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 (171-180):
LauraKW
by "Dude!" on Jan. 22, 2013 at 4:42 PM

 I'm kind of speechless.  You don't seem to understand that you don't understand.  Let's stick with I'm no doctor .

Quoting Kelseyciarah:

 Of course!

But a vaginal birth would have to be FORCED which is traumatic on the body, maybe even moreso than a controlled c-section. I'm no doctor, but to "abort" the fetus that far along you would either need to induce labor, or dilate the cervix manually rip out the baby and contents of the uterus, pull through the vagina, etc etc etc.

If a simple c-section would kill a woman at that point, I highly doubt going through a partial birth 3rd tri abortion would have a different outcome.

Quoting LauraKW:

