Skip to main content

The recent Supreme Court ruling regarding late-term abortion confirms Roe vs. Wade.

Roe vs. Wade was never absolute. It protects a woman's right to abortion during the first two trimesters. This is good sense, because until the third trimester, the fetus is completely dependent on the mother. Any third trimester fetus these days is viable.

There is no disagreement between this week's ruling and Roe vs. Wade. The recent ruling makes Roe vs. Wade stronger.

DF
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Excuse me if I beg to differ, but this in no way supports Roe vs Wade, it is a step in the protection of unborn babies. Also babies are very much ,"viable", as you would say well before the third trimester. And just in case you think it can't feel or is not a living human being why don't you look at the development of a baby in the womb: What are some of the other milestones of fetal development?
In addition to the unborn child's heartbeat, brainwaves, fingerprints and capacity to feel pain, other important milestones include:

At 4 weeks from conception, a baby's eye, ear, and respiratory systems begin to form.
Thumbsucking has been documented at 7 weeks from conception.
At 8 weeks from conception, a baby's heartbeat can be detected by ultrasonic stethoscope.
By 9 weeks from conception, a baby is able to bend her fingers around an object in her hand.
By 11 to 12 weeks from conception, the baby is breathing fluid steadily and continues to do so until birth.
By 11 weeks from conception, a baby can swallow.
Between 13 and 15 weeks from conception, a baby's taste buds are present and functioning.
At 20 weeks, and perhaps as early as 16 weeks from conception, a baby is capable of hearing his mother's heartbeat and external noises like music.
At 23 weeks from conception, babies have been shown to demonstrate rapid eye movements (REM), which are characteristic of active dream states.
At six months from conception, a baby's oil and sweat glands are functioning.
At seven months from conception, a baby frequently "exercises" in preparation for birth by stretching and kicking.
At eight months from conception, a baby's skin begins to thicken, and swallows a gallon of amniotic fluid each day and often hiccups.
During the ninth month from conception, a baby gains half a pound per week. Of the 45 generations of cell divisions before adulthood, 41 have already taken place.

And if that's not enough how about the following babies born prior to the third trimester (third trimester begins at 28 weeks):
In the fifties viability was reached about thirty weeks after conception. Modern medical technology changed that to twenty-five weeks in the seventies. Now viability continues to be pushed further and further back in the pregnancy and is now as early as nineteen weeks. Here are some examples of viable children: fetuses said to be only parts of their mothers who lived and grew into individual happy healthy people without their mothers:

Marcus Richardson - 19 weeks, 6 days - 780 gm - Jan. '72 - (University Hosp., Cincinnati)
Melissa Cameron - 20 weeks - 450 gm - Dec. '83 - (Sault Ste. Marie Hosp., Cincinnati Enquirer)
Kenya King - 21 weeks - 510 gm - June '85 - (Med. World News, Nov. 11, 1985, p. 119)
Suzanne South - 21 weeks, 2 days - 644 gm - July '71 -(Bethesda Hosp., Cincinnati)
Kelly Thorman - 21 weeks - 596 gm - March '71 - (St. Vincent Hosp., Toledo)
Melissa Murray - 22 weeks - 510 gm - June '83 - (Victoria, Texas - Houston Post)
Tracy LaBranch - 22 weeks, 1 day - 538 gm - March '72 - (Battle Creek Enquirer)
Ernestine Hudgins - 22 weeks - 484 gm - Feb. '83 - (San Diego, Washington Post)
Mimi Faulkner - 23 weeks - 484 gm - Nov. '78 - (San Diego, Boston Herald)
Tascha Hudson - 23 weeks - 580 gm - March '74 - (Brooke Army Hosp.)
Simmonne Jayette - 23 weeks - 595 gm - April '78 - (Montreal Jewish General Hospital)
Alicia Ponce - 24 weeks - 644 gm - April '74 - (Associated Press)

