your side and there are 2 or 3 others on the other side. I had it yesterday with the gun control.
[/b]
Thanks girl!

Quote:
This is a baby that would have "qualified" for a partial birth abortion...




So she has a scar on her chest... I would say that's better than having been ripped apart limb by limb...

If a mother is in danger, they still allow it... there are SO MANY TIMES that women are told their baby is sick, gong to die after birth... and they don't believe in abortion, so they have the baby and guess what? It's COMPLETELY NORMAL. Their tests were wrong! Or it isn't as severe, so they can fix the baby up easily. Or it is severe and they STILL fix the baby up easily (as is the case with my Madeline). Just because they make an educated GUESS that the baby isn't viable doesn't mean it's true![/b]
I know this is close to your heart.. I'm glad and happy you made your decision.. You're lucky to even have that choice. Madeline is beautiful.

Here's the thing.. there shouldn't have to be a debate about the mom's health being in danger. The stats show it's used to reduce complications. Women have epi's to help deliver.. the women's life isn't in danger but it's a medical procedure designed to give women choice and help them. That's all parital birth abortions are. They are medical procedures designed to help a women (who likely wanted that pregnancy) ease her condition.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:20 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0