Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was thinking that some premature babies born in the third trimester have trouble breathing, and if left to struggle on their own they will die. However, with a little assistance they will survive those first few hours after birth and be able to go home in a week or so. I have two perfectly healthy grandsons in grade school now, who were born premature.
I think more than a few late term abortions are based on the knowledge that the baby has a deformity. Envision a mother who knows her third trimester baby has spina bifida, and it's born in a botched abortion, where it has trouble breathing. So mom and doctor are having the conversation Northam described. You can fill in the rest.
The vast majority of abortions in the third trimester would be for conditions much more serious and lethal than spina bifida. Try something like anencephaly, when the baby essentially has no brain, and would have no quality of life.
Late term abortions are extremely uncommon. IIRC well over 90% of abortions occur in the first trimester. It is simply insulting (imo sexist) fear mongering to suggest that women who ‘don’t want their deformed babies’ would just let them suffocate/die. The context here is severely ill babies who will likely die anyway.
Why? Because prolonging its life would amount to torture.
Such is done to people all the time. In fact, ERs do EXACTLY what is being deliberately denied to the born alive infants whose mothers/families decide they don't want them... medical care that preserves and sustains life whereas the patient would otherwise die. Letting a born alive infant die due to lack of medical care is infanticide.
Who will pay for the millions in healthcare to keep those babies, born with congenital abnormalities that are incompatible with life, from dying (e.g. ventilator support, years in intensive care, industrial strength medications, tube feedings, emergency surgeries to keep from dying, etc....?)
Wait... Are you suddenly AGAINST "Medicare for ALL?" Seems lefties have no problem with forcing others to fund that. This is the same thing.
I was thinking that some premature babies born in the third trimester have trouble breathing, and if left to struggle on their own they will die. However, with a little assistance they will survive those first few hours after birth and be able to go home in a week or so. I have two perfectly healthy grandsons in grade school now, who were born premature.
My full-term youngest had respiration issues at birth and could not breathe without assistance. Without medical intervention, youngest would have died (THANK GOD the hospital staff put youngest on a respirator immediately and didn't assume I could "choose" to just let youngest die).
I was thinking that some premature babies born in the third trimester have trouble breathing, and if left to struggle on their own they will die. However, with a little assistance they will survive those first few hours after birth and be able to go home in a week or so. I have two perfectly healthy grandsons in grade school now, who were born premature.
And that's an EXCELLENT point. Everyone knows family and/or friends who've had premature babies born with severe health issues to the point where the mother is discharged from the hospital while the baby stays in the NICU for another 4 more months or more, artificial life support keeping the baby alive all that time.
Does anyone assume the mothers in those cases have the "option" to just let that baby die because it's too "inconvenient" to visit the NICU for several hours every day to spend time with the baby and keep up to date on the baby's condition with Hospital staff, pump milk both to feed the baby while in the NICU and keep lactating, etc.?
Want the right to let born alive babies that need medical support to sustain life die? Same should be true of heart attack sufferers, etc. No medical support. They either live without the help of medical intervention, or they die because without medical intervention and assistance, they're nonviable.
My full-term youngest had respiration issues at birth and could not breathe without assistance. Without medical intervention, youngest would have died (THANK GOD the hospital staff put youngest on a respirator immediately and didn't assume I could "choose" to just let youngest die).
Oh, good on you. It's just that your situation has eff-all to do with what is being discussed here. And you have no right - none whatsoever - to sit in judgment over those who were not so lucky as you were in having a viable newborn. Be grateful that you were saved a horrible decision, and have some damn empathy (you may want to google that) for those who face that sort of choice.
Want the right to let born alive babies that need medical support to sustain life die? Same should be true of heart attack sufferers, etc. No medical support. They either live without the help of medical intervention, or they die because without medical intervention and assistance, they're nonviable.
Hey, look! InformedConsent is about to stumble on to the world of advance directives, DNR orders and palliative care. Will hospice workers be termed murderers next? Stay tuned!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