Twenty-one and twenty-two week premature babies are now supported routinely, and have a good chance of survival. By twenty-four weeks after conception, premature babies have a 40% chance of reaching adulthood without any major complications.2 By twenty-eight weeks, the chance is 90%.3 By twenty-nine weeks, survival is almost definite. (Note: These percentages are from reports written during the late 1980s. Current survival rates are most likely much higher.)
These are just a few a personally know of 2 woman who have had babies at 21 weeks and 24 weeks and they both have lived and are doing well.
As technology develops it can only prove the horror of abortion, that it is in fact infanticide,cruel and totally unmorale.

How can any one see a 3-d sonogram of a baby in the womb and support such a sick barbaric act is beyond me.

If you are still wondering I am pro-life. Will always be Pro-life, and will never alter my opinion. Yes I would and do gladly protest. I however, do believe in forgiveness. So if anyone out there has made the mistake of aborting their unborn child. I do not condemn you, there is healing for your pain. And I would be the first to embrace you and help you through the process in anyway I can.
Healing for my pain? I'm not in pain.

We are all familiar with those development stages. It stands to reason that a human fetus would develop human functions before they're needed at birth.

But it's a fact that women will seek abortions. Over 90% of abortions take place in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. If you make abortion illegal, women will die.

Women should give birth when they decide to, not because they find themselves pregnant. If men got pregnant, there would be no issue on this.

But, still, this ruling reinforces the two-trimester foundation of Roe vs. Wade, as is proper. The recent ruling supports the third trimester viability of the fetus. Sure, artificial, highly expensive viability keeps getting earlier and earlier, but it's approaching or exceeding the point of diminishing returns. The medical system can hardly afford to spend over a million dollars for a second trimester fetus that, if he lives, will likely suffer serious medical conditions caused by the circumstances of his birth.

It comes down to whose rights prevail, living human women or dependent fetuses. You have to give the benefit of the doubt to the women.

DF
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
Healing for my pain? I'm not in pain.

We are all familiar with those development stages. It stands to reason that a human fetus would develop human functions before they're needed at birth.

But it's a fact that women will seek abortions. Over 90% of abortions take place in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. If you make abortion illegal, women will die.

Women should give birth when they decide to, not because they find themselves pregnant. If men got pregnant, there would be no issue on this.

But, still, this ruling reinforces the two-trimester foundation of Roe vs. Wade, as is proper. The recent ruling supports the third trimester viability of the fetus. Sure, artificial, highly expensive viability keeps getting earlier and earlier, but it's approaching or exceeding the point of diminishing returns. The medical system can hardly afford to spend over a million dollars for a second trimester fetus that, if he lives, will likely suffer serious medical conditions caused by the circumstances of his birth.

It comes down to whose rights prevail, living human women or dependent fetuses. You have to give the benefit of the doubt to the women.

DF


----------------------------------------------

DF, I totally agree with your assessment.

While I abhore abortion, I am a realist, and therefore accept that abortion is going to happen. It should be safe, legal and seldom.

I remember Clinton trying to get the Republican congress to give him a "partial birth abortion bill" that gave exceptance for to save the life of the mother. The Republicans refused, stating that the value of the fetus , even tho flawed, is more valuable than the mother. Clinton even marched about 6 or 7 women on stage to give their story how each wanted their child, but had to terminate to save their life. I'm not a medical person, and cannot understand why so late a procedure would be be helpful, but why not give exception for the life of the mother.
Right before the 2004 election , Tom Delay pushed a bill thru Congress that would prevent "partial birth abortions" with no exception for the life of the mother. Idiot signed it, but the Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional because of the lack of concern about the mothers life.
That's what you are dealing with in these fanatics wanting to outlaw abortion.
Y'all should keep your noses out of every one else's business.
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:

Women should give birth when they decide to, not because they find themselves pregnant. If men got pregnant, there would be no issue on this.
[...]

