Judge Blocks Partial-Birth Abortion Ban

[Tiger Al 0]

A federal judge in Nebraska blocked implementation of a federal ban on certain late-term abortions Wednesday, less than an hour after President Bush signed the ban into law.

U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf issued a temporary restraining order against the law after a three-hour hearing on a lawsuit in Nebraska brought by abortion-rights supporters.

He said his order would apply only to the four doctors who filed the lawsuit, but the ruling could extend beyond Nebraska because the physicians are licensed to practice in Alabama, Georgia, Iowa, New York, South Carolina and Virginia.

Kopf cited concerns that the law did not contain an exception for preserving the health of the woman seeking the abortion.

LINK

I agree with banning partial-birth abortions. I would, however, like to see a caveat to allow it for endangered mothers, birth defects and incest/rape.

[Weagle98 119]

To this day (to my knowledge) this procedure has not been used to help an endangered mother. Of course some of the cases have stated it was used for this reason but when analyzed they state that the mental state of the mother was so that it would have been mentally stressful for the mother to have the baby. So the abortion is not mentally stressful? This will be a loophole but then again I sure as heck don't want my wife to die in labor either.

Birth defects. Where do you draw the line? MS or deformed arm. What if the baby is blind? I just have trouble playing god and saying this baby has a right to try to make it in this world but this one over here doesn't. Personal opinion.

Incest/Rape, this one is hard but surely the individual has plenty of time to make this decision before they need to have THIS operation performed.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

Testimony I've seen from doctors knowledgeable about the procedure said there are other methods for handling the life of the mother (and therefore the other ones you mention, TigerAl) that aren't barbaric and painful like this one.

And I'm sorry...this is a late-term procedure. If the girl hasn't decided by then, and her life isn't in danger, she made her decision months ago. It isn't the baby's fault and it shouldn't have to pay with not only it's life, but having a pair of scissors jammed into the base of its skull and then the brains being suctioned out.

What kind of Mengele disciple thought this procedure up?

[bammanmr 0]

If the girl hasn't decided by then, and her life isn't in danger, she made her decision months ago.

I agree.

[Tiger Al 0]

I agree with you 100%. My wife is pregnant now and has been two times before. Each time, because of my wife's age, our OB doc asks us if we want an amniocentesis or some other tests that will show birth defects. We always decline because it won't make a difference to us. We talked about what we'd do if one of the babies DID have something wrong and our conclusion was that we wouldn't abort either way, so why go through the procedures with the risks, albeit minimal, when the results wouldn't affect our decision.

I remember a patient I had a few years ago who had been recently diagnosed with lymphoma. I was doing a CT scan on her to see where the cancer had spread and when I got to her pelvis, I started seeing little bones! She had denied pregnancy and signed a release form to that effect, but she didn't know she was pregnant. I immediately stopped scanning her and discussed it with the radiologist. We found out later that she'd had an abortion because the baby never would've made it through the chemotherapy, and if the young girl was to have a chance to beat her cancer, therapy had to begin immediately.

I personally think abortion is wrong, but I've also never been in a situation where a girlfriend, acquantaince or my wife was pregnant and it was unwanted, either because I/she/we weren't mentally, emotionally or financially able to bear the enormous responsibility of raising a child. I've been lucky!!! Faced with those kinds of challenges, I can't say for certain what I'd do. But, as wrong as I think it is, it's not my place, or our government's, to tell you or your wife (husband for the ladies!) that you aren't allowed to make the decision for yourselves. But, make it quickly because partial-births are horrible.

Some adjunct issues that could help the abortion problem are making the adoption process more attractive here instead of countries overseas and better reproductive awareness classes in high schools. Sorry, I am a liberal!!!

[TitanTiger 20,510]

I personally think abortion is wrong, but I've also never been in a situation where a girlfriend, acquantaince or my wife was pregnant and it was unwanted, either because I/she/we weren't mentally, emotionally or financially able to bear the enormous responsibility of raising a child. I've been lucky!!! Faced with those kinds of challenges, I can't say for certain what I'd do. But, as wrong as I think it is, it's not my place, or our government's, to tell you or your wife (husband for the ladies!) that you aren't allowed to make the decision for yourselves. But, make it quickly because partial-births are horrible.

But Al, it is the government's place to protect innocent life. And I'm not even getting into the issue of life beginning at conception. I'm talking about a child that can live outside the womb, because that's when this procedure is used.

Some issues trump others. If we're talking about any other surgical procedure, whether it's a hysterectomy, having her tubes tied, breast augmentation, you name it, the woman should be able to do what she wants with her body. Period. It's her business. But there's a hierarchy of concerns to deal with in a pregnancy. The right to decide what to do with one's own body is trumped by a higher concern...the rights of a sentient being to live. In this scenario, those rights are in conflict. But the right to live MUST take precedence here. The loss of control over one's body in this situation is by far the lesser evil.

Some adjunct issues that could help the abortion problem are making the adoption process more attractive here instead of countries overseas and better reproductive awareness classes in high schools. Sorry, I am a liberal!!!

First of all, I completely agree with the adoption issue. We need to have a standard federal law regarding this that trumps the state laws. The process needs to be easier and the ability of the birth parents to change their mind and get the child back after it's been adopted needs to be severely curtailed. No one wants to pour their heart into a new child and then have it ripped from their home.

Interestingly on the reproductive awareness issue, my wife and I were discussing hypothetical scenarios the other day and we posed the following:

We are both opposed to abortion except for instances of the life of the mother (or permanent physical health) being in danger. We also don't like the idea of passing out condoms or other contraceptives in high schools and junior highs because of principle...we think it sends the wrong message about sexual activity.

That said, I would totally go for the whole sex-ed thing the liberals want: condoms, the pill, the classes, etc. IF AND ONLY IF, we would outlaw abortions with the only exception being the life or serious physical health of the mother. I might even go for it if they added rape or incest.

Why? The lives of those babies matters more to me than fighting over sex-ed. Abortion stats show that less than 3% of all abortions are done because of rape, incest, or life of the mother. Being able to save the lives of 97% of all the babies currently being killed because of some warped view of birth control would be worth it to me.

[DKW 86 7,440]

C Everett Koop and a large collection of OB/GYN's estimated that less than .5% of late term abortions are therapuetic.

The exception clause was restricted because the opposition insists that a 'mental health of the mother' clause be included in any situation. The abortionist gets to do the mental evaluation, not a trained pro.

Basically if the he/she considers the pregnancy an inconvenience he can sign his own forms, get the cash, do the abortion and effectively gut the law. That is why the 'health of the mother clause' is in such troble.

Folks, the OB/GYNs doing these procedures are, for the most part, considered the poorest trained, poorest educated, by their peers. This is an area in medicine where malpractice is almost unheard of. It is quick, easy, and very profitable money. Literally if they cannot do a real OB/GYN job, they can always do abortions.