woman fakes cancer to get a late-term abortion

But that's not the most appalling part. During the induced labor abortion the baby was born alive, at 22½ weeks, weighing just 1 pound. The baby lived for approximately 20 minutes and received no life-saving help from hospital staff, even though there was a chance it might have been able to survive with medical help.

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/05/320...ing-cancer-get-abortion-thats-not-worst-part/

 

So? What's your point?


People break the law. And she was caught and charged......is there a problem?

 

Maybe when late-term abortions are allowed for health reasons there needs to be more safeguards to make sure the woman truly has a serious enough medical condition to justify it.

I remember reading one outrageous case from many years ago where the doctor checked off the box for "fetal abnormality" so the woman would legally be allowed to get the abortion. The "abnormality" turned out to be that the woman was pregnant with twins.

 

got any proof of that, given the number of times you have posted fake things you will excuse me if I treat this latest thing with a great deal of suspicion.

22 1/2 weeks is not a late-term abortion.

 

22 weeks is not late-term?

 

Do me a favour and stop trying to hide you inane comments, for once have a little politeness and quote who you are responding to.

No 22 weeks is not late-term, there is no consensus as to when "late-term" actually is

A late-term abortion often refers to an induced abortion procedure that occurs after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late". Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term. The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_termination_of_pregnancy

Choosing 16 weeks, 18 weeks, 20 weeks etc is just an arbitrary decision by the individual, you choose 16 weeks, I choose 24 weeks, neither is right, neither is wrong.

 

That does seem to be the attitude of pro-choicers, that it's neither right nor wrong.

This one came out at 22 weeks:



Fortunately it had a happy ending.

https://au.lifestyle.yahoo.com/prac...y-stella-born-at-just-22-weeks-and-five-days/

 

If you are going to quote me, quote everything and stop cherry picking comments to suit, or simply don't bother to respond.

No it is not just the attitude of pro-choice people, it is a fact that the term "late-term" has no consensus as to when it starts, just as there is no consensus as to the "life begins at .." question.

Anything you choose and anything I choose about when late-term starts is nothing but an arbitrary choice.

Great that-that baby survived, now all you have to do is answer the question .. was it a wanted pregnancy?

 

She'll need a cup in prison.

 

Do you have any other sources for the news piece in question? I don't trust just one source of news as things can be a little bit iffy on detailes and such things like that.

 

I can't find anything about this but your link .

In your link there is a hearing and she's been charged.

AGAIN : There was a crime committed, the perpetrator caught, a hearing......what is the problem?

Has the hospital staff been charged with a crime?

Did anyone get away with a crime?

 

I didn't see anywhere in the link that said the woman had a kid or kids.....do you know what a "Mom" is? It's someone who had a kid or kids....did she?

And if she is, I'll ask what relevance it has to her alleged crime.

 

All I can find is in media reports where it says "documents state", I'd like to see a copy of that or those documents before accepting this as fact. none of the media reports lists the condition of the "baby".

If there was negligence on the side of the doctors in violation of the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 then that should be investigated and if necessary the relevant people charged.

This is just another of the OP's authors attempts to imply that doctors who perform abortions are violating federal laws instead of it being what it is, the possible violation of federal law by a specific doctor etc .. he wants to burn the house down based on the alleged actions of a single case. By his logic all religion should be illegal based on the actions of the clergy who are paedophiles.

It has a name it's called guilt by association and is a fallacy.

 

22 weeks is damn near 6 months! I also would like to know what is considered "late term?"

 

There is no consensus of when late-term starts, each person chooses a point which to them is late-term ergo it is an arbitrary decision.

 

From another article:

http://www.abc15.com/news/region-ph...ncer-story-to-qualify-for-tax-funded-abortion


But wait .....aren't all abortion doctors scum of the earth who only want to do as many abortions as they can? Why did this one turn her in?

 

Maybe he was afraid if he didn't report the fraud to authorities he could later get in trouble for defrauding the state's health agency. As horrible is this sounds, the bigger issue here might not have been the life of the baby, but rather the simple fact that this despicable woman engaged in fraud to get the state to pay for her procedure.

We can also speculate that the doctor might not have been too happy finding out he had been tricked into aborting a fetus at 22 weeks, thinking it was necessary.
This was a professional OB/GYN, not some run-of-the-mill doctor running an abortion mill. Even among doctors who work at abortion clinics, the majority of them are reluctant to want to terminate a pregnancy that late into the game. Maybe because they realize it's not just a lifeless clump of cells.

 

I have in other articles as well that documents states that she had an abortion, before the doctor called this in fact, I would have doubts about these so called documents if none where posted in the articles. The born alive baby act was not a nation wide law, such a stupid name by the way.

 

Why??
If they're born alive and outside of the woman. What exactly would you call it then?

 

It's a way for POLTICAL leaders to get around abortion and nice cherry picking my post. It's also makes it seems like doctors don't already try to help the baby after it was born in obgyn's. Abortions are a freaking right given to us by Roe vs Wade. Apparently, you don't understand enough POLTICAL jargon to understand why I said it was a stupid name. Note I am not trying to insult you just pointing out why this is POLTICAL jargon.

 

22 weeks plus a few days is the world record earliest survival of a premature birth. Despite the advances in medical science in the intervening years, until recently the record stood for two decades. It's the very edge of viabiltiy.

 

Why is this not illegal? This is blatant infanticide. <Rule 2>

Marco Rubio was right. Future generations will look back on us as barbarians for letting these things happen.

 

Actually it is illegal, ever since the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act was passed in 2002. (before then it basically was legal)

But just making a law against something does not necessarily stop it.
22 weeks is very premature, the baby does not have good odds of survival, and even if it does survive there is a fair chance of long-term developmental impairment. It's also expensive to put a baby in the neonatal intensive care unit. In all honesty, many medical practitioners would rather turn the other way and just leave the baby to die.

There have been cases where they left the baby to die and it didn't die, and then they were basically forced to give it medical attention 24 hours later. But these cases don't happen at 22 weeks. At that gestational age the lungs are so underdeveloped that the baby would need to be immediately put on oxygen to have any chance.

 

"""""" rather the simple fact that this despicable woman engaged in fraud to get the state to pay for her procedure.""""


And as such has nothing to do with abortion....it has to do with fraud , law breaking. Why did you post it here?




"""Even among doctors who work at abortion clinics, the majority of them are reluctant to want to terminate a pregnancy that late into the game. Maybe because they realize it's not just a lifeless clump of cells""""


Doctors know more about what a fetus is than some "others".



NO one, no doctor, NO one posting here has EVER claimed a fetus is a lifeless clump of cells.

First you say the doctors are "run-of-the mill doctors(whatever the hell that is) and then you ADMIT """Even among doctors who work at abortion clinics, the majority of them are reluctant to want to terminate a pregnancy that late into the game"". And they don't have to because most abortions are performed much sooner as you well know.

 

The Born Alive Infant Protection Act does not require medical "treatment that will do no more than temporarily prolong the act of dying when death is imminent."

http://www.legispeak.com/bill/2015/hb15-1112