DF


Absolutely! I believe you are quite correct in your interpretation of the underlying gender issue.

As a woman, I say, "Keep your laws off my body."
Last edited by e
quote:
sdauberbuster
, Viable means able to live independently of the womb. It is a point in development that is nearly impossible to predict. In fact, some full term babies, born normally die. They were not Viable at birth. That out of the way, your remaining developmental sequence is basically correct.

There is ONLY one issue. The Federal Government, with this particular law, passed by the Congress, Signed by the President, and now upheld by the Supreme Court, has set a precedent of interference in medical practice.

The law does not even prohibit late term abortion. IT ONLY PROHIBITS A SPECIFIC PROCEDURE THAT IS ONE OF SEVERAL OPTIONS IN LATE TERM ABORTION. The procedure that is outlawed is considered safer for the mother than the other options, by some doctors.

The law, written, passed, signed, and and court reviewed changes virtually nothing.
You are write I would remove that choice, as I don't beleive it is a choice. When you made the choice to have sex, you should of thought twice. And a baby should not have to loose its life because you find it inconvenient. Heck, why if it's all about choice, why should murders be prosecuted. They made a choice and it felt right to them at the time, oh yea that person they killed had a voice unlike that baby inside you that you so easily discard.Why prosecute prostitutes it's their body, their choice? Odd you can be arrested for chosing to sell your own body, but its perfectly legal to kill a baby inside you out of "choice". The irony of the land we live in. Also odd if you are assaulted and are pregnant and the baby dies it is murder, but if you want to kill it it's just discarding of a fetus that is inconvenien to you. Have you ever witnessed an abotion? I have they scream as their limbs are bing ripped apart being succed out with a vacum, their heart rate increases as they feel the change. And if that isn't enough, depending on what stage you are in they are born alive and then killed. Oh yeah, I forget that's your right, because it is your body. Thank God your mom didn't think that. And for the person who brought up cost of saving premature babies, since when does life have a price tag? Oh, is it only after a cetain age? Please tell me if you know, because I haven't met a mom yet who would have put a price on their premature babies life. What if your child was sick, do you pu a price on it then? Well you met the million dollar mark, son, you ain't worth more than that I'll just let you die. Technology only supports the inhumanity of abortion, how can any one see a 3d ultrasound, and then kill that child within. I'm a female, and I do not believe it is a choice, I would die as to take the life of my baby. A mothers instict would/should be to sacrifice their life for that of their childs. I would in a heart beat, for how could I say that my life is more valuable than that of my babies.Well, I've made me point clear, so I will not continue this thread anylonger.

"1 out of every 2 patients who enter an abortion clinc will die"
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
Y-witch,

You are correct, but sdauberbuster would remove your choice in the matter. That is the issue.

DF
How can you abhor abortion and support it at the same time. That's being double minded, basically its making no stand at all. And if women die because it is made illegal it would be very unlikely, unless they break the law and try to have an abortion though illegal means. Becaue even before Roe vs Wade, abortion took place when the mothers life was at stake, example tubal pregnancies. But, you know I have a cousin alive today because her mom chose not to have an abortion when she was a tubal baby. She made the choice to keep her baby even if it meant her life. And, some how my cousin made it out of the tube, and she now has 2 children of her own, and my aunt is a great,great grandma.
quote:
Originally posted by excelman:
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
Healing for my pain? I'm not in pain.

We are all familiar with those development stages. It stands to reason that a human fetus would develop human functions before they're needed at birth.

But it's a fact that women will seek abortions. Over 90% of abortions take place in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. If you make abortion illegal, women will die.

Women should give birth when they decide to, not because they find themselves pregnant. If men got pregnant, there would be no issue on this.

But, still, this ruling reinforces the two-trimester foundation of Roe vs. Wade, as is proper. The recent ruling supports the third trimester viability of the fetus. Sure, artificial, highly expensive viability keeps getting earlier and earlier, but it's approaching or exceeding the point of diminishing returns. The medical system can hardly afford to spend over a million dollars for a second trimester fetus that, if he lives, will likely suffer serious medical conditions caused by the circumstances of his birth.

