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

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

` Ignoring Threats, Doctors Do Third-Trimester Abortions

 

 

'After Tiller': Ignoring Threats, Doctors Do Third-Trimester Abortions

PHOTO: (Clockwise from top left) Dr. Robinson, Dr. Sella, Dr. Carhart, Dr. Hern acknowledge publicly that they provide third-trimester abortions.
 
(Clockwise from top left) Drs. Susan Robinson, Shelley Sella, LeRoy Carhart, Warren Hern acknowledge publicly that they provide third-trimester abortions. (After Tiller)
 

By NANCY RAMSEY
Jan. 21, 2013

 

 

Spend 10 minutes on the phone with Dr. Susan Robinson, an obstetrician-gynecologist who specializes in providing women with third-trimester abortions, and the name Aron Ralston will invariably come up. He's the mountain climber who was trapped in a canyon in Utah after a boulder crushed his right hand. He was pinned down by the boulder for five days (the film "127 Hours" is based on his story) until he realized the only way he could get free would be to cut off his hand.

 

It's a graphic, horrific image, but Robinson says it's the best analogy she can think of to describe women who are pregnant in their third trimester and "have thought about it deeply, consulted their conscience, wrestled with the ethics, and decided the best thing for themselves and their families is to have an abortion."

 

"People think you choose an abortion like you choose red or green shoes, or a flavor of ice cream," Robinson told ABC News. "But in fact, they [the women I see] need an abortion the way Aron Ralston needed to cut his hand off."

 

Robinson is one of four doctors featured in the documentary "After Tiller," which screened at the Sundance Film Festival this past weekend. "A#Sundance first: security guards checking bags and wanding people before abortion documentary 'After Tiller,'" tweeted Sean Means, movie critic for The Salt Lake Tribune.

 

(Clockwise from top left) Drs. Susan... View Full Size
PHOTO: (Clockwise from top left) Dr. Robinson, Dr. Sella, Dr. Carhart, Dr. Hern acknowledge publicly that they provide third-trimester abortions.
After Tiller
(Clockwise from top left) Drs. Susan Robinson, Shelley Sella, LeRoy Carhart, Warren Hern acknowledge publicly that they provide third-trimester abortions.
 
 
 
Against Abortion, Ann Romney Calls It a 'Tender Issue' Watch Video

The film takes its name from Dr. George Tiller, a third-trimester abortion provider in Wichita, Kan., who was assassinated in May 2009 while attending church. Robinson worked with Tiller, as did Shelley Sella, who worked as a midwife before becoming a doctor and abortion provider, and is also featured in the film. The two now operate out of a clinic in Albuquerque.

 

"We learned at his knee," said Robinson, speaking of Tiller. "Kindness, courtesy, justice, love and respect are the hallmarks of a good doctor-patient relationship. People tell me every single day, 'Dr. Robinson, you've given me my life back.' For these women it is life or death. Many women try to self-abort. The less available it is, the poor will have the hardest time."

 

A Red-Hot Issue

 

If abortion is a hot-button political issue, then third-trimester abortion is red-hot, and such words as "kindness" and "respect" are not two that leap to mind for many people. The arrest two years ago of Philadelphia doctor Kermit Gosnell, accused of killing a woman with a lethal dose of Demerol, put a gruesome face on doctors performing third-trimester abortions. Police, searching his office, found what prosecutors called "a house of horrors," bags and bottles of aborted fetuses scattered throughout the building, a place where fetuses were delivered live and then killed with scissors.

 

Even many supporters of abortion rights draw a line at third-trimester abortions. A 2011 Gallup poll showed that making abortion illegal in the last trimester got strong support from both pro-choice (79 percent) and pro-life advocates (94 percent). Laws passed in 41 states prohibit abortions, except to protect the woman's life, after a certain point in the pregnancy, usually fetal viability (about 24 weeks). In the U.S., 88 percent of abortions are done in the first 12 weeks, according to the Guttmacher Institute; fewer than 1 percent are in the third trimester.

 

by on Jan. 21, 2013 at 8:32 AM
Replies (11-20):
radioheid
by Libertarian on Jan. 21, 2013 at 9:58 AM
7 moms liked this

 I disagree. As I explained in another post dealing with the life of a fetus, up until the point of viability (typically around 24 weeks), and particularly at an early stage of development, an embryo/fetus is very similar to a person in a vegetative state on total life support. We don't condemn families for choosing to remove such people from life support, despite the fact that eventually that person *may* recover, nor do we accuse the medical professionals who remove said persons from life support to be "murderers". This is exactly how I feel about abortions before the point of viability. It is human, yes, and very technically alive, however, said embryo or fetus requires constant life support in order to stand any chance at all of surviving, and I refuse to condemn people who choose to remove that life support.

