Ohio bill restricting abortions to before a heartbeat is heard

[smilesammich 10,727]

But the inaccuracies started before Trump even responded: Wallace’s question was problematic right out of the gate because of the term he used. “Partial birth” is a political, not medical, term, and it does not refer to all late-term abortions. It refers to a very specific and rare procedure called dilation and extraction*, in which a fetus is partially pulled through the birth canal and then aborted, nearly always when the fetus cannot live outside the womb and typically when the mother’s health is in danger, the fetus has a serious abnormality, or both. Such a procedure is not conducted lightly: the fetus has a fatal defect and will not survive, or the mother is at risk of death herself.

As this NPR article notes about a partial-birth abortion ban passed in 2003, “when some members of Congress tried to amend the bill to ban only those procedures that take place after viability, abortion opponents complained that would leave most of the procedures legal.” And the Supreme Court ultimately declined to strike down the ban anyway. Further, most states don’t allow late-term abortions: just eight states and Washington, D.C., have no restrictions on abortion timing, and the rest have restrictions and other regulations in place.

As noted, these types of abortions are extremely rare. Although both the rate and number of abortions have steadily fallen in the U.S., an estimated 1 million procedures are performed each year, according to the Guttmacher Institute. These procedures remain very safe, considerably more so than pregnancy and birth, in fact. Of these abortions, 91.4% are performed in the first trimester, less than 14 weeks into pregnancy. Just 1.3% of abortions are performed at or after 21 weeks, and an estimated 0.2% of all abortions involve the dilation and evacuation procedure. And why would women seek them in the first place?

“The kinds of cases that fall at the end of pregnancy are often the most heartbreaking, painful decisions for families to make,” Clinton said at the debate. “I have met with women who toward the end of their pregnancy get the worst news one could get, that their health is in jeopardy if they continue to carry to term or that something terrible has happened or just been discovered about the pregnancy. I do not think the United States government should be stepping in and making those most personal of decisions.”

If you have any question about whether the harrowing stories Clinton referred to are really the case, you can read the details of one woman's story yourself. Despite being “overjoyed” at her pregnancy, a discovery of a fatal defect in the fetus led her to the painful decision to have an abortion at 32 weeks — for which she was fortunate to have the resources to seek by flying across the country to Colorado. (She specifically notes, “if the doctors thought there was any way he [the fetus] might make it, I would have taken that chance.”) A number of fetal abnormalities that lead to death or extremely severe disability in a fetus — including the majority of problems caused by a Zika infection during pregnancy — are not identified until after the 20th week of pregnancy.

When it was Trump’s chance to respond, his answer went far afield of any medical procedures that actually take place in the real world: “Well, I think it's terrible. If you go with what Hillary is saying, in the ninth month, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother just prior to the birth of the baby.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahaelle/2016/10/20/no-late-term-abortions-dont-rip-babies-out-of-wombs-but-they-are-needed/#55aecc1e1bc4

[bcking 3,157]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahaelle/2016/10/20/no-late-term-abortions-dont-rip-babies-out-of-wombs-but-they-are-needed/#55aecc1e1bc4

Don't even get me started with what Trump said during that debate. It was completely rediculous. I'm sure not even he believes it and his representatives will say that you can't take what he says at "face value" or something. He says those things to get rises out of people without actual factual evidence because he knows he can get away with it. It's completley innappropriate and doesn't help promote any valid discussion on the issue. Hilary should have just responded by saying "Yes well instead we should have the unicorns magically remove them using fairy dust" because that would be about as true as what he said.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Don't even get me started with what Trump said during that debate. It was completely rediculous. I'm sure not even he believes it and his representatives will say that you can't take what he says at "face value" or something. He says those things to get rises out of people without actual factual evidence because he knows he can get away with it. It's completley innappropriate and doesn't help promote any valid discussion on the issue. Hilary should have just responded by saying "Yes well instead we should have the unicorns magically remove them using fairy dust" because that would be about as true as what he said.

if hilary would have responded as such, trump would have made some comment about her seeming disregard for the value of fairy dust as a job creator and something about unicorn liberty and greatness.

[OriZ 3,157]

Not murder. We've gone over this before. You cannot murder someone who has not yet been born.

When you're talking late term and/or partial birth I personally see no difference, but, you're free to feel otherwise.

[smilesammich 10,727]

the only opinion stemming from 'feelings' is yours, oriz.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

I feel that my cat should be given constitutional protection, but that means squat in a court of law. But of course in a new post-truth era, anything goes.

[bcking 3,157]

When you're talking late term and/or partial birth I personally see no difference, but, you're free to feel otherwise.

You can personally feel whatever you want, that doesn't mean that both biologically and legally there is a difference. Even on a personal note you have to realize how arbitrary it is. "Viability" if the mom goes into labour 200 miles from the nearest hospital is very different than "viability" if you are in a tertiary center with a Level IV NICU. So is it suddenly murder if someone goes into labour and the baby dies because they can't get to a hospital, despite the baby being past 'viability' with current medical practice?

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

Not murder. We've gone over this before. You cannot murder someone who has not yet been born.

A 17-year-old girl has been arrested for allegedly stabbing a pregnant woman to death in Los Angeles, California last month.

Multiple sources report that the teenager, whose name has not been released by police because she is a juvenile, turned herself in to police on Friday. She has been charged with the murders of Jasmine Preciado, 22, and her unborn child.

https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/teen-arrested-stabbing-pregnant-woman-171613798.html

[bcking 3,157]

There is a federal and many states have laws called "Unborn Victims of Violence" that means you can prosecute for murder of a fetus. That doesn't mean it is the same thing as murdering a 1 month old. It also doesn't mean the fetus is a "living being" (The law doesn't specify that, only that the unborn fetus is a member of the human species). It has limitations (in many states it only pertains to homicide).

Interestingly it has no "viability" requirement or gestational age requirement at all. It is a pretty poorly written law medically speaking. If a woman is murdered and turns out to have conceived the day prior, the person can also be charged with murdering the zygote (which may not have actually even implanted yet and therefore may not actually ever become a fetus since many fertilizations don't result in actual pregnancies).

Edited December 8, 2016 by bcking

[OriZ 3,157]

You can personally feel whatever you want, that doesn't mean that both biologically and legally there is a difference. Even on a personal note you have to realize how arbitrary it is. "Viability" if the mom goes into labour 200 miles from the nearest hospital is very different than "viability" if you are in a tertiary center with a Level IV NICU. So is it suddenly murder if someone goes into labour and the baby dies because they can't get to a hospital, despite the baby being past 'viability' with current medical practice?

What I was saying is(which I believe I've actually seen you agree to some extent in the past) once it becomes viable, it is not only her body. I don't really care what the law says or doesn't say nor did I claim that the law considers it murder, but I see no difference between killing that baby when you're 8 months pregnant, or killing it two months later. I wasn't talking about them not being able to get to a hospital...we're talking about abortions here. And I'm sorry but ain't nobody gonna convince me there's nothing wrong with having an abortion when you're 8, or even 7 or 6 months pregnant. It is wrong, and I will continue to believe it is wrong. Do I think they should be charged with murder? I never said that. I was just saying it's about the same interest to the public(strangers, as val called them) as all these "murder cases" are.

[bcking 3,157]

What I was saying is(which I believe I've actually seen you agree to some extent in the past) once it becomes viable, it is not only her body. I don't really care what the law says or doesn't say nor did I claim that the law considers it murder, but I see no difference between killing that baby when you're 8 months pregnant, or killing it two months later. I wasn't talking about them not being able to get to a hospital...we're talking about abortions here. And I'm sorry but ain't nobody gonna convince me there's nothing wrong with having an abortion when you're 8, or even 7 or 6 months pregnant. It is wrong, and I will continue to believe it is wrong. Do I think they should be charged with murder? I never said that. I was just saying it's about the same interest to the public(strangers, as val called them) as all these "murder cases" are.

Ya I do agree with you personally, I just would never legislate other people to adhere to my belief.

If you consider a "post-viable" fetus living it creates real conflicts like the one I mentioned. Just because 23 weeks is viable at a major hospital center doesn't mean it is universally viable. Even 28 weeks can be difficult depending where you are. It's all relative to what you have available to you.

[smilesammich 10,727]

What I was saying is(which I believe I've actually seen you agree to some extent in the past) once it becomes viable, it is not only her body. I don't really care what the law says or doesn't say nor did I claim that the law considers it murder, but I see no difference between killing that baby when you're 8 months pregnant, or killing it two months later. I wasn't talking about them not being able to get to a hospital...we're talking about abortions here. And I'm sorry but ain't nobody gonna convince me there's nothing wrong with having an abortion when you're 8, or even 7 or 6 months pregnant. It is wrong, and I will continue to believe it is wrong. Do I think they should be charged with murder? I never said that. I was just saying it's about the same interest to the public(strangers, as val called them) as all these "murder cases" are.

and you're considering late term abortions as a woman deciding she no longer wants to be pregnant and terminating. the post i made previously disputes that is normally the case when late term abortions are used. this idea that there are scads of women walking around getting knocked up indiscriminately and waiting till a week before their due date to have the child 'ripped from their bodies' is a fallacy. it's peddled by extreme christian prolifers who, in my opinion, emotionally and mentally abuse plenty of living children under their 'instruction' with their propaganda.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

the only opinion stemming from 'feelings' is yours, oriz.

so if a woman is 5 days from delivery and decides she doesn't want the child anymore, you are ok with her aborting. Just trying to clarify ?

[smilesammich 10,727]

so if a woman is 5 days from delivery and decides she doesn't want the child anymore, you are ok with her aborting. Just trying to clarify ?

no. and that doesn't happen.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

no. and that doesn't happen.

when I said I was pro choice with limitations, you said no. I was just trying to clarify. So when do you think the cutoff should be. 3 weeks . 1 month ??