It comes down to whose rights prevail, living human women or dependent fetuses. You have to give the benefit of the doubt to the women.

DF


----------------------------------------------

DF, I totally agree with your assessment.

While I abhore abortion, I am a realist, and therefore accept that abortion is going to happen. It should be safe, legal and seldom.

I remember Clinton trying to get the Republican congress to give him a "partial birth abortion bill" that gave exceptance for to save the life of the mother. The Republicans refused, stating that the value of the fetus , even tho flawed, is more valuable than the mother. Clinton even marched about 6 or 7 women on stage to give their story how each wanted their child, but had to terminate to save their life. I'm not a medical person, and cannot understand why so late a procedure would be be helpful, but why not give exception for the life of the mother.
Right before the 2004 election , Tom Delay pushed a bill thru Congress that would prevent "partial birth abortions" with no exception for the life of the mother. Idiot signed it, but the Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional because of the lack of concern about the mothers life.
That's what you are dealing with in these fanatics wanting to outlaw abortion.
Y'all should keep your noses out of every one else's business.
quote:
Originally posted by yankeewitch:
I don't like the idea of abortion,but that is only my opinion,and I would not presume to try and force my opinion on others.Every woman has to make that decision theirselves.

Will, would you not presume to try to force your opinion on a child molester. After all it's his opinion that it is perfectly ok to molest children, and we wouldn't want to force are opinion or belief on him now would we.
quote:
posted by sdauberbuster:
"1 out of every 2 patients who enter an abortion clinc will die"
Can you provide any data supporting that statement? Even with illegal abortion in back alley clinics the mortality rate was not 50%.

Long range the mortality rate for women who have abortions is 100%. But long range the mortality rate for every child ever conceived is 100%.

I suspect that you are saying that one half the patients who enter an abortion clinic are unborn babies. In that case your estimate is also overstated. No "abortion only" clinics exist. A few exist that will not provide prenatal care, but will refer a patient who chooses to carry to term to a place that does.

I am an old fogie, So old that all my children, and one of my grandchildren were born before Roe v. Wade. I remember the public debate over legalizing abortion, and the relief when Roe v. Wade was decided. I am acquainted with two women who became sterile as a result of illegal abortions. Even in small communities there were regular news reports of young women dying as a result of "botched" back alley abortions. Abortion was illegal, not eliminated.

There is a reasonable solution for preventing unwanted pregnancy. It is called contraception. It is obvious, and you recognize, that parents do not do a very good job of teaching contraception in the home. If it were taught accurately and effectively, even disobedient, rebellious boys and girls would know "the facts of life" well enough to prevent unwanted pregnancy. CONTRACEPTION IS NOT TAUGHT ACCURATELY AND EFFECTIVELY.
To end, or greatly reduce, abortion, teach birth control, not hormone control.
quote:
Originally posted by sdauberbuster:
You are write I would remove that choice, as I don't beleive it is a choice. When you made the choice to have sex, you should of thought twice.




Your statement that begins with the phrase "When you made the choice to have sex" speaks volumes about your argument in general.

If you believe that every pregnant woman had the opportunity to make that choice, then I think you should realize how lucky you are for living a life that was sheltered to the extent you can still feel confident about making such a statement.
quote:
Originally posted by sdauberbuster:
You are write I would remove that choice, as I don't beleive it is a choice.


For you to determine that you believe such is a choice, in and of itself. You have your own to make, and it sounds as though you've made it.

quote:


Have you ever witnessed an abotion?



Have you ever witnessed a rape?

quote:


Oh yeah, I forget that's your right, because it is your body. Thank God your mom didn't think that.



