Abortion: Fetus Masturbation

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Abortion: Fetus Masturbation

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

ExplodingChef posted:

If anyone is interested in the how and why behind third trimester abortions, I highly recommend tracking down a copy of After Tiller.

http://aftertillermovie.com for a preview.

There are *4* doctors in the entire US that perform third trimester abortions. Four.

Could we get a TL:DW?

For example, I'm pro choice, but here in Iceland, it's not even possible to get a third trimester abortion (though we have epic reproductive rights in all other aspects) and I see that most of the scandinavian nations are similar. Why is it that the US needs late term abortions (outside of the health issues)? Is it purely because of the lack of reproductive rights and education early on?

# ¿ Jan 23, 2015 11:03

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:58

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

Xibanya posted:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar

Also note that most late term abortions are due to severe birth defect. The people who are getting them are not those who lack "reproductive rights and education" as you imply. They're those who wanted to have a baby and then discovered something went horribly wrong. People who get abortions because of birth control failure overwhelmingly get them as early as possible.

It was just a hypothetical guess on my part. I'm honestly curious why countries with otherwise superb reproductive rights still ban third trimester abortion and it doesn't seem like many people mind. I want to know if that is a problem and it should be allowed without question, or if other more effective solutions make it so many less are even needed.

Plus this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_termination_of_pregnancy

seems to suggest it is indeed poor reproductive rights and education stateside:

In 1987, the Alan Guttmacher Institute collected questionnaires from 1,900 women in the United States who came to clinics to have abortions. Of the 1,900 questioned, 420 had been pregnant for 16 or more weeks. These 420 women were asked to choose among a list of reasons they had not obtained the abortions earlier in their pregnancies. The results were as follows:[2]
71% Woman didn't recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation
48% Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion
33% Woman was afraid to tell her partner or parents
24% Woman took time to decide to have an abortion
8% Woman waited for her relationship to change
8% Someone pressured woman not to have abortion
6% Something changed after woman became pregnant
6% Woman didn't know timing is important
5% Woman didn't know she could get an abortion
2% A fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy
11% Other

# ¿ Jan 25, 2015 13:07

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

poopinmymouth posted:

It was just a hypothetical guess on my part. I'm honestly curious why countries with otherwise superb reproductive rights still ban third trimester abortion and it doesn't seem like many people mind. I want to know if that is a problem and it should be allowed without question, or if other more effective solutions make it so many less are even needed.

Plus this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_termination_of_pregnancy

seems to suggest it is indeed poor reproductive rights and education stateside:

In 1987, the Alan Guttmacher Institute collected questionnaires from 1,900 women in the United States who came to clinics to have abortions. Of the 1,900 questioned, 420 had been pregnant for 16 or more weeks. These 420 women were asked to choose among a list of reasons they had not obtained the abortions earlier in their pregnancies. The results were as follows:[2]
71% Woman didn't recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation
48% Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion
33% Woman was afraid to tell her partner or parents
24% Woman took time to decide to have an abortion
8% Woman waited for her relationship to change
8% Someone pressured woman not to have abortion
6% Something changed after woman became pregnant
6% Woman didn't know timing is important
5% Woman didn't know she could get an abortion
2% A fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy
11% Other

So... no response for this?

# ¿ Jan 29, 2015 09:27

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

SedanChair posted:

I don't understand why late-term abortion would need to be banned while we wait for reproductive health education to improve.

I didn't argue for that. I am simply curious if there is a clear reason *why* they are so necessary in the US. It seems like the answer is because the rest of reproductive rights are so poo poo, so they need to remain, but since this is a discussion thread about abortion, I wanted to discuss it to see if there were any other ideas as to why.

# ¿ Jan 29, 2015 21:24

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

Xibanya posted:

The list in your quote is from 1987, at least use the more recent one, where defects found later in pregnancy is 13% rather than 2% (quite a jump!) I imagine part of the difference is accounted for with advances in prenatal screening. It's also unclear how many late-term abortions were reported total from 1987 and how many there were in 2004. I'm aware of the sample size of each survey, but without the total population they are meant to represent it is difficult to compare the two surveys. The same wikipedia article also says that the number of abortions total has been decreasing dramatically since 1990.

