Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Arizona Defends Its Restrictive Abortion Ban Because Fetal Birth Defects Are ‘The Woman’s Problem’

Posted by   + Show Post

A federal appeals court panel on Mondayconsidered Arizona’s stringent abortion ban, which has the distinction of being the most restrictive in the nation because it criminalizes almost all abortions after just 20 weeks. Arizona already bans abortion after viability — which is generally considered to occur around week 23 or 24 of pregnancy — but the bill in question would go even further, redefining gestation in a way that would ban abortion at least two weeks before other states do, potentially as early as week 18.

The judges on the panel questioned HB 2036′s potential to harm the women who do not realize the medical risks of their pregnancies until after the arbitrary cut-off, when they are no longer permitted to seek abortions. But Arizona officials brushed aside those concerns, saying that those medical emergencies are “the woman’s problem”:

Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, a panel member appointed by former President George H.W. Bush, repeatedly expressed concern that the law might not afford women the opportunity to abort a fetus with birth defects in cases where the defects are not apparent until just before 20 weeks.

He also questioned the need to prohibit abortions at that stage of the pregnancy, especially for fetuses bound to develop “horrible birth defects.”

“They’re basically born into hell and then die,” Kleinfeld said. “I don’t see how the courts could act before viability” of the fetus.

“With due respect, that’s the woman’s problem,” responded David Cole, Arizona’s solicitor general. “She should have made that decision earlier.”

However, in some cases, women cannot actually make that decision earlier because it is too difficult to detect fetal abnormalities before the medically accepted point of viability. And the American Civil Liberties Union, which is suing Arizona to block HB 2036 from going into effect,told Reuters that Arizona’s ban has a “truly, horrifically narrow” medical exception that will prevent many women from getting abortions even when it is medically necessary for them to end a pregnancy. Even though about 100 pregnancies are terminated after 20 weeks in Arizona each year, the law would criminally prosecute the doctors who perform abortion services after the cut-off.

The three-judge panel has yet to make a final ruling. A federal judge upheld HB 2036 at the end of July, but a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel temporarily blocked the law from going into effect just a few days later so that the court could more fully consider the case.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/06/us-usa-abortion-arizona-idUSBRE8A503420121106?

by on Nov. 16, 2012 at 10:31 PM
Replies (11-20):
Stephanie329
by Bronze Member on Nov. 17, 2012 at 3:19 PM
1 mom liked this
Come on, you mean that 0.4% of late term abortions aren't because the woman couldn't get into her bikini?

In all seriousness, if Canadian and US late term abortion rates are
similar (haven't checked), then Arizona is wasting legislative time restricting less than 1/2 percent of abortions.

Bravo, douchbags.


Quoting D.O.E.:

a canadian view on abortion

Quoting D.O.E.:

 

Incidence of Late Term Abortions 

The Canadian Medical Association's abortion policy defines abortion as the active termination of 

a pregnancy up to 20 weeks of gestation (Canadian Medical Association, Policy on Induced 

Abortion, 1988). 90% of abortions in Canada are performed during the first 12 weeks of 

pregnancy, and just over 9% of abortions take place between 12 and 20 weeks of gestation. A 

mere 0.4% of abortions take place after 20 weeks of gestation. These are considered late term 

abortions.  

Why Late Term Abortions are Necessary  

A very small number of abortions occur after 20 weeks of gestation primarily because the fetus is 

gravely or fatally impaired, or the woman's life or physical health is at risk, or both (Statistics 

Canada, 2003; http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/action/bill_c338.html#facts). Many impairments or 

health risks are not detectable until after the 24

th

 week of gestation. In 1998 an American Doctor, 

George Tiller, opposed efforts to ban late term abortions in Kansas, using “statistics and photos 

of catastrophic pregnancies he had aborted.” The images showed fetuses with missing skulls or 

spinal cords, and in one case twins fused into a single body (Dave Ranney, “Tiller: Abortion Bill 

an Insult to Women,” Wichita Eagle, April 11, 1998, and Colleen McCain and Dave Ranney, 

“Five Kansas Families share Deeply Personal Stories,” Wichita Eagle, April 19, 1998). 

