Abortion Doctor Gunned Down at Church

[Patroklos]

1. You're ignoring my point about the fact that for most women, it's emotionally difficult for them to go through an abortion. So many other men seem to think that it's a light-hearted decision for a woman to choose to get an abortion.

Its irrelevant as to whether it was done for convenience or not.

2. I disagree with MikeH on that - I don't think quality of life of a child should be a factor on whether or not to get an abortion except for SEVERE conditions. Even then, if such conditions can be determined in the early stage of pregnancy, I would be opposed to a woman getting a late term abortion later on.

I was pretty sure that we were more in agreement here than opposed. While I fully recognize the convienience of aborting children with severe conditions, when did it it become acceptable to kill people for convienence?

That last question is not for you Mr. Fun, I have the same postion as you when it comes to late term abortions.

[MrFun]

okey dokey

[Patroklos]

DP

[Arrian]

when did it it become acceptable to kill people for convienence?

Until we developed some of the fancier medical techniques in our arsenal, the babies I'm talking about would've died quickly (and at least some of them would take mom with 'em). Now we can keep 'em alive for a few months & 3 brain surgeries before they die anyway! Wonderful, isn't it!? Quality of life is an issue not only for the mother, but also for the fetus. I think both matter.

Oh and my read of history is that we are and have been just FINE with killing people for convenience. They just have to be the right sort of people.

-Arrian

[Guynemer]

Kansas law makes it illegal to abort after 22 weeks without risk to the mothers life.

22 weeks is not truely viable. It is only partially viable, and then the majority of times with damage to the foetus. I'll try to find the facts this afternoon or tomorrow, bit busy with my last exam in an hour and a half though.

24 weeks is about the limit to give good odds to survival, and IIRC, 28 weeks and after the baby has good enough odds on survival to (IMO) not allow abortian except in cases that risk the mother.

Taking the above into account calling a abortion on a 23 week old foetus "late term" is politicizing the use of the word and removing scientific meaning from it.

This. All of this. Thread can be closed now.

[Lorizael]

Thread can be closed now.

You had your chance.

[Patroklos]

Until we developed some of the fancier medical techniques in our arsenal, the babies I'm talking about would've died quickly (and at least some of them would take mom with 'em). Now we can keep 'em alive for a few months & 3 brain surgeries before they die anyway! Wonderful, isn't it!? Quality of life is an issue not only for the mother, but also for the fetus. I think both matter.

We have medically acceptable rules when killing is an option, and almost all of them revolve around being brain dead or similar extreme degredation. The medical community has been pushing back the time when brain devolpment occurs to eariler and earlier within a pregnancy, there is no reason not to apply the standards we use elsewhere to this.

I am not against all abortions, you know this so don't get snippy with me

Oh and my read of history is that we are and have been just FINE with killing people for convenience. They just have to be the right sort of people.

If there was a point in this I fail to see it.

[DinoDoc]

I agree that aborting late term (@ 22+ weeks?) for "birth control" reasons is ****ed up. However, based on the testimonials up over at the Daily Dish, it appears that women carrying fetuses with terrible defects (as in guaranteed short life lived in agony or guaranteed ~10 years of vegetation) traveled to Kansas for Dr. Tiller's services. How they stack up as a percentage, I have no idea, but for those women it wasn't "birth control."

Interesting. Perhaps Guy would be the best person to answer this, what sorts of disorders are we unable to detect until the fetus is late term? It's my understanding that those are incredibly rare and not the sort of thing one can build a million $ a year practice on.

[Guynemer]

You had your chance.

Touche.


To expand on Krill's point:

The vast majority of fetuses born at 22 weeks will not even have an attempt made to resuscitate them. They are simply not viable. Many don't even have an oral cavity developed enough to support intubation and ventilation, let alone skin to maintain hydration and electrolytes. A vanishingly small amount that are resuscitated (probably those who have had their dates simply underestimated) might actually live long enough to leave the hospital many, many months (or even years) later, but none of them would have anything close to a normal life. They would all have severe, debilitating brain damage (ie, be nonverbal), likely be missing at least several digits or limbs, have chronic renal failure, chronic pulmonary failure, require tracheostomy and home ventilators, dialysis, feeding tubes, colostomies, etc. etc. etc. The quality of life would be, at best, zero.

