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
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 email@example.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!
Well first off - there is no such thing as "partial birth abortion". This is an incorrect emotion based "phrase" that is NOT tied to ANY medical or abortion procedure. There is NO such medical procedure as a partial birth abortion. The phrase is PURE propiganda DESIGNED only to obtain an emotional response and make people falsly believe that healthy, viable, living children who are half born are being slaughtered as they slide out of the vagina. That simply is NOT true.
The real procedure is called a D and X and 99.9 percent of the time it is used on ALREADY DEAD deformed babies when MEDICALLY NESSICARY abortions in the second and third trimester are required to save the life of the mother or abort a fetus that is severly ill or dead. Lets not forget that later term abortion is already legally regulated - and illegal in most places past a certian point - except in cases where dangers to the mother or fetus are present. Women aren't just going around slaying thier 8 month old fetuses because they woke up one morning and decided they no lnoger wanted to be pregnant - so they get D and X's.
As I understand it the fetus is already dead in-utero before the abortion procedure begins. Live baby's aren't shredded and ripped limb from limb alive and kicking and screaming as most PL would like to have you believe. The D and X procedure is used to preserve the body of the fetus - so that the parents can have a body to bury, grieve over, and get closure. A D and E is a similar procedure that can be used in later term abortions - but it destroys the body of the fetus - not allowing the parents oppertunity to grieve. The ONLY other way to remove the fetus intact is via c-section which can be DEADLY to the mother and which has MUCH MORE SVERE risks, a longer healing time, and can cause INFERTILITY and reproductive organ loss due to infection, hemorage exc. Should women have to face becoming sterile so they can grieve the loss of a wanted baby and have a body to bury? Or should they have no baby to grieve and no funeral because others want to make D and X's illegal (with out understanding what they are) but are fine with D and E's to save the life of the mother. It makes no sence. Both procedures accomplish the same thing - yet people are agianst D and X's because they misunderstand what they are. Forcing women into life risking MAJOR abdominal surgery that will FOREVER alter thier bodies - because a third party who has NO connection to the pregnancy and who doesn't have all the facts about the procedure and it's benifits - wants D and X's to be illegal based on thier emotional attachments is idiotic IMO.
Situations which might require a D and X are severe hydrocephulus. These Hydrocephulus fetuses are usually brain dead, brain damaged, will never be concious, will never have functioning brains or bodies, or CAN NOT survive on thier own with out the life support of another (the womans body or a machine). Hydro fetuses will almost always die - perhaps painfully and slowly - after they leave thier life support systems. They usually can not survive on thier own. Live birth for these babies is not an option. Hydro is a defect that CAN NOT be detected until well into the second trimester. Neither early aboriton OR birth are options. For most women the BEST option is a D and X which is 1. safe with fewer risks then a c-section OR attempted birth (which could kill the woman as the head is so swollen that it will damage her birth canal or become stuck) and 2. which allowed the woman closure, the bond with the body of her child, to experience her child, to meet her child, to have a funeral for her child, and to say goodbye.
Birth is not an option because hydro baby's have swelling of the brain. Thier heads can not fit through the birth canal with out causing serious harm or even death to thier mothers. This is why the skull of the ALREADY DEAD hydro baby has to be decompressed to allow it to pass through the birth canal. If the skull is not "crushed" the dead fetus will become stuck in the womans body causing great damage or even death.
D and X's are medically nessicary - and if not absalutley nessicary ( I admit that there are other options like D and E and C-section) then often in the best intrest of the patient. Often time D and X is the procedure that will cause the WOMAN the LEAST HARM both physically, emotionally, psycologically exc. Why should a procedure that has been deemed in a patients best intrest by a professional be immoral or illegal because of a third partys misunderstandings and emotionally based arguments.[/b]
I didn't know that; thanks for sharing.
This is very disturbing. That deep into a pregnancy is undeniably murder.
Me - 28
DH - 33
DD Charlotte -4
gypsy "I only believe in abortions past viability (24 weeks) if it is medically necessary to save the mother's life."[/b]
If you are saying you agree with the abortion of a healthy baby after 24 weeks only because the moms life is in danger I absolutely whole-heartedly disagree with you. If a moms life is in danger (pre-e or what have you) she can deliver the baby and the chances of survival are pretty good. My 24 weeker is living proof of this. There would be absolutely NO reason for the mom to abort the baby and let it die if it was a pregnancy she wanted. And if the doctors had told me this when I went into labor I would have told them to go to hell and transfer me elsewhere.
I find abortion in general pretty disgusting but PBA??? thats just f*****g disgusting. I understand abortions in early pregnancy.. but late term abortions of HEALTHY babies well I think it's pretty terrible. I think some people are just so f*****d up and if they are going to kill there baby in there 3rd trimester when it can be delivered and survive than they don't deserve to have children. I seriously just don't understand why that is legal. Makes me sick to be a part of this generation...
I find abortion in general pretty disgusting but PBA??? thats just f*****g disgusting. I understand abortions in early pregnancy.. but late term abortions of HEALTHY babies well I think it's pretty terrible. I think some people are just so f*****d up and if they are going to kill there baby in there 3rd trimester when it can be delivered and survive than they don't deserve to have children. I seriously just don't understand why that is legal. Makes me sick to be a part of this generation...[/b]
I just have a few things to add and I hope not to start a big debate.
