Houses Passes Pan on Partial Birth Abortion

• Partial-birth abortions are performed thousands of times annually on healthy babies of healthy mothers. In 1997, Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers (1997), estimated that the method was used 3,000 to 5,000 times annually. “In the vast majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother with a healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along, Fitzsimmons said.” (The New York Times, Feb. 26, 1997, p. A11.)

Dr.Pamela Smith, Director og Medical Education,Dept. of Ob-Gyn at Mt. Sinai Hospital in Chicago, has stated: "There are absolutely no obstetrical situations encountered in this country which would require partial- birth abortion to preserve the life or health of the mother." And she adds two more risks: cervical incompetence in subsequent pregnancies caused by three days of forceful dilation of the cervix, and uterine rupture caused by rotating the fetus in the womb. Joseph DeCook, Fellow, Am. Col., Ob/Gyn, founder of PHACT (Physicians Ad Hoc Coalition for Truth), stated: "There is no literature that testifies to the safety of partial birth abortions. It’s a maverick procedure devised by maverick doctors who wish to deliver a dead fetus. Such abortions could lead to infection causing sterility." Also, "Drawing out the baby in breech position is a very dangerous procedure and could tear the uterus. Such a ruptured uterus could cause the mother to bleed to death in ten minutes.".."The puncturing of the child’s skull produces bone shards that could puncture the uterus." (Congressman Charles Canady (R-FL), 7/23

Is surgery on an ectopic pregnancy an abortion.
Some do define this as an abortion, and this is one reason why Right to Life people usually accept a "life of the mother" exception to laws that would forbid abortion.

By the time most ectopic surgery is done, the developing baby is dead and often destroyed by the hemorrhage. In any case, such surgery is done primarily to prevent the death of the mother. This is good medical practice because there is no chance for the baby to survive. Even if a yet-alive, tiny baby were removed from the tube, the Right to Life movement would allow this, for without the procedure, both would die. The baby has a zero chance of survival. The surgery will save the mother’s life. If medical technology were advanced enough to allow transplanting the baby from its pathological location, and placing it into the uterus, then most ethicists would say this should be done. Since this is not possible with present technology, the tiny new baby’s life today is lost.

http://www.partialbirthabortions.com/

http://www.poorchoice.org/

It has been a few months I can't remember where but I read the stats that partial birth abortions are performed at way above the 1% rate.

 

Partial-birth abortions are performed thousands of times annually on healthy babies of healthy mothers...the method was used 3,000 to 5,000 times annually.
The way that's written, one might think it's saying that 3k to 5k elective pba's are performed annually. Not at all. The number of pba's is probably correct, in line with my earlier statement that the procedure comprises about 0.1% of abortions overall (a staggering number, to be sure).

.... In the vast majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother...
From doing copious searches on the net, I see the elective figure dancing about all over the place, from 5% to 80%. It probably depends on how one defines "elective". If only saving the life of the mother is elective, the number is high. If it includes everything from mental capacity on up, it's low. If, however, life and health of the mother are non-elective, the number is probably at about 20%. I recall an artical in JAMA, circa 1997, which reported that figure. But there have been other articles in JAMA that report different figures.

... with a healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along, Fitzsimmons said.
Elective abortion in general is nationally legal up to about 26 weeks, including pba abortions done in that time frame. I'm not discussing those. The legislation in question does not address these. It addresses late term PBA's Note the AP story in the first post, which states, "President Bush is hailing House passage of a measure to ban a certain late-term abortion procedure." Late term, meaning third trimester. Third trimester abortions are generally illegal in the United States. I think most of us can agree that we're unhappy about the number of elective abortions in the first and second trimesters, which are legal. This thread was not started to discuss those, only to discuss the subject of the bill in question, which is late term pba's. I do not advocate, nor is anyone else here advocating, late term elective abortions.

"There are absolutely no obstetrical situations encountered in this country which would require partial- birth abortion to preserve the life or health of the mother." And she adds two more risks: cervical incompetence in subsequent pregnancies caused by three days of forceful dilation of the cervix, and uterine rupture caused by rotating the fetus in the womb.
The lack of late term PBA's done for the health of the mother will result in greater likelihood of sterility. Many mothers would choose the risk of cervical incompetence over sterility. As far as uterine rupture risk, the purpose of a late term pba is to prevent uterine rupture which is a serious risk factor in delivery of dead or dying fetuses.

Is surgery on an ectopic pregnancy an abortion.
Technically, it depends. If the fetus has hemmhoaged, then I'd say no. If the fetus has not ruptured, then yes.

Right to Life people usually accept a "life of the mother" exception to laws that would forbid abortion.
Many ectopic pregnancies are terminated prior to the mother's life being in danger. In cases where it's done early, it's done for the health of the mother (an unruptured ectopic removal is less invasive than that of one which has ruptured). Since late term PBA's are generally done where the survivability of the fetus is effectively zero, I don't see why late term pba's aren't given the same consideration as ectopic pregnancies. Ectopics in early pregnancy and anencephalics in late term pregnancies are certainly parallel conditions.

 

For all who wrote in to your elected Congressional officials regarding bringing this "partial birth abortion ban bill" up for a vote again, thank you from the unborn.

For what it's worth, I was one of those who wrote my congressional representatives, asking them to reintroduce the bill after Clinton's veto, and asking them to include the health exception. I wanted to see this as a law. But I wanted to see the health exception included. I'm hoping now that the Supreme Court will not overturn the law outright, but will instead interpret the law to be constitutional except where the mother's physical health is concerned. I would prefer that, rather than the entire law being ruled unconstitutional.

 

Kudos!