My mom did think that it was her right to make her own choice about her own body. She made the choice she felt appropriate at the time. That choice was hers to make, just as you have every right to make your own choices. You don't, however, have the right to make those same choices for other people.
Last edited by e
quote:
Originally posted by sdauberbuster:
Excuse me if I beg to differ, but this in no way supports Roe vs Wade, it is a step in the protection of unborn babies. Also babies are very much ,"viable", as you would say well before the third trimester. And just in case you think it can't feel or is not a living human being why don't you look at the development of a baby in the womb: What are some of the other milestones of fetal development?
In addition to the unborn child's heartbeat, brainwaves, fingerprints and capacity to feel pain, other important milestones include:

At 4 weeks from conception, a baby's eye, ear, and respiratory systems begin to form.
Thumbsucking has been documented at 7 weeks from conception.
At 8 weeks from conception, a baby's heartbeat can be detected by ultrasonic stethoscope.
By 9 weeks from conception, a baby is able to bend her fingers around an object in her hand.
By 11 to 12 weeks from conception, the baby is breathing fluid steadily and continues to do so until birth.
By 11 weeks from conception, a baby can swallow.
Between 13 and 15 weeks from conception, a baby's taste buds are present and functioning.
At 20 weeks, and perhaps as early as 16 weeks from conception, a baby is capable of hearing his mother's heartbeat and external noises like music.
At 23 weeks from conception, babies have been shown to demonstrate rapid eye movements (REM), which are characteristic of active dream states.
At six months from conception, a baby's oil and sweat glands are functioning.
At seven months from conception, a baby frequently "exercises" in preparation for birth by stretching and kicking.
At eight months from conception, a baby's skin begins to thicken, and swallows a gallon of amniotic fluid each day and often hiccups.
During the ninth month from conception, a baby gains half a pound per week. Of the 45 generations of cell divisions before adulthood, 41 have already taken place.

And if that's not enough how about the following babies born prior to the third trimester (third trimester begins at 28 weeks):
In the fifties viability was reached about thirty weeks after conception. Modern medical technology changed that to twenty-five weeks in the seventies. Now viability continues to be pushed further and further back in the pregnancy and is now as early as nineteen weeks. Here are some examples of viable children: fetuses said to be only parts of their mothers who lived and grew into individual happy healthy people without their mothers:

Marcus Richardson - 19 weeks, 6 days - 780 gm - Jan. '72 - (University Hosp., Cincinnati)
Melissa Cameron - 20 weeks - 450 gm - Dec. '83 - (Sault Ste. Marie Hosp., Cincinnati Enquirer)
Kenya King - 21 weeks - 510 gm - June '85 - (Med. World News, Nov. 11, 1985, p. 119)
Suzanne South - 21 weeks, 2 days - 644 gm - July '71 -(Bethesda Hosp., Cincinnati)
Kelly Thorman - 21 weeks - 596 gm - March '71 - (St. Vincent Hosp., Toledo)
Melissa Murray - 22 weeks - 510 gm - June '83 - (Victoria, Texas - Houston Post)
Tracy LaBranch - 22 weeks, 1 day - 538 gm - March '72 - (Battle Creek Enquirer)
Ernestine Hudgins - 22 weeks - 484 gm - Feb. '83 - (San Diego, Washington Post)
Mimi Faulkner - 23 weeks - 484 gm - Nov. '78 - (San Diego, Boston Herald)
Tascha Hudson - 23 weeks - 580 gm - March '74 - (Brooke Army Hosp.)
Simmonne Jayette - 23 weeks - 595 gm - April '78 - (Montreal Jewish General Hospital)
Alicia Ponce - 24 weeks - 644 gm - April '74 - (Associated Press)

Twenty-one and twenty-two week premature babies are now supported routinely, and have a good chance of survival. By twenty-four weeks after conception, premature babies have a 40% chance of reaching adulthood without any major complications.2 By twenty-eight weeks, the chance is 90%.3 By twenty-nine weeks, survival is almost definite. (Note: These percentages are from reports written during the late 1980s. Current survival rates are most likely much higher.)
These are just a few a personally know of 2 woman who have had babies at 21 weeks and 24 weeks and they both have lived and are doing well.
As technology develops it can only prove the horror of abortion, that it is in fact infanticide,cruel and totally unmorale.