Those opposed to abortion rights have portrayed women as having late term abortions out of 

"selfish convenience" or because they "suddenly can't get into a bathing suit." This 

misrepresentation of women’s decision making with regard to abortion is always inaccurate, but 

especially so in cases of late term abortion. Most women who terminate their pregnancies after 

20 weeks wanted to have a child, and were forced to consider abortion for medical reasons. 

Other women may be in desperate social circumstances, such as an abusive relationship, or they 

may be very young teenagers who have delayed abortion care because they were in denial about 

the pregnancy


Canada is one of only three countries in the world with no laws restricting abortion. Because of 

that, Canada serves as a respected role model for abortion care internationally. Abortion is a 

health procedure and as such, can be left up to the discretion of the doctor and patient. It requires 

no extra regulation, in the same way that childbirth or heart surgery requires no extra 

regulation. It would be reactionary and counter-productive to pass any restriction against 

abortion, because that would endanger women’s health and lives, and infringe on women's 

equality rights: only women get pregnant, so abortion restrictions amount to discrimination 

against women. It would also give the anti-abortion movement something to build on, and agitate 

from. Abortion opponents target rare cases of late term abortion, describing it in horrific detail, 

to evoke an emotional response in listeners. Their ultimate goal is to restrict all abortion rights. 

What these lobbyists strategically fail to mention, however, is that banning late term abortions 

would force women pregnant with dying fetuses to give birth at great risk to their own health, 

undermining both the rights of women and the medical authority of doctors


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
nanaofsix531
by Platinum Member on Nov. 17, 2012 at 3:24 PM
1 mom liked this

I am so sick of men telling woman what to do with their body's.It is none of their effing business.

NancSBRN
by Bronze Member on Nov. 17, 2012 at 6:05 PM
1 mom liked this

I believe AZ has a woman Govenor Jan Brewr  right and she is just as bad as the men. This is happening in a lot of states for a party that claims to want  to keep Government Out of your private business they have no problem with this sort of things.


kailu1835
by Silver Member on Nov. 17, 2012 at 6:10 PM
1 mom liked this

He's right.  Most defects are found by 20 weeks.  So why wait to terminate?

PamR
by Platinum Member on Nov. 17, 2012 at 6:38 PM
1 mom liked this


Quote:

He's right.  Most defects are found by 20 weeks.  So why wait to terminate?

Anyone here actually ever been in this situation?

redvelvet42
by Member on Nov. 17, 2012 at 7:03 PM

whoa why do doctors go to medical school and judges go to law school? i am personally pro-life but to hinder a medically necessary procedure seems wrong and severely wrongsided. i think the law is designed to actually prevent abortions period. but, what about the quality of life, if you will, of this unborn child? why isn't that a consideration? forget the pregnant woman, she can presumably get pregnant again, but this unborn child must suffer. some of this severe birth defects will cause the child to have to endure a life of pain, surgeries, being stuck with needles daily, etc. and who's paying for all of that? the taxpayer of course. and that's not fair to innocent taxpayers, the innocent baby, or the parent(s).

i do not support abortions as a means of birth control but when the life of the mother or child are in danger then the procedure should be performed. and the AZ solicitor general's statement that its the mothers problem if she does not know that her child is severely deformed by a certain gestational age is rediculous. a lot of women do know that they are pregnant right away and may not learn of the pregnancy until 10 or 12 weeks and at that stage of pregnancy, as all of us know, you only see the doctor once a month and the first untrasound might not be performed until 18 or 20 weeks; so, when would the woman have a chance to make any sort of decision about deformities or whatever?

imamomzilla
by on Nov. 17, 2012 at 7:14 PM

 Where are you getting your stats?

<9 weeks 61.3%
9-10     17.8%
11-12    9.6%
13-15    6.7%
16-20    3.5%
>21      1.1%

 

Quoting Stephanie329:

Come on, you mean that 0.4% of late term abortions aren't because the woman couldn't get into her bikini?

In all seriousness, if Canadian and US late term abortion rates are
similar (haven't checked), then Arizona is wasting legislative time restricting less than 1/2 percent of abortions.

Bravo, douchbags.


Quoting D.O.E.:

a canadian view on abortion

Quoting D.O.E.:

 

Incidence of Late Term Abortions 

The Canadian Medical Association's abortion policy defines abortion as the active termination of 

a pregnancy up to 20 weeks of gestation (Canadian Medical Association, Policy on Induced 

Abortion, 1988). 90% of abortions in Canada are performed during the first 12 weeks of 

pregnancy, and just over 9% of abortions take place between 12 and 20 weeks of gestation. A 

mere 0.4% of abortions take place after 20 weeks of gestation. These are considered late term 

abortions.  

Why Late Term Abortions are Necessary  

A very small number of abortions occur after 20 weeks of gestation primarily because the fetus is 

gravely or fatally impaired, or the woman's life or physical health is at risk, or both (Statistics 

Canada, 2003; http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/action/bill_c338.html#facts). Many impairments or 

health risks are not detectable until after the 24

th

 week of gestation. In 1998 an American Doctor, 

George Tiller, opposed efforts to ban late term abortions in Kansas, using “statistics and photos 

of catastrophic pregnancies he had aborted.” The images showed fetuses with missing skulls or 

spinal cords, and in one case twins fused into a single body (Dave Ranney, “Tiller: Abortion Bill 

an Insult to Women,” Wichita Eagle, April 11, 1998, and Colleen McCain and Dave Ranney, 

“Five Kansas Families share Deeply Personal Stories,” Wichita Eagle, April 19, 1998). 

Those opposed to abortion rights have portrayed women as having late term abortions out of 

"selfish convenience" or because they "suddenly can't get into a bathing suit." This 

misrepresentation of women’s decision making with regard to abortion is always inaccurate, but 

especially so in cases of late term abortion. Most women who terminate their pregnancies after 

20 weeks wanted to have a child, and were forced to consider abortion for medical reasons. 

Other women may be in desperate social circumstances, such as an abusive relationship, or they 

may be very young teenagers who have delayed abortion care because they were in denial about 

the pregnancy

 

Canada is one of only three countries in the world with no laws restricting abortion. Because of 

that, Canada serves as a respected role model for abortion care internationally. Abortion is a 

health procedure and as such, can be left up to the discretion of the doctor and patient. It requires 

no extra regulation, in the same way that childbirth or heart surgery requires no extra 

regulation. It would be reactionary and counter-productive to pass any restriction against 

abortion, because that would endanger women’s health and lives, and infringe on women's 

equality rights: only women get pregnant, so abortion restrictions amount to discrimination 

against women. It would also give the anti-abortion movement something to build on, and agitate 

from. Abortion opponents target rare cases of late term abortion, describing it in horrific detail, 

to evoke an emotional response in listeners. Their ultimate goal is to restrict all abortion rights. 

What these lobbyists strategically fail to mention, however, is that banning late term abortions 

would force women pregnant with dying fetuses to give birth at great risk to their own health, 

undermining both the rights of women and the medical authority of doctors


 



Stephanie329
by Bronze Member on Nov. 17, 2012 at 10:48 PM
Really? well, OK, ill reiterate: If you read the person I quoted, she gave Canadian stats (0.4% late term). I stated that IF (see where i said I didn't know? Hence the "if")US stats are similar.....

If your stats are correct and the late term abortion rate is still only 1.1%, then, ok, that doesn't change that Arizona is wasting legislative time restricting 1.1% of abortions. Then, I clearly stated they are douchebags.

So. Lets go by your stat, do you have an opinion on that percentage? What Arizona is doing? The lack of (non) reasoning behind it (moms are psychic)?



Quoting imamomzilla:

 Where are you getting your stats?


<9 weeks 61.3%
9-10     17.8%
11-12    9.6%
13-15    6.7%
16-20    3.5%
>21      1.1%


 


Quoting Stephanie329:

Come on, you mean that 0.4% of late term abortions aren't because the woman couldn't get into her bikini?

In all seriousness, if Canadian and US late term abortion rates are
similar (haven't checked), then Arizona is wasting legislative time restricting less than 1/2 percent of abortions.

Bravo, douchbags.



Quoting D.O.E.:


a canadian view on abortion


Quoting D.O.E.:



 


Incidence of Late Term Abortions 


The Canadian Medical Association's abortion policy defines abortion as the active termination of 


a pregnancy up to 20 weeks of gestation (Canadian Medical Association, Policy on Induced 


Abortion, 1988). 90% of abortions in Canada are performed during the first 12 weeks of 


pregnancy, and just over 9% of abortions take place between 12 and 20 weeks of gestation. A 


mere 0.4% of abortions take place after 20 weeks of gestation. These are considered late term 


abortions.  


Why Late Term Abortions are Necessary  


A very small number of abortions occur after 20 weeks of gestation primarily because the fetus is 


gravely or fatally impaired, or the woman's life or physical health is at risk, or both (Statistics 


Canada, 2003; http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/action/bill_c338.html#facts). Many impairments or 


health risks are not detectable until after the 24


th


 week of gestation. In 1998 an American Doctor, 


George Tiller, opposed efforts to ban late term abortions in Kansas, using “statistics and photos 


of catastrophic pregnancies he had aborted.” The images showed fetuses with missing skulls or 


spinal cords, and in one case twins fused into a single body (Dave Ranney, “Tiller: Abortion Bill 


an Insult to Women,” Wichita Eagle, April 11, 1998, and Colleen McCain and Dave Ranney, 


“Five Kansas Families share Deeply Personal Stories,” Wichita Eagle, April 19, 1998). 


Those opposed to abortion rights have portrayed women as having late term abortions out of 


"selfish convenience" or because they "suddenly can't get into a bathing suit." This 


misrepresentation of women’s decision making with regard to abortion is always inaccurate, but 


especially so in cases of late term abortion. Most women who terminate their pregnancies after 


20 weeks wanted to have a child, and were forced to consider abortion for medical reasons. 


Other women may be in desperate social circumstances, such as an abusive relationship, or they 


may be very young teenagers who have delayed abortion care because they were in denial about 


the pregnancy


 


Canada is one of only three countries in the world with no laws restricting abortion. Because of 


that, Canada serves as a respected role model for abortion care internationally. Abortion is a 


health procedure and as such, can be left up to the discretion of the doctor and patient. It requires 


no extra regulation, in the same way that childbirth or heart surgery requires no extra 


regulation. It would be reactionary and counter-productive to pass any restriction against 


abortion, because that would endanger women’s health and lives, and infringe on women's 


equality rights: only women get pregnant, so abortion restrictions amount to discrimination 


against women. It would also give the anti-abortion movement something to build on, and agitate 


from. Abortion opponents target rare cases of late term abortion, describing it in horrific detail, 


to evoke an emotional response in listeners. Their ultimate goal is to restrict all abortion rights. 


What these lobbyists strategically fail to mention, however, is that banning late term abortions 


would force women pregnant with dying fetuses to give birth at great risk to their own health, 


undermining both the rights of women and the medical authority of doctors




 

Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
paknari
by Silver Member on Nov. 17, 2012 at 10:52 PM
I couldn't abort a child at all unless it had a horrible birth defect anyway but I worry about the birth defects that are found later I'm not sure but I know that with my doctor I was not offered testing for defects until I was almost 29 weeks. Can they do them sooner?
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Stephanie329
by Bronze Member on Nov. 17, 2012 at 10:55 PM
No one waits to terminate, aside from the heartbreakingly hopeful testing that I gladly submitted to. I was just under 20 weeks. If my OB had caught it just 1 or 2 weeks later, I would have fallen into the "late term" category.

It could have easily happened. Anyone saying he's right or has a point simply doesn't know any better, or, just likes to troll.


Quoting PamR:




Quote:





He's right.  Most defects are found by 20 weeks.  So why wait to terminate?

Anyone here actually ever been in this situation?


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)