1 Bump

Changes in medicine should prompt new limits on abortion.... (LONG)

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/01/opinion/osler-abortion-viability/index.html?hpt=op_bn4

(CNN) -- Thirty-nine years ago, Roe v. Wade was decided. With the passage of nearly four decades, the landscape of abortion has changed in a way that should trouble even those who consider themselves pro-choice.

Right now, 10 states and the District of Columbia have no statutory time limit on when abortions can be performed, while five more states allow abortion up to the end of the second trimester (about 27 or 28 weeks). Yet, we know that by 28 weeks, the great majority of fetuses would survive birth. In other words, we allow the killing of viable infants in our country. This is a fact that progressives (including me) would rather not address.

As two Maryland abortion doctors face murder charges for allegedly performing late-term abortions, the issue now has a pair of human faces.

Drs. Steven Brigham and Nicola Riley were arrested after the discovery of what are alleged to be several viable fetuses in a freezer chest. The story only got stranger on New Year's Day, when a clinic apparently owned by Brigham burned to the ground in Florida. Important facts are still unknown, and the doctors have asserted their innocence regarding any late-term abortions.

There has been relatively little discussion of this case in progressive circles. It's no wonder that we would rather look away. The abortion debate has largely devolved into professional activists screaming at each other on television and at street protests. We don't want to be like those people.

We are also haunted by the ragged remains of the Supreme Court opinion in Roe v. Wade. Despite being disavowed by subsequent opinions and some of the individual justices, one part of that precedent lives on in the statutes of some states and the practices of several doctors: The assertion in Roe's majority opinion that "viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks)."

The scientific claim that viability (the ability of a fetus to live outside the womb) "usually" occurs at 28 weeks has been undermined by medical advances over the past 38 years.

Children who would have died if born late in the second trimester in 1973 would more than likely live if they were born now. A Swedish study in 2009 found that preterm babies born late in the second trimester who are given intensive care survive at surprising rates: 53% of those born at 23 weeks live, 67% at 24 weeks, and by 25 weeks, 82% of the babies survive. (Sweden's health care system makes it possible to reliably track survival rates, but the type of care provided there is similar to that available in the United States).

In the same way that the law had to change to accommodate advances in DNA evidence that can exonerate those on death row, state laws must change to accommodate that with modern medical care, a child born at 27 weeks is very likely not only going to live, but live a fairly normal life.

We progressives tend to revere science, and there are few scientific proofs more convincing than those former preterm infants who live and thrive all around us. Though late-term abortions are only a small fraction of the total number of terminated pregnancies, it remains a defining issue for our society.

As someone who works against the death penalty, trying to save the lives of people who have committed murder, I have a moral obligation to set my feet, breathe in deeply and honestly admit that prosecutors are morally in the right to pursue cases where they believe viable fetuses are being aborted in violation of the law. A life is ended, and that is murder, if the facts so prove.

Some will see any accommodation on abortion as "appeasement" of conservatives, but this attitude is nothing less than the adoption of hard-line evidence-ignoring tactics that progressives so often (and properly) decry in groups such as the National Rifle Association. We may disagree about whether life begins at conception, but it is now irrefutable that life is viable at 27 weeks. To deny this plainly observable fact is akin to denying the existence of evolution or global warming.

Much as Troy Davis (who was executed in Georgia last year despite troubling exculpatory evidence) and Hank Skinner (who received a stay of his execution in Texas to allow DNA testing to be pursued) personified the problems with the death penalty, there are those who do so just as starkly when we ponder late-term abortion.

For me, that person is named Rees. On a hot summer day in Waco, Texas, his proud grandfather carried him across the street for me to meet, months after his birth at about 24 weeks. His eyes were clear in the Texas sun, he was wrapped in a blue-and-white blanket, and he was surrounded by love.

Opinion article... Agree?  Disagree? Thoughts and all the same old questions.

