Planned Parenthood mocks the Savior's birth

[Johnv]

I think some people around here just like to argue.
You missed my point. Dilatation and Extraction (D&X) procedured aren't done on healthy full term babies. Your posts imply that they are. That is not the truth.

The Dilatation and Extraction technique is generally reserved for cases of fetal demise, where the unborn baby dies prior to birth being completed, and the baby's corps cannot pass through the birth canal.

You also cited that the AMA disapproves of the procesure. That's incorrect. The AMA recommends that the "intact dilatation and extraction procedure not be used unless alternative procedures pose materially greater risk to the woman and that abortions not be performed in the third trimester except in cases of serious fetal anomalies incompatible with life".

[ December 09, 2002, 07:32 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

[LadyEagle]

Johnv: Dilatation and Extraction (D&X) procedured aren't done on healthy full term babies. Your posts imply that they are. That is not the truth.

So I guess you are calling me a liar, then. Because it IS the truth!

But then I guess the Congress of the United States is lying, too.

From: http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/releases/1997/PARBLN.704.htm

H.R. 1122 -- Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 1997

Removal of the brain collapses the skull and completes the extraction of the fetal body. (A pointed hollow metal tube called a trochar is sometimes used instead of scissors to puncture the skull.) The main surgical advantage of the partial-birth abortion technique, as opposed to other methods that involve the intra-uterine dismemberment of the living fetus, is its relative ease for the person performing the abortion.

As Dr. W. Martin Haskell, a noted proponent and practitioner of partial-birth abortions, describes his development of the procedure:

"D&Es ["dilation and evacuations," i.e., live intrauterine fetal dismemberments], the procedure typically used for later abortions, have always been somewhat problematic because of the toughness and development of the fetal tissues. . . . I kept doing D&Es because that was what I was comfortable with, up until 24 weeks. But they were very tough. Sometimes it was a 45-minute operation. I noticed that some of the later D&Es were very, very easy. So I asked myself why can't they all happen this way. You see the easy ones would have a foot length presentation, you'd reach up and grab the foot of the fetus, pull the fetus down and the head would hang up and then you would collapse the head and take it out. It was easy. At first, I would reach around trying to identify a lower extremity [i.e., a foot] blindly with the tip of my instrument. I'd get it right about 30-50 percent of the time. Then I said, 'Well gee, if I just put the ultrasound up there I could see it all and I wouldn't have to feel around for it.' I did that and sure enough, I found it 99 percent of the time. Kind of serendipity."

["2nd Trimester Abortion: An interview with W. Martin Haskell, MD," Cincinnati Medicine, Fall 1993]

The partial-birth procedure also lessens the chance that fetal tissue might be left behind in the mother's body. With respect to current law, it is essential that the procedure be completed before the fetus' head leaves the birth canal; once the fetus were completely clear of the mother's body, a live delivery would have occurred and the child would be protected by existing criminal statutes.

According to an interview with Dr. Haskell in the American Medical Association's American Medical News of July 5, 1993, approximately one-third of fetuses involved in this procedure "are definitely dead" before removal of the fetus, and "probably the other two-thirds are not." In testimony before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution on June 15, 1995 (and cited in the 1997 House Committee Report), Professor Robert White, Director of the Division of Neurosurgery and Brain Research Laboratory at Case Western Reserve University stated that fetuses within the gestational period when this procedure is performed are "fully capable of experiencing pain."

President Clinton justified his veto of the bill passed by the 104th Congress by claiming that the partial-birth procedure is medically necessary:

Johnv, thank you for giving me the opportunity to post this valuable information to everyone who cares for the sanctity of human life.

 

[stubbornkelly]

It seems the key word in John's post was "healthy." None of what you just posted, SheEagle, is contrary to his point that most aren't performed on healthy full term babies.

 

[Headcoveredlady]

Thank you she Eagle for posting that truth. Horrible isn't it? We can do our part by supporting our local crisis centers financially, prayerfully and physically.


Here is a story about a man who needs Jesus:
http://news.christiansunite.com/religion/religion01559.shtml

HCL

 

[LadyEagle]

Re: "healthy"

This is extracted from the above HR Bill at the above link:

Organizations opposing the bill, as well as President Clinton, have repeatedly claimed that only a few hundred partial-birth procedures take place each year, only in the third trimester of pregnancy, most if not all of which are based on extreme circumstances of fetal deformity or danger to the mother. However, these claims have been contradicted by press accounts indicating that thousands of partial-birth abortions take place yearly, the large majority occurring in the second trimester, and are performed for elective (i.e., non-medical) reasons. In addition, earlier this year a noted spokesman for an abortionists' professional organization admitted that he had knowingly misrepresented the frequency of partial-birth abortion in supporting the "party line" against the bill. (For further details, see below, page 7, "The Ron Fitzsimmons Admission: 'I Lied.'") One of the two leading practitioners of the abortion technique prohibited by this bill claims that 80 percent of the partial-birth abortions which he performs are "purely elective."

 

[LadyEagle]

Thanks, HCL, for posting that link. More SAD STATISTICS from that article:

(More than 3,400 babies are killed daily by abortion. An estimated 15,000 partial-birth abortions are performed yearly in the U.S.)

 

[Johnv]

The reasoning makes no sense: Right now abortion is legal up to approx 24 months, I believe, with the exception of those that are medically necessary. Therefore, having an abortion near term is currently illegal, whether it's from a partial birth abortion or not. The legislation that was vetoed by bill clinton would not have changed that. If the law would have made a currently elective legal abortion illegal, it would have violated the roe v wade decision. But elective abortions are not legal at that level now, and the vetoing of the legislation does not make it legal.

The reason he vetoed it was because it it would have restricted the procedure to only life threatening cases (to the mother), and he wanted it to be in life threatening cases, and medically necessary cases. The ban proposed by the law would have meant that mothers who were forbidden the procedure would have been left with a dead baby AND no uterus (or worse), where currently the procedure allowed the baby to be removed in a manner that may allow the mother to concieve again.

One of the common reasons to require this type of procedure is when a fetus is diagnosed with anencephaly (in layman's terms, the baby does not have a brain). This happens in 1 out of every 1000 cases. Many mothers with an anencephalic fetus end up miscarrying. The ones that make it to term are still born. In rare cases, a birth may result in a live birth, but the baby'slife signs drop within minutes. In cases of the fetus dying during delivery (which is the majority that make it to term), the dying process causes the fetus to often sieze, resulting in inability to be passed through the birth canal. Under the current law, a D&X relaxes the muscles and allowes the fetus to pass through the birth canal. Had the vetoed law been enacted, the procedure would have been allowed only if a c-section was not possible. A c-section with a fetus in that condition is invasive, and typically results in destruction of the uterous, leaving the mother barren. In many cases, the c-section also results in abdominal disfigurement of the mother, requiring reconstructive surgery.

 

[LadyEagle]

Johnv: Right now abortion is legal up to approx 24 months,

BWHAAAAAAAAAAAAH! For what? Elephants?

Get thee down to Starbucks..........AND FAST! You're starting to disintegrate!