Why would someone need a late term abortion? Did it take them 8 months to realize they didn’t want the baby?
What kind of medical conditions suddenly appear in the mother that necessitate the procedure to ensure her health?
I think it’s common sense that a partial birth abortion is safer to the mother than an en utero abortion of a 7-9 month old fetus. But why would someone medically need to terminate their pregnancy in the first place? What kind of conditions cause this necessity? Any examples? Any recent stats or anything that shows how many PBAs were performed and why?
I’m assuming that if a person does not want their baby, then they will terminate the fetus early. Why wait until the last minute to decide? And if the mother wants the baby, but doctors think its too risky and she should abort it, then why? What causes a situation like that? And are there any cases of that situation actually occurring?
I can give you one near-example, and that was my own daughter. Had she been a few days younger, we would have needed a D&E.
What happened was an infection in her placenta (basically the amniotic sac got a hole in it, bacteria got in where it shouldn’t, and grew on the placenta). I had a slightly elevated temp and had bleeding and leaking amniotic fluid. For my health, she needed to be removed so that I could get the IV antibiotics I needed, the infected placenta could be removed and only secondarily so she herself didn’t catch the infection. I was 23 weeks and 6 days along. That’s just at the beginning end of theoretically able to live, with about a 50% chance, and of those 50% that live, 30% have some permanent disability. So it was decided to try to save her. Had it happened 7 days earlier, she wouldn’t have been saved - no hospital that I’ve heard of knowingly attempts to save a baby before 23 weeks. (The recent 22 weeker in Florida was due to a calculation error on an ultrasound - they thought she was 23 weeks.)
Because we tried to save her (and did, by the way, she’s Practically Perfect In Every Way), they did a c-section. That was not without risk for me, not only the normal emergency c-section risks, but remember I also had that infection going on. Furthermore, they had to do a vertical incision to get her out because it was so early in the pregnancy - meaning that every future delivery I have will have to be c-section, again increasing my risks, and every pregnancy will be at a slightly higher chance of uterine rupture because of that scar. (Uterine rupture pretty much means death by hemorrhage, unless you happen to be standing outside an ER when it happens.)
If it had been a week earlier and she not viable, a D&E would have been the far safer option for me, in that pregnancy and in future ones. Because I had that infection going and the placenta started to abrubt (tear away too soon), speed was indeed of the essence, and the illegal procedure might have been the best medical choice.
Another situation would be if a woman was diagnosed with cancer. Just the other day I read about a woman who was diagnosed with cancer during pregnancy. She chose not to have an abortion and recently died (a few months after the birth of a healthy child)*. Some women would make the choice to abort the child and receive chemo treatments.
*I can’t remember where I read this story and I can’t find a link to it…sorry.
I think you need to define what you mean by “late term” abortion. Pro-lifers tend to use that term to apply to 2nd trimester abortions as well as 3rd. Abortions in the 3rd trimester are extremely rare, and usually the fetus is either already dead or has severe abnormalities which would not allow them to survive outside the womb.
For the purpose of this discussion, “Late term abortion” means “An abortion occuring so late in the pregnancy that a PBA becomes much more practical and safer than a traditional abortion.”
If there exists a situation in the 2nd trimester or even the 1st where a doctor would say “You know, because of the risks to your health, I believe you should not have this abortion now. You should wait until you are ready to deliver and we will perform a PBA at that time.” then I’d like to hear it.
Basically, I want to learn if there is really a practical need for PBA vs en utero abortions. And if so, then why?
And also, I’d like to know whose having 2nd and 3rd trimester abortions? Is it the indecisive crowd, the sick baby crowd, or the sick mother crowd? I’m sure it is probably some percentage of each.
Further, I’m trying to determine what the practical need for a PBA is. I hear a lot of “it’s safer and less invasive for the mother than a nonPBA abortion that late in the pregnancy.” My immediate thought is "well, that’s obvious. But WHY would she be needing an abortion that late in the pregnancy.
One more question:
What is the minimum gestation period to perform a PBA? Obviously, one cannot be performed at 2 weeks. When does the PBA become a safer and more practical procedure than the suction-probe method.
Ah. See that’s the info I need.
From what I’ve been hearing lately (granted, I’m sorta forced to watch Fox News 9 hours a day) a PBA is performed at around the 8th or 9th month to a healthy but unwanted baby. The baby is delivered half-way or more (maybe just a foot is left in the vagina), and the baby’s brain is sucked out.
That’s a complete load of crap (I’m speaking of Fox, not you). I’m guessing that Fox uses the phrase “late-term abortion” delibreately to mislead viewers into thinking it happens in the 3rd trimester. Abortions in he 3rd trimester are only performed for urgent medical reasons. Purely elective abortions in the 3rd trimester are virtually non-existent and are already illegal in most states anyway.
Also, IDX does not pull the fetus outside of the body, it pulls the head out of the cervix, not all the way out of the body. The skull has to be crushed to get it the rest of the way out.
Do we really know that? The cites that I’ve seen say we don’t have statistcs after 20 weeks-- all abortions after 20 weeks are lumped into the “after 20 weeks” category. Now, it would make sense that more are closer to 20 weeks than further away, but we really don’t know for sure. From wikipedia on Late Term Abortions:
Also of interest, from the same entry in wikipedia:
Your cite still conflates the non-medical, political phrase “late-term” with 3rd trimester. Only a fraction of 1% of all abortions are performed in the 3rd trimester and only for medical reasons.
“Late-term abortion” is a medically meaningless term. Elective abortions don’t happen in the 3rd trimester, regardless of what pro-life propganda would have you believe.
That doesn’t make sense - the cervix is the smallest part. If it can get through that, it can get through the vagina. What I’ve read is that the body is extracted feet first, the skull then pierced with a long instrument while on the uterine side of the cervix, so it can then make it through the cervix without full dilation to 10 cms like an induced delivery.
Some reasons might not be medical. One might be a legal situation, such as parental notification laws, either going through the courts or waiting until age 18. Another reason might be a change in the relationship between the mother and the father.
It’s hard to elaborate at all without getting political, so I’ll just put these out there as things that could cause the decision to take effect later than it would otherwise.
I’ve heard that this type of abortion often happens during the 2nd or early part of the 3rd trimester if the fetus dies in utero, though I don’t know why it’s safer than a traditional abortion at that point.
A more developed fetus has to be broken up in some way to get it out. It can be broken up in utero (a regular D&E) and taken out in pieces or it can be partially extracted intact (as WhyNot described), have the skull crushed and then be removed from the body (this is the now banned IDX procedure). The IDX is safer and quicker because it requires fewer passes through the cervix. This law basically says the fetus has to be torn apart in the uterus instead being extracted as intactly as possible. It doesn’t do a thing for the fetus, it just mandates a less safe procedure for the woman.
Another reason IDX (aka "D&X) is more safe is that (sorry, there’s no non-gruesome way to put this) anytime something is cut into pieces, you increase the risk that a piece will be left behind. For the very same reason a natural miscarriages or a “regular” abortion needs to be followed up with a doctor or midwife, a D&E runs a very real risk of serious infection or death from retained placental or fetal parts.