[twinzplus3]

Okay I looked it up but didn't read the whole thing. 3rd trimester abortions are legal in some states (although gosh I would really suspect a doctor that would perform one) but the partial birth abortion procedure is not. It is technically defined as the birth of a baby up to the navel of the baby (meaning the baby is still alive and is out of the mother up to its navel) OR if it is head down, the birth of a live baby up to its head. So in other words the baby is alive and half way out of the mother and then it is killed. That procedure is illegal with the partial birth abortion ban.

[siageah]

The term "partial birth" abortion is not a medical term, but a political one. So yes, there is a ban on them, but what they actually *are* is still a huge grey area. There are doctors performing procedures today that they have determined to be in the best interest of their patients that may, or may not, be illegal. Because the law was written by politicians and not by the medical community it is not entirely known what the law bans and what it does not.

That said, third trimester abortions and/or terminations are still extremely rare. They are not a procedure that is either advised lightly, nor provided lightly.

[alabamarose]

I do not agree with abortion of any kind. Murder is murder, there's no justification for it.

[allisonx]

Having miscarried, I don't see how anyone could choose to abort their child. It's so sad.

[mollymae]

Originally Posted by alabamarose

I do not agree with abortion of any kind. Murder is murder, there's no justification for it.

What about if the mothe will die if she continues the pregnancy?

[twinzplus3]

That's a trick question. Doctors just don't always get it right. Those first two babies below? I was supposed to terminate that first pg bc "she was so profoundly retarded she'd never have any type of normal life" Um. . .not even close. That 2nd one was supposed to be profoundly retarded as well needing hugely expensive medical care. Again, they messed up.

Then there's the whole 'selective reduction' thing where terminating one or more of the babies will save the other babies and the mom. But a mother chooses to put herself in that situation. That does not occur naturally. So again, that should be justified?

But legally speaking, no I don't oppose an 'abortion' as a life saving measure. Generally then though, it's not termed abortion.

[mollymae]

Your right doctors don't always get it right.

But to say they is never any justification for abortion is a huge generalization.

[twinzplus3]

I agree. . .but like I said, at least here, terminating a pregnancy as a life saving measure for a mother is generally not referred to medically as abortion.

[mollymae]

Medically speaking over here a miscarriage and termination are both called an abortion on your medical notes. Which I find very odd.

[twinzplus3]

Originally Posted by mollymae

Medically speaking over here a miscarriage and termination are both called an abortion on your medical notes. Which I find very odd.

A miscarriage here is called a spontaneous abortion. And I agree. . .it is very odd and I must say as someone who has miscarried and is vehemently opposed to abortion it is extremely unsettling. Especially if no one explains to you the difference.