Once that person has reached a point that he or she can survive on his or her own, I feel they are deserving of every protection afforded to a person, including the basic right to life, including food and medical/supportive care.

Thus, I draw the line at viability.

*As a matter of record, I have never had an abortion. My family is very pro-life, with me being the exception. In fact, my twin sister was the vice president of Hiram College's chapter of Right To Life years ago. Once upon a time, I was staunchly pro-life, probably more so than you. My views evolved to what they are now over many years, many debates, and a lot of research on abortion.

Quoting LoganTroyMom:

How is it any different than an 8 week developed baby? Is a woman only a little pregnant for the first few months? it's still in her body. her body her choice right?

abortion is wrong at any stage of development. to say otherwise is dehumanizing and hypocritical.

you said it yourself- to kill a baby is murder. a newly developing baby is no less a baby than one at 28 weeks. we are not- should not be, rather- a community that judges the right to live on how closely one reselmbles an "ideal" person.


Quoting radioheid:

 Once you reach the third trimester, you're carrying a baby. Period. And to kill a baby is murder. End of story. There is absolutely no excuse. These people are professional murderers.

 


"Roger that. Over."

R   A   D    I    O    H    E    I    D

my4kids274
by Member on Jan. 21, 2013 at 9:59 AM



Quoting ambertreas76:

Third trimester abortions should be considered murder unless deemed medically necessary.



LoganTroyMom
by Bronze Member on Jan. 21, 2013 at 10:02 AM
1 mom liked this
the difference is that baby has not had the right to live at all, and in contrast of being in a vegitative state, the most likely outcome is a healthy newborn, NOT the same.

i used to be pro choice, and my opinion has evolved due to years of debates and research, as well as having children.

killing a baby before the time of viability is simply beating it to the punchline. yeah, kill it before it has ANY chance. totally humane.


Quoting radioheid:

 I disagree. As I explained in another post dealing with the life of a fetus, up until the point of viability (typically around 24 weeks), and particularly at an early stage of development, an embryo/fetus is very similar to a person in a vegetative state on total life support. We don't condemn families for choosing to remove such people from life support, despite the fact that eventually that person *may* recover, nor do we accuse the medical professionals who remove said persons from life support to be "murderers". This is exactly how I feel about abortions before the point of viability. It is human, yes, and very technically alive, however, said embryo or fetus requires constant life support in order to stand any chance at all of surviving, and I refuse to condemn people who choose to remove that life support.


Once that person has reached a point that he or she can survive on his or her own, I feel they are deserving of every protection afforded to a person, including the basic right to life, including food and medical/supportive care.


Thus, I draw the line at viability.


*As a matter of record, I have never had an abortion. My family is very pro-life, with me being the exception. In fact, my twin sister was the vice president of Hiram College's chapter of Right To Life years ago. Once upon a time, I was staunchly pro-life, probably more so than you. My views evolved to what they are now over many years, many debates, and a lot of research on abortion.


Quoting LoganTroyMom:

How is it any different than an 8 week developed baby? Is a woman only a little pregnant for the first few months? it's still in her body. her body her choice right?

abortion is wrong at any stage of development. to say otherwise is dehumanizing and hypocritical.

you said it yourself- to kill a baby is murder. a newly developing baby is no less a baby than one at 28 weeks. we are not- should not be, rather- a community that judges the right to live on how closely one reselmbles an "ideal" person.



Quoting radioheid:


 Once you reach the third trimester, you're carrying a baby. Period. And to kill a baby is murder. End of story. There is absolutely no excuse. These people are professional murderers.


 

Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
romalove
by Roma on Jan. 21, 2013 at 10:08 AM
6 moms liked this


Quoting LoganTroyMom:

the difference is that baby has not had the right to live at all, and in contrast of being in a vegitative state, the most likely outcome is a healthy newborn, NOT the same.

i used to be pro choice, and my opinion has evolved due to years of debates and research, as well as having children.

killing a baby before the time of viability is simply beating it to the punchline. yeah, kill it before it has ANY chance. totally humane.