At 24 weeks, the picture is quite a bit better, but by no means good. This fetuses are viable, by and large. However, the number that will survive long enough to actually leave the hospital is barely over 50%. The majority of those fortunate enough to survive (~65-75%) have much the same problems as detailed above. Ultimately, we're talking around 15% of 24 weekers have what we would consider good quality of life, though most of them will still have some chronic repurcusions. (i.e. asthma, cognitive impairments, emotional impairments, epilepsy, palsy, etc.)

Once we get to 28 weeks, that's when things get good. Very rarely will such a birth not produce a viable child who survives to the end of their postbirth hospitalization, and most of them won't have any serious longterm deficits, though they are still at some increased risk for asthma, cognitive problems, etc.

[Guynemer]

DD:

There are actually a large number of various disorders and deformities that may not be detected until late in the pregnancy. Fetal ultrasound is quite good, but it is far from perfect, and highly operator-dependant.

In particular, a number of severe, crippling heart deformities (such as hypoplastic left heart syndrome, as an example) may not be detected until lateterm. Several renal abnormalities may not be detected either, as the malfunctioning kidneys affect the amount of amniotic fluid.


I am reminded of a couple of horrific experiences during my residency here in Columbus. In one case, while working the NICU, we knew at some point in the coming weeks a child would be delivered who had some unspecified lung abnormality--the lungs were significantly underdeveloped for the estimated fetal age. The cause was unknown, and something that simply could not be deliniated on the ultrasound. As the end of the month rolled around, I thought we might dodge the bullet and the next team would have to deal with it. But in that last week, we were called to the delivery--the child at this point was ~30 weeks. The plan was to deliver the child via c-section, but leave the cord attached to the placenta until we could determine what exactly was going on--this way, the child would at least be getting oxygen through his cord.

The child was removed from the womb, and an endoscope was placed down the trachea to try to visualize the lungs. The trachea just ended. Full stop. It did not connect to the lungs. There was no way for the child to breathe, and nothing we could do to make her breathe. The cord was cut, the child was brought over to our warmer, and I watched her struggle to suck air into lungs that had no connection to the outside world for about a minute, and she died.

[Lorizael]

I have no idea what the statistics are on this, but I wonder how many poor pregnant mothers get very little, very poor, or no medical treatment prior to delivery.

[chequita guevara]

Show me a perfect system for anything, and I'll give you a cookie.

Math, now give me my cookie, *****!

[Patroklos]

They would all have severe, debilitating brain damage (ie, be nonverbal), likely be missing at least several digits or limbs, have chronic renal failure, chronic pulmonary failure, require tracheostomy and home ventilators, dialysis, feeding tubes, colostomies, etc. etc. etc. The quality of life would be, at best, zero.

Sounds like quite a few severe car accident victims, to the glue factory with them!

More seriously, are there any physical damages besides brain damage that allows a doctor to declare a patient forfiet?

[chequita guevara]

Sounds like quite a few severe car accident victims, to the glue factory with them!

The world of difference being the car crash victims already had a personality, intelligence, self-awareness. Those in permanent vegetative states ought to be euthanized, but people in long term comas can and do recover, occasionally, though they tend to slip back into coma later.

[Patroklos]

The world of difference being the car crash victims already had a personality, intelligence, self-awareness. Those in permanent vegetative states ought to be euthanized, but people in long term comas can and do recover, occasionally, though they tend to slip back into coma later.

Yes, you have just very clearly pointed out the difference between a child with a not fully developed mind and a vegetative car accident victim without a fully developed mind; one of them is near guarunteed to develope to human standards.

You missed the point entirely though che. The point is all those horrible physical and mental handicaps Guy mentioned can all be had from a particularly bad car accident, yet despite the quality of life issues we don't mercy kill them. If they have a mind, or are in a position where there is a real chance for that mind to exist again, they cannot be killed. The analogy of a fetus with a developed brain and a vegetable brain dead adult is not valid.