Intrade: 70.5% chance Obama will win third debate

[giblets]

Hardly anyone is killed with guns, so in practice we have a society free from gun violence.

JM

Firearm homicides a year: 11,493
Third trimester abortions a year: ~100

I don't even want to ban guns.

[Imran Siddiqui]

24 weeks is actually an important time point, because currently the only non-invasive test for chromosomal abnormalities (Downs, Spinal Bifida, etc.) is typically carried out at 22 weeks - this is a long ultrasound (~1 hour) comparing measurements of various parts of the fetus in order to determine the risk profile. Because invasive tests such as amniocentesis carry a nontrivial risk of inducing a miscarriage (between 0.2% and 0.5% depending on who you ask), many families prefer noninvasive tests when their initial risk profile (based on mother's age, father's age, and a few other factors) initially is sufficiently low that an amniocentesis would carry a higher risk than the risk of an abnormal fetus.

Once those scans are done (Around 20-22 weeks), the baby is assigned an updated risk profile; the parents then may choose to perform invasive tests or not as a result. If you get a low risk profile (say, 1 in 5000), many will choose not to perform additional testing. However, if you do get a higher profile, you'd take an amnio and see what the cause is (or, not - 'high risk' might be 1/100 or something, so still relatively low).

Either way, if they cut it back from 24 weeks to, say, 20, it would have two effects - one, you couldn't make the decision to abort based on the risk profile analysis; and two, as a result of that, a lot more amnios would be done (which can be done at 16 weeks), which would mean more miscarriages (or, deaths, from that point of view?).

Though, I'd imagine that a decent amount of those who would consider themselves strongly pro-choice would find it highly distastful to abort based on the child having Down's Syndrome, right?

[Jon Miller]

And I don't want to ban all third-trimester abortions.

Just most of them.

And I don't consider even 10 deaths as meaningless.

JM

[Jon Miller]

And it is the case that 100% of firearm homicides are banned.

JM

[Guynemer]

24 weeks is actually an important time point, because currently the only non-invasive test for chromosomal abnormalities (Downs, Spinal Bifida, etc.) is typically carried out at 22 weeks - this is a long ultrasound (~1 hour) comparing measurements of various parts of the fetus in order to determine the risk profile. Because invasive tests such as amniocentesis carry a nontrivial risk of inducing a miscarriage (between 0.2% and 0.5% depending on who you ask), many families prefer noninvasive tests when their initial risk profile (based on mother's age, father's age, and a few other factors) initially is sufficiently low that an amniocentesis would carry a higher risk than the risk of an abnormal fetus.

Once those scans are done (Around 20-22 weeks), the baby is assigned an updated risk profile; the parents then may choose to perform invasive tests or not as a result. If you get a low risk profile (say, 1 in 5000), many will choose not to perform additional testing. However, if you do get a higher profile, you'd take an amnio and see what the cause is (or, not - 'high risk' might be 1/100 or something, so still relatively low).

Either way, if they cut it back from 24 weeks to, say, 20, it would have two effects - one, you couldn't make the decision to abort based on the risk profile analysis; and two, as a result of that, a lot more amnios would be done (which can be done at 16 weeks), which would mean more miscarriages (or, deaths, from that point of view?).

24 weeks is also the current benchmark for viability. A little more than half of fetuses born at 24 weeks will eventually be discharged from the NICU alive; under 24 weeks, that percentage drops like a stone. Granted, the vast majority of those 24 weekers will never, ever, ever have anything even approaching "a normal life," but they can, at least, survive.

[giblets]

And I don't want to ban all third-trimester abortions.

Just most of them.

And I don't consider even 10 deaths as meaningless.

JM

Do you have any data on how many of those 100 third trimester abortions were for medical reasons? I'm under the impression that women who simply don't want a child don't wait that long. There are health problems that can't be discovered until then but are lethal for the fetus, IIUC.

[MRT144]

That wasn't legislating from the bench. 14th and 15th amendments. Abortion is never mentioned in the constitution.

Did a judge not invalidate the will of the people who approvef of discriminitory laws. Any action of a judge could be construed as legislating

[Ben Kenobi]

never, ever, ever have anything even approaching "a normal life," but they can, at least, survive.

My life isn't normal and never will be. Should I have been aborted?

[Ben Kenobi]

Do you have any data on how many of those 100 third trimester abortions were for medical reasons? I'm under the impression that women who simply don't want a child don't wait that long. There are health problems that can't be discovered until then but are lethal for the fetus, IIUC.

Something like 1 percent of all abortions done are for reasons other than 'personal choice and convenience'. These exceptions are well blown out of proportion with the reality.

[Guynemer]

Oh **** off. You know god damned well I'm not talking about hearing impairment.

[Ben Kenobi]

There is consensus on what murder is. There is not consensus on what a 5 week old fetus is. That is the difference.

So it's ok for a society to declare certain classes of unpersons as subhuman?

Biologically, you were a 5 week old embryo. All of us were - we couldn't have become who we are now without having been a 5 week old embryo, just like we were infants, toddlers and children at one point and time.

This is why abortion is wrong - it denies this biological truth that there is continuity of the person from conception onwards.

[Ben Kenobi]

You know god damned well I'm not talking about hearing impairment.

Frankly, no I don't. I've had medical professionals argue that had they had a child like me, they would have aborted the child if they had known early enough.

So where do you draw the line between, 'disabled', and 'not disabled enough, Guy? Right now society aborts something like 95 percent of all those with Down's syndrome.

The point is that a 'normal' life is irrelevant. Aborting people because they aren't 'like us' for having a disability is no different that aborting them because they have a different skin color.

[Ben Kenobi]

Maybe you've been lucky enough to never interact with a woman who has been raped. I have, many times. It is, psychologically, about the most terrifying, horrific experience a human being is ever likely to endure. And to force that woman, after having already been forced and violated in the most primal, humiliating way possible, to serve as an incubator for a embryo that she did not want, and was in fact forced upon her in every sense of the word, is beyond comprehension.

So the prescribed course of psychological treatment for pregnancy resulting from rape is an abortion? Getting an abortion isn't going to unrape these women, just the opposite. It compounds her suffering.

[MRT144]

So the prescribed course of psychological treatment for pregnancy resulting from rape is an abortion? Getting an abortion isn't going to unrape these women, just the opposite. It compounds her suffering.

How would you know what an abortion does to women?

[MRT144]

My life isn't normal and never will be. Should I have been aborted?

Yes, but for other reasons.