How can any one see a 3-d sonogram of a baby in the womb and support such a sick barbaric act is beyond me.

If you are still wondering I am pro-life. Will always be Pro-life, and will never alter my opinion. Yes I would and do gladly protest. I however, do believe in forgiveness. So if anyone out there has made the mistake of aborting their unborn child. I do not condemn you, there is healing for your pain. And I would be the first to embrace you and help you through the process in anyway I can.



Wow!!!! GREAT post!!! I am so happy you posted this!!!1

The Supreme Court ruled against the LATE TERM abortions ... babies LIVE during the late term!!!!

Could ANY of you take a tiny baby out of the uterus, watch it breath, and BECAUSE IT WAS AN ABORTION, you HAVE to throw it in the garbage can to die?????

No way in heck could I do it, or would I do it...

I am not actually FOR abortion for ME, but I realize that women are going to have them, and they are the ones who have to live with it, and it is THEIR choice!!! So I guess I could be called Pro-Choice..

BUT, and there is always a BUT... if a baby is in the uterus long enough to LIVE then it would take a dang sorry person to toss it in the garbage like I have read about!!!!

THAT should be murder!!!
Kindred, In 1961 my aunt went into labor. After many hours of suffering her Doctor came out and said she was going to die if the baby was not aborted. He informed my uncle that it was her or the baby. After consulting with his wife, my uncle told the Doctor to save the baby. Both mother and baby died. They are now buried together in Oakwood cemetery in Sheffield. The point here is, my Uncle and his family had to make the decision - not the U.S. Government, not me, not his children, it was the decision between my Uncle and Aunt. They made it and he had to live with it. By the way, they had 2 existing children. Both teenagers at the time. Today BOTH will tell you they wish they had their MOTHER back, NO MATTER WHAT. She left them for a child who also died. It was a personal, private decision that they made. It should NEVER be left up to the Federal Government to make medical decisions for its people. It would be a rare thing that this would happen today, thankfully. But, IF it happened to your daughter now there is NO provision for the LIFE OF THE MOTHER. If my child wanted to have the proceedure and it was life or death for her - I would move heaven and earth to save her life. Thats just me - and anyone elses opinion is of no interest to me - at all.
Pro-Choice is not Pro-Abortion. I would never condone murder (as it's called by some), but there's no way it's my call what a woman does with her body. Pro-Life, an incredible misnomer, should be called Pro-Abortion, or just plain fascist. I understand the sentiment, but it's none of anyone's business what a woman does with her body.
quote:
Originally posted by one who posts:
quote:
Originally posted by meanasasnake:
and anyone elses opinion is of no interest to me - at all.


That's a sad, lonely place to be.


One Who Posts, In life there are decisions we all make as a family that are not subject a community vote. My personal healthcare decisions are really none of yours or anyone elses business. Lonely? You bet - Life can be hard and is full of difficult decisions for many families. We are talking about the life of a woman. Could be your wife, or your daughter. I really dont care what the neighbor thinks about it - its really not up to a committee vote.
quote:
Originally posted by meanasasnake:
quote:
Originally posted by one who posts:
quote:
Originally posted by meanasasnake:
and anyone elses opinion is of no interest to me - at all.


That's a sad, lonely place to be.