Quoting radioheid:

 I disagree. As I explained in another post dealing with the life of a fetus, up until the point of viability (typically around 24 weeks), and particularly at an early stage of development, an embryo/fetus is very similar to a person in a vegetative state on total life support. We don't condemn families for choosing to remove such people from life support, despite the fact that eventually that person *may* recover, nor do we accuse the medical professionals who remove said persons from life support to be "murderers". This is exactly how I feel about abortions before the point of viability. It is human, yes, and very technically alive, however, said embryo or fetus requires constant life support in order to stand any chance at all of surviving, and I refuse to condemn people who choose to remove that life support.


Once that person has reached a point that he or she can survive on his or her own, I feel they are deserving of every protection afforded to a person, including the basic right to life, including food and medical/supportive care.


Thus, I draw the line at viability.


*As a matter of record, I have never had an abortion. My family is very pro-life, with me being the exception. In fact, my twin sister was the vice president of Hiram College's chapter of Right To Life years ago. Once upon a time, I was staunchly pro-life, probably more so than you. My views evolved to what they are now over many years, many debates, and a lot of research on abortion.


Quoting LoganTroyMom:

How is it any different than an 8 week developed baby? Is a woman only a little pregnant for the first few months? it's still in her body. her body her choice right?

abortion is wrong at any stage of development. to say otherwise is dehumanizing and hypocritical.

you said it yourself- to kill a baby is murder. a newly developing baby is no less a baby than one at 28 weeks. we are not- should not be, rather- a community that judges the right to live on how closely one reselmbles an "ideal" person.



Quoting radioheid:


 Once you reach the third trimester, you're carrying a baby. Period. And to kill a baby is murder. End of story. There is absolutely no excuse. These people are professional murderers.


 

It's interesting to listen to people on this issue.  I am like you but opposite.  I was very against abortion when I was younger.  As I got older, and knew more and more women who had abortions and their reasons, and found people who needed and chose not to have abortions and died, and learned more about the differences between sentient and non sentient life, and how important it was to protect choice for women who's lives depended on it, I was much better at putting it into perspective for myself.  I came down on the side of protecting born sentient women.  In a case of competing rights, I side with those already born.

LoganTroyMom
by Bronze Member on Jan. 21, 2013 at 10:11 AM
1 mom liked this
no, you are putting the right to do what you want above the right to be alive.

Quoting romalove:


Quoting LoganTroyMom:

the difference is that baby has not had the right to live at all, and in contrast of being in a vegitative state, the most likely outcome is a healthy newborn, NOT the same.



i used to be pro choice, and my opinion has evolved due to years of debates and research, as well as having children.



killing a baby before the time of viability is simply beating it to the punchline. yeah, kill it before it has ANY chance. totally humane.




Quoting radioheid:

 I disagree. As I explained in another post dealing with the life of a fetus, up until the point of viability (typically around 24 weeks), and particularly at an early stage of development, an embryo/fetus is very similar to a person in a vegetative state on total life support. We don't condemn families for choosing to remove such people from life support, despite the fact that eventually that person *may* recover, nor do we accuse the medical professionals who remove said persons from life support to be "murderers". This is exactly how I feel about abortions before the point of viability. It is human, yes, and very technically alive, however, said embryo or fetus requires constant life support in order to stand any chance at all of surviving, and I refuse to condemn people who choose to remove that life support.



Once that person has reached a point that he or she can survive on his or her own, I feel they are deserving of every protection afforded to a person, including the basic right to life, including food and medical/supportive care.



Thus, I draw the line at viability.



*As a matter of record, I have never had an abortion. My family is very pro-life, with me being the exception. In fact, my twin sister was the vice president of Hiram College's chapter of Right To Life years ago. Once upon a time, I was staunchly pro-life, probably more so than you. My views evolved to what they are now over many years, many debates, and a lot of research on abortion.



Quoting LoganTroyMom:

How is it any different than an 8 week developed baby? Is a woman only a little pregnant for the first few months? it's still in her body. her body her choice right?

abortion is wrong at any stage of development. to say otherwise is dehumanizing and hypocritical.

you said it yourself- to kill a baby is murder. a newly developing baby is no less a baby than one at 28 weeks. we are not- should not be, rather- a community that judges the right to live on how closely one reselmbles an "ideal" person.




Quoting radioheid:



 Once you reach the third trimester, you're carrying a baby. Period. And to kill a baby is murder. End of story. There is absolutely no excuse. These people are professional murderers.



 

It's interesting to listen to people on this issue.  I am like you but opposite.  I was very against abortion when I was younger.  As I got older, and knew more and more women who had abortions and their reasons, and found people who needed and chose not to have abortions and died, and learned more about the differences between sentient and non sentient life, and how important it was to protect choice for women who's lives depended on it, I was much better at putting it into perspective for myself.  I came down on the side of protecting born sentient women.  In a case of competing rights, I side with those already born.

Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
sweetnspacey
by Member on Jan. 21, 2013 at 10:12 AM
3 moms liked this

I'm pregnant right now and this just makes me want to cry :(

romalove
by Roma on Jan. 21, 2013 at 10:13 AM
1 mom liked this


Quoting LoganTroyMom:

no, you are putting the right to do what you want above the right to be alive.

Quoting romalove:


Quoting LoganTroyMom:

the difference is that baby has not had the right to live at all, and in contrast of being in a vegitative state, the most likely outcome is a healthy newborn, NOT the same.



i used to be pro choice, and my opinion has evolved due to years of debates and research, as well as having children.



killing a baby before the time of viability is simply beating it to the punchline. yeah, kill it before it has ANY chance. totally humane.




Quoting radioheid:

 I disagree. As I explained in another post dealing with the life of a fetus, up until the point of viability (typically around 24 weeks), and particularly at an early stage of development, an embryo/fetus is very similar to a person in a vegetative state on total life support. We don't condemn families for choosing to remove such people from life support, despite the fact that eventually that person *may* recover, nor do we accuse the medical professionals who remove said persons from life support to be "murderers". This is exactly how I feel about abortions before the point of viability. It is human, yes, and very technically alive, however, said embryo or fetus requires constant life support in order to stand any chance at all of surviving, and I refuse to condemn people who choose to remove that life support.



Once that person has reached a point that he or she can survive on his or her own, I feel they are deserving of every protection afforded to a person, including the basic right to life, including food and medical/supportive care.



Thus, I draw the line at viability.



*As a matter of record, I have never had an abortion. My family is very pro-life, with me being the exception. In fact, my twin sister was the vice president of Hiram College's chapter of Right To Life years ago. Once upon a time, I was staunchly pro-life, probably more so than you. My views evolved to what they are now over many years, many debates, and a lot of research on abortion.



Quoting LoganTroyMom:

How is it any different than an 8 week developed baby? Is a woman only a little pregnant for the first few months? it's still in her body. her body her choice right?

abortion is wrong at any stage of development. to say otherwise is dehumanizing and hypocritical.

you said it yourself- to kill a baby is murder. a newly developing baby is no less a baby than one at 28 weeks. we are not- should not be, rather- a community that judges the right to live on how closely one reselmbles an "ideal" person.




Quoting radioheid:



 Once you reach the third trimester, you're carrying a baby. Period. And to kill a baby is murder. End of story. There is absolutely no excuse. These people are professional murderers.



 

It's interesting to listen to people on this issue.  I am like you but opposite.  I was very against abortion when I was younger.  As I got older, and knew more and more women who had abortions and their reasons, and found people who needed and chose not to have abortions and died, and learned more about the differences between sentient and non sentient life, and how important it was to protect choice for women who's lives depended on it, I was much better at putting it into perspective for myself.  I came down on the side of protecting born sentient women.  In a case of competing rights, I side with those already born.

I see it as a competing right.

I know two people who had cancer diagnosis during pregnancy.  Don't they have the right to choose to live?

fullxbusymom
by Bronze Member on Jan. 21, 2013 at 10:14 AM
1 mom liked this

Because at 8wks it is like a parasite and can only survive by being attached to its host its mother.  At 28wks it is completely viable and no longer needs a host to survive making it murder.

Quoting LoganTroyMom:

How is it any different than an 8 week developed baby? Is a woman only a little pregnant for the first few months? it's still in her body. her body her choice right?

abortion is wrong at any stage of development. to say otherwise is dehumanizing and hypocritical.

you said it yourself- to kill a baby is murder. a newly developing baby is no less a baby than one at 28 weeks. we are not- should not be, rather- a community that judges the right to live on how closely one reselmbles an "ideal" person.


Quoting radioheid:

 Once you reach the third trimester, you're carrying a baby. Period. And to kill a baby is murder. End of story. There is absolutely no excuse. These people are professional murderers.


emeraldangel2.0
by on Jan. 21, 2013 at 10:14 AM


Quoting Mommy_of_Riley:

IMO once that baby can live outside of your womb its no longer your choice to end its life. It's murder.

And it's illegal so I'm unsure how these people are in a movie bragging about their illegal activities...


Rebecca-via

lga1965
by on Jan. 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM
3 moms liked this
This is still none of our business. It is between the woman and her doctor. If it's illegal then it's between the woman, her doctor and the courts. I'm not going to judge them. (
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)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN