usregimechange
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-07-05 02:34 PM
Original message |
Since abortions are restricted in the states in 3rd tri. does "choice" |
|
not exist in the 3rd trimester?
|
usregimechange
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-07-05 02:36 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I supose there is informed consent even in medical cases |
|
Edited on Tue Jun-07-05 02:36 PM by usregimechange
but is that considered "choice?"
|
Warpy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-07-05 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
7. yes, and that's where the choice comes in |
|
Third trimester abortions are extremely rare and done only for the most tragic of circumstances. Every attempt is made to preserve the life of a statistically viable fetus. Only when the health of the mother is so precarious that she is unable to survive either induced labor or a c-section is a D&X of a viable fetus considered. The rest of the cases involve deformities that would not allow the survival of the fetus much past birth, such as anencephaly detected late in pregnancy.
These things should always be decided by the woman in question and her doctor. Women don't get third trimester abortions so they can fit into their swimsuits on a cruise. They do it for the most tragic of reasons and because there is no other real choice except injury or death.
Politicians and preachers have no business making medical decisions for people they don't know, not now, not ever. The decision making process falls squarely upon the people involved. Preachers may be consulted for pastoral care, but that's where their input should be.
|
BlueIris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-07-05 02:44 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Thanks for this thread. n/t |
Orangepeel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-07-05 02:45 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Federally, no. It does not. |
|
Roe v. Wade allows states to prohibit abortion in (roughly) the third trimester, as long as provisions are made to protect the life of the woman.
There may be some states that allow unrestricted choice in the third trimester, but I don't know if there are or what they are. But, Federally, choice does not exist in the 3rd trimester.
That's what angers me the most about people who want to "compromise" on reproductive rights. Roe v. Wade is already a compromise along the lines of what most Americans say they think ought to be the case.
|
theboss
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-07-05 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. Casey is the case here not Roe |
|
Casey v. Planned Parenthood. O'Conner sets all kind of weird tests.
|
FourStarDemocrat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-07-05 02:46 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Choice doesn't exist in the 3rd trimester except in a medical emergency |
|
Although a lot of freepers try to ignorantly argue otherwise..
|
lynne
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-07-05 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
- and even in the case of a medical emergency, the choice should be to deliver a pre-term baby vs. continuing the pregnancy as babies without birth defect or disease are easily viable by 6 months gestation.
|
tk2kewl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-07-05 02:49 PM
Response to Original message |
5. I certainly hope 6 months is long enough for people to choose |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 09:19 PM
Response to Original message |