Abortion back on the top of the agenda

[Bullitt]

"This subsection does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself."

Just throwin that out there

[Shawnee123]

Where did you find that quote, Bullitt? I might have missed it, but I can't find it in the article, and it is my understanding that this ban does not allow it even in the case of danger to the life of the mother. I'm looking for clarification.

Thanks!

[Bullitt]

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...1----000-.html

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

it is my understanding that this ban does not allow it even in the case of danger to the life of the mother.

The ban has a provision where if the "life" of the mother is threatened, then the ban does not apply. The District court and the Appeals court have said the law is unconstitutional because there is no provision for the "health" of the mother. And the Supreme Court overruled them, saying the "health" issue doesn't matter. So it's a difference between the "life" of the mother and the "health" of the mother.

There is no provision for the "health" of the mother, and the conservative old men of the Supreme Court don't care.

Wikipedia has a confusing article on the topic with lots of links to the original documents.

[Bullitt]

A partial birth abortion is an inherently dangerous procedure in terms of physical health to begin with. With all abortion, the later in pregnancy an abortion is performed, the more complicated the procedure and the greater the risk of injury to the woman. In addition to associated emotion reactions, D&X carries the risk of injury to the woman, including heavy bleeding, blood clots, damage to the cervix or uterus, pelvic infection, and anesthesia-related complications. There is also a risk of incomplete abortion, meaning that the fetus is not dead when removed from the woman's body. Possible long-term risks include difficulty becoming pregnant or carrying a future pregnancy to term.
Also:
http://www.pregnancycenters.org/abortion.html

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

In addition to associated emotion reactions, D&X carries the risk of injury to the woman, including heavy bleeding, blood clots, damage to the cervix or uterus, pelvic infection, and anesthesia-related complications.

Apparently, the alternate method to D&X is actually more dangerous. And Tom Minnery, "Focus on the Family"s veep, thinks that's a good thing:

Originally Posted by Tom Minnery

Doctors adopted the late-term procedure "out of convenience," Minnery added. "The old procedure, which is still legal, involves using forceps to pull the baby apart in utero, which means there is greater legal liability and danger of internal bleeding from a perforated uterus. So we firmly believe there will be fewer later-term abortions as a result of this ruling."

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Apparently, the alternate method to D&X is actually more dangerous. And Tom Minnery, "Focus on the Family"s veep, thinks that's a good thing:

Sure, that'll put the fear o' god in 'em. Maybe they'll have a nervous breakdown and won't be competent to sign for it
until it's too late. After all, we have our stirling child services department to raise the kid properly.




Stirling? Serling? Stirling? Serling? Whatever.