The results do not necessarily suggest that poor sex education causes late-term abortions. (To be clear, I am most certainly in favor of improving sex education.)

Your original question was essentially "Why does the US need late-term abortions when European countries don't?" The question implies banning late-term abortions is desirable, but I'll set that aside for now. It looks like the top results involve social and economic situations that would create a suboptimal environment for raising an additional child. My argument would be we need to permit late-term abortions because it is bad to force people to have babies they know they aren't capable of supporting (financially, emotionally, etc).

I realize my arguments might sound like I'm a "just asking questions" crypto pro-life troll. That is not the case. I am 100% in pro choice.

I (as I'm sure really everyone) find late term abortions extremely heartbreaking. I realize the alternative, having an unwanted child, risking the mother's health, or even forcing someone to raise a child they don't have the means to support is worse. I do not want to ban them. I want to make the need for them whither away as much as possible through better support in earlier areas.

The reason I would like the nice neat answer of "because the US is so poo poo at early stage support" is when arguing against my pro-life relatives who make it seem like late term abortion is all that happens, that it's their only real objection, and that thousands of doctors are giggling in glee in a real life version of the Onion's abortionplex, I want to be able to show it's actually their own views and party's platform that makes late term abortion necessary stateside, when it's nearly non existent if not outright banned in other nations that "do reproduction rights (more) correctly".

Cause without hard numbers (which I did provide), even 13% is a pretty woefully low number compared to the other reasons late term abortions were sought.

*edit* whoops, missed that quote of yours

Most of those reasons could easily be applied to seeking an abortion before 16 weeks though? Like all of the top 8 are logic choices one can decide upon from the first day you know you're pregnant.

I realize they are affected by the lovely economic situation a lot of them are in, which is another kettle of fish all together.

poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 10:40 on Jan 30, 2015

# ¿ Jan 30, 2015 10:34

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

OwlFancier posted:

Not really seeing a significant difference between early and late term abortions myself.

I guess early term abortions would be easier but people are silly and indecisive.

Even without any "beep boop, I'm a robot without emotions" talking about the actual procedures which are quite a bit more horrendous than early abortion, how about the fact they do carry higher risks on the mother AND at some state those are viable fetuses capable of surviving outside of the womb in many cases?

Like if you are going to get an abortion, there are very few reasons outside of financial access, education, or physical access to wait til a later stage.

The argument for easy legal free abortions is that people will pursue them anyway dangerously, or you will have heaps of unwanted or uncared for children, yet amazingly, these slippery slopes play out quite infrequently in nations that ban late term abortions (but have otherwise excellent access to reproductive rights and sex education). People just go and get them earlier.

poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 11:23 on Jan 30, 2015

# ¿ Jan 30, 2015 11:20

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

OwlFancier posted:

I can understand the importance if they're state funded, as more complex and preventable medical procedures can drain the already limited funding available to national healthcare programs. If they are privately funded or not drawn from the healthcare budget in general, that becomes a bit less of a problem though obviously still, it is better to encourage people to try to minimise the expense of their healthcare where possible.

If you want to make the case for banning late term abortion I guess you would need to conclusively prove that people do just get them earlier when they aren't available late. Rather than simply delaying until it's too late and then ending up without much in the way of options. Some people obviously will get them earlier but you'd really need some statistics either way I think if you're trying to decide whether or not the financial benefits of banning late term abortion are more worthwhile than the social and financial benefits of allowing it.

Are we in DnD operating under the assumption that a fetus should be given no thought til it has been expelled by the mother? Like I'm not one to say life begins at conception, but isn't there some point where it's literally killing an otherwise viable fetus? what about week 39.5? 38? where is the line where it becomes a pretty grotesque operation that should have been avoided by better societal measures AND choices by the intended parent(s).

To try to be more clear. Assuming we have much better sex-ed, free contraception of all forms, free abortion without restriction, generous social safety nets and education systems, would that not drop the amount of late term abortions in nearly all cases other than extreme health risk to the mother that was not found until the end? That is my ideal scenario, not banning it, just fixing all the other areas that make it seemingly necessary stateside, and not even on the radar of human rights groups in other nations (that I know of, welcome to be shown it's something people argue against banning in say, scandinavia, and the reasons as to why).

poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 11:57 on Jan 30, 2015

# ¿ Jan 30, 2015 11:52

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

I guess I still have a few questions, or concepts I want to explore.

I am confused about two things, one is that it seems most people treat a baby as a simple dichotomy of born/not born. Is there no room for someone feeling like it's a spectrum? that the further developed a fetus is, the more adverse one would feel about termination?

And the 2nd, is it really a basic autonomy/no-autonomy trying to get people to make a decision earlier? I don't want to strap anyone down and force them to give birth, but I find the idea of late term abortions extremely off-putting and violent, to the point I'd like to support the best possible way to reduce them.

# ¿ Jan 30, 2015 20:36

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

CommieGIR posted:

Yes, there are. Threats to the life of the mother, inability of the child to survive outside the womb, cases of hostage rape, etc.

Sure, but as I posted, none of those reasons are listed as the top reasons as to why American women seek late term abortions, and with rape, well they knew it was rape back before week 20+.

For example here in Iceland, the law is: "Abortion is only legal if performed within the first 16 weeks of pregnancy, unless a pregnancy threatens the woman's health or the fetus has a deformity." Which I think is a very reasonable take, and as far as I know, we don't have any of the scary slippery slope arguments playing out of back alley abortions or tons of kids born into poverty or being unwanted.

# ¿ Jan 30, 2015 21:01

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

First the anti-choice movement made up a thing called �partial-birth abortion.� Now they�re trying the same thing with �dismemberment abortion.�

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015/01/31/3617078/fetal-dismemberment-bills/

# ¿ Feb 3, 2015 22:36

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

Women Who Had Abortions After 20 Weeks Explain Why They�re Necessary

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015/02/03/3618460/20-week-abortion-stories/

From the article:

quote:

�When people talk about fetal pain, it infuriates me, because that was our goal,� Mary O�Donnell, a Virginia resident who had a post-20-week abortion back in 2005, told ThinkProgress. �Our goal as parents was to avoid suffering on behalf of our child.�
O�Donnell was pregnant with her first child, and excited to start her family with her husband, when a routine ultrasound at 12 weeks showed their unborn child�s organs were outside of its body. At first, it was unclear how serious the issue was. The doctors said the baby�s lungs were underdeveloped, but a series of surgeries might be able to put its organs back in place. O�Donnell and her husband decided to wait to do more genetic testing and get a closer look at their unborn daughter�s heart.
�We wanted to give our child every possible opportunity. If she was going to survive, we wanted to give her that opportunity,� O�Donnell said. �So we waited.�
They had to wait until around the 20 week mark to do more testing on her heart. At that point, they found out it wasn�t strong enough, and their child probably wouldn�t survive the surgeries necessary to move her organs. They decided to end the pregnancy by inducing labor, a form of abortion that allowed O�Donnell to deliver her daughter, who never took a breath. She named her Naomi.

# ¿ Feb 4, 2015 10:58

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:58

poopinmymouth: Mar 2, 2005; PROUD 2 B AMERICAN (these colors don't run)

Also relevant

http://feministing.com/2015/02/04/indiana-woman-found-guilty-of-feticide-and-neglect-for-having-a-miscarriage/

quote:

Yesterday a jury convicted Purvi Patel, the Indiana woman arrested after miscarrying and seeking help at the ER, after five hours of deliberation. She faces a maximum sentence of 70 years in prison.

Patel was found guilty of two mutually contradictory charges � feticide and felony neglect of a dependent. The former charge only holds if Patel intentionally terminated her pregnancy causing a miscarriage or stillbirth, while the latter only holds if she delivered a live, viable fetus. As Jessica Mason Pieklo explains, in order to try to cover both bases, prosecutors argued that Patel took abortion drugs that text messages indicated she�d ordered online �to induce a miscarriage but that instead of miscarrying, Patel delivered a live fetus that she abandoned.�

During the trial, the prosecution was unable to prove that Patel took abortion pills � the state�s own toxicologist admitted that he found no evidence of abortifacients in her body. And the only evidence that the fetus had been born alive � let alone was developed enough to actually be viable outside the uterus � was weak. But the jury still convicted on both counts.

# ¿ Feb 4, 2015 18:22

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Abortion: Fetus Masturbation