I am PRO CHOICE to a point. I believe you have until the child is considered a fetus to abort which is more or less 12 weeks (3 months), If you change your mind after that for any reason, give it up for adoption because at this point the babies fine motor skills have begin developing, correct?..
Anyways quickly I want to say I have read most of the stories here and saw that a woman chose to abort a baby in the third trimester after deciding later in the pregnancy to leave her abusive boyfriend and not have any ties to him? Well, I think that was just stupid and maybe this is pointless to even explain my point of view but I have to get it out.... I would rather Lie and say I had an abortion and secretly give the baby up for adoption before killing it! Maybe that is equally wrong from hiding it from the father but I think it may just justify itself knowing the baby had 2 options live/die.......
Wow I am all over the place and off topic but this issue just gets me wanting to say a million things....
ANYWAYS, If a baby has a life threatning issue that a mother was given the option of PBA and she was told the babies life on earth would be painful, how could it possibly be any less painful than being murdered?
Maybe I am wrong because I am Pro choice and yet still believe pba is considered murder but I believe if you abort a baby that if delivered at the same gestation could survive it is murder, maybe I am just inventing that in my own head but to me it seems logical.
Anyways, I think the PBA for a baby who has a illness that will take there life in what could possibly be a painful way is a bit selfish, the only difference to me is that we don't have to witness it as the parents that the baby suffers! I mean if you were to deliver the baby completely and do the pba the baby would be crying which it can'tduring a pba b/c it's face is squished inside the birth canal, it would be in horrific pain and ultimately die.. right? But, since the mothers are normally drugged either completely under or atleast she isn't feeling any pain or seeing the baby suffer she feels like well it's the best option? I'm just confused....
Does anyone at all see my point?
I need a lot of education in this but it saddens me that even if educated my opinion ultimately wouldn't change the world and PBA no matter how much I thought I was right!
I have so many questions, concerns, thoughts, feelings!
How is a doctor doing a PBA not illegal but if a mother murders a baby it is illegal even if the baby was still in her stomach, what is the difference?
A doctor can do a PBA at anytime up until the baby is completely full term but if the actual mother does anything it is murder, even if the baby is or is not healthy?
I'm guessing it's because it was still inside the mother? If a darn toe was still in the mother and the doctor proformed a PBA would that be murder healthy or not?
AND we say it is NOT murder when the head is still inside because you can't hear it's cries? I don't think people are thinking about every issue when it comes to murder and PBA and all that could tie to it? Because there are many things that contradict it :/
If I had a baby with a illness that would kill it and chose not to have a PBA and then suffocated it as soon as it was born even though it would have died anyways wouldn't I be considered a murderer? (I would never do that btw just a example)
If raped why would you have to wait until week 25 or so to actually get an abortion and it be legal wouldn't you have a good window of the 1st trimester abortion to be able to decide?
I'm so confused and heart broken because we really contradict ourselves, I mean literally our government just decides what it right and what is wrong and thats the way it is but it all just screws over everything! I could literally pay a doctor a little extra to have him proform a PBA right it off as medical wether it was or wasn't although if someone gave birth to a mentally handicapped baby and killed it is would be illegal, I think both are wrong but how is one logical and one not? I'm confused and I need some of you to explain this to me....
I am pro-choice, until any time, for any number of times.
I believe a woman has the right to abort whenever, and however often, she wants. I don't believe the fetus is a child or has the rights of a child until they are born.
I personally would not abort past the first trimester... but I have known women how honestly DID NOT know they were pregnant until they were 6 months gone. They kept the pregnancies, but I do not believe they should have to be forced to keep it if they hadn't wanted to, just because they didn't realize they were pregnant before the cutoff for aborting.
They did have a choice, to give it up for adoption.....
there are 3 choices in a pregnancy when your time has ran out for an abortion which is one choice you are left with two. have it and keep it or have it and give it up. As for your friends finding out at 6 months (24 weeks) well at this point it is considered a baby even legally (legally I mean, if your friend was murdered at this gestation in a pregnancy the murderer would have been accounted with murdering TWO people) anyways at 6 months even if they birthed the baby they would have a possibility of surviving, I would rather them deliver it then deciding to not keep it and adopt it out and have the chance to live than to abort it at this gestation.
Omg are people really discusiing this type of abortion. I feel like I actually want to be sick. I shall leave now, just people amaze me they really do. What a topic to talk about.
It's a debate board...what do you expect?
~Beth~ Wife to my Airman Chris, and mommy to: Anthony Nathaniel (8/31/04), Anastasia Fae (8/01/06), Baby C (lost on 10/12/07), David Cillian (7/31/08), Charles George (4/29/10), and Alan Christopher (2/22/12)
I am from Germany and recently I read an article about the Oldenburg Baby: Oldenburg Baby - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The mother chose a late term abortion as the fetus was diagnosed Down Syndrome. The baby survived despite no medical care was given after the "procedure" until 10 hours later the doctors decided to provide medical care as the baby was still alive.
In 1997 they didn`t inject potassium chloride before inducing labor to ensure immediate heart failure as standard practice in late term abortions.
The mother of Tim committed suicide later.
Last edited by elsi2009; May 2nd, 2010 at 08:47 AM.