Answer Question
  • SHARE THIS QUESTION:
  •  
amazinggrace83

Asked by amazinggrace83 at 3:32 PM on Feb. 2, 2012 in Parenting Debate

41866 Level 29
Answers (25)
  • You know I'm pro choice. But the more I read, the more I hear, I'm moving towards the other side of the fence.
    FreeForAll

    Answer by FreeForAll at 3:43 PM on Feb. 2, 2012

    Credits: 63677 Level 34 1 star Parenting Debate 101
    Found an answer to your question?
    Like us on Facebook!
  • I am against all abortion, but the article is correct in that medicine has come so far that babies are being born much earlier and surviving. For me it hits a personal front because my dh had a son born at 23 weeks. He lived for 7 days and his remains were given to my dh and his now ex for burial. He had his own casket, and has a beautiful headstone in the cemetery. It seems strange and wrong to me that my dh buried his son who under Roe vs Wade could have been considered nothing more than a fetus who could have legally been aborted. My dh loved his son, and he had a good change of survival until he caught meningitis. So know these babies older then my dh's son are being treated as nothing but a tissue mass seems morally wrong to me.
    gemgem

    Answer by gemgem at 3:45 PM on Feb. 2, 2012

    Credits: 147884 Level 42 1 star1 star1 star Parenting Debate Major
    Found an answer to your question?
    Like us on Facebook!
  • I really dislike the "i have the moral high ground approach" that the author uses.

    UpSheRises

    Answer by UpSheRises at 3:46 PM on Feb. 2, 2012

    Credits: 48774 Level 31 1 star1 star Parenting Debate Minor
    Found an answer to your question?
    Like us on Facebook!
  • You know I'm pro choice. But the more I read, the more I hear, I'm moving towards the other side of the fence.
    Answer by FreeForAll 14 minutes ago

    Sarcasm? I can't tell....
    amazinggrace83

    Comment by amazinggrace83 (original poster) at 3:58 PM on Feb. 2, 2012

    Credits: 41866 Level 29 1 star Parenting Debate 101
  • I really dislike the "i have the moral high ground approach" that the author uses.

    Answer by UpSheRises 12 minutes ago

    Other than that.... what is your opinion on his opinion lol
    amazinggrace83

    Comment by amazinggrace83 (original poster) at 3:59 PM on Feb. 2, 2012

    Credits: 41866 Level 29 1 star Parenting Debate 101
  • No, sincerity, actually.
    FreeForAll

    Answer by FreeForAll at 4:06 PM on Feb. 2, 2012

    Credits: 63677 Level 34 1 star Parenting Debate 101
    Found an answer to your question?
    Like us on Facebook!
  • Shocked.... Not in a bad way lol
    amazinggrace83

    Comment by amazinggrace83 (original poster) at 4:09 PM on Feb. 2, 2012

    Credits: 41866 Level 29 1 star Parenting Debate 101
  • I don't know how to really put it...but yeah, I am definitely uneasy with a lot of things that 'my' side has to say. It's weird.
    FreeForAll

    Answer by FreeForAll at 4:12 PM on Feb. 2, 2012

    Credits: 63677 Level 34 1 star Parenting Debate 101
    Found an answer to your question?
    Like us on Facebook!
  • I don't think judgments should be based on viability, but on whether or not natural labor has begun.
    SWasson

    Answer by SWasson at 4:15 PM on Feb. 2, 2012

    Credits: 73234 Level 35 1 star1 star Parenting Debate Minor
    Found an answer to your question?
    Like us on Facebook!
  • WOW! What an article.
    Thank you for sharing.
    I have always been pro choice, though I myself believe it is murdering an unborn child.
    I also agree that the laws need to be changed with increase in knowledge.
    Dardenella

    Answer by Dardenella at 4:30 PM on Feb. 2, 2012

    Credits: 79873 Level 36 1 star1 star Parenting Debate Minor
    Found an answer to your question?
    Like us on Facebook!
Need more information? Get answers in less than 5 minutes. Ask your question now!
Or search CafeMom Answers:
 
Advertisement
Advertisement