One Who Posts, In life there are decisions we all make as a family that are not subject a community vote. My personal healthcare decisions are really none of yours or anyone elses business. Lonely? You bet - Life can be hard and is full of difficult decisions for many families. We are talking about the life of a woman. Could be your wife, or your daughter. I really dont care what the neighbor thinks about it - its really not up to a committee vote.
I am going to try to remember your comments here, they actually mean a lot to me. I have questioned a medical decision I made with my wife for a very long time. She went toxic while carrying our son. Intervention at the outset made a lot of difference, but her condition did not improve, and the baby was not likely to survive if delivered when the problem began. We lived on pins and needles. Twice weekly visits to the Doctor. Medications, hope that the toxemia would pass and the pregnancy continue. It didn't. At the earliest opportunity labor was induced, Sam was born. He was dead gray the first time I saw him, barely moving and tiny. I think his apgar score was 3. He lived. He was normal. Or, as the doctors put it, within the range of normal intelligence, coordination and rate of development, but compared with most children he was slow. He had trouble learning to read. He did poorly in athletics. He was clumsy, he was easily distracted, but he was not only able to make his own way, he did, till the day he rode a bicycle into the front wheel of a 40 ton truck loaded with lumber and went under it. He was six weeks from his 30th birthday. He was a respected member of the community, and he was riding the bicycle for the pleasure of it.
As far as I know abortion was never even considered, though a cesarean was discussed. The risk of surgery, because of the illness, was considered too great.

I suppose the reason for this story is to affirm what meanasasnake said. THE DECISION IS NOT YOURS TO MAKE FOR ME, NOR IS IT MINE TO MAKE FOR YOU. Go, make your decisions. Leave me to make mine. I don't need the government to help me decide what life should be for me or my children. And stop telling me that as a liberal I want the government to make my decisions for me. That is a lie, and now even you know it.
quote:
Originally posted by EdEKit:
quote:
Originally posted by meanasasnake:
quote:
Originally posted by one who posts:
quote:
Originally posted by meanasasnake:
and anyone elses opinion is of no interest to me - at all.


That's a sad, lonely place to be.


One Who Posts, In life there are decisions we all make as a family that are not subject a community vote. My personal healthcare decisions are really none of yours or anyone elses business. Lonely? You bet - Life can be hard and is full of difficult decisions for many families. We are talking about the life of a woman. Could be your wife, or your daughter. I really dont care what the neighbor thinks about it - its really not up to a committee vote.
I am going to try to remember your comments here, they actually mean a lot to me. I have questioned a medical decision I made with my wife for a very long time. She went toxic while carrying our son. Intervention at the outset made a lot of difference, but her condition did not improve, and the baby was not likely to survive if delivered when the problem began. We lived on pins and needles. Twice weekly visits to the Doctor. Medications, hope that the toxemia would pass and the pregnancy continue. It didn't. At the earliest opportunity labor was induced, Sam was born. He was dead gray the first time I saw him, barely moving and tiny. I think his apgar score was 3. He lived. He was normal. Or, as the doctors put it, within the range of normal intelligence, coordination and rate of development, but compared with most children he was slow. He had trouble learning to read. He did poorly in athletics. He was clumsy, he was easily distracted, but he was not only able to make his own way, he did, till the day he rode a bicycle into the front wheel of a 40 ton truck loaded with lumber and went under it. He was six weeks from his 30th birthday. He was a respected member of the community, and he was riding the bicycle for the pleasure of it.
As far as I know abortion was never even considered, though a cesarean was discussed. The risk of surgery, because of the illness, was considered too great.

I suppose the reason for this story is to affirm what meanasasnake said. THE DECISION IS NOT YOURS TO MAKE FOR ME, NOR IS IT MINE TO MAKE FOR YOU. Go, make your decisions. Leave me to make mine. I don't need the government to help me decide what life should be for me or my children. And stop telling me that as a liberal I want the government to make my decisions for me. That is a lie, and now even you know it.


Thank you. "Conservatives" are intent on telling us that their view of abortion is the only one, that the life of MY daughter means nothing compared to the life of her child. Her life has NO value. Sorry - I will fly her to Canada if it means saving her life, provided that is what SHE wants. I would find a way to save her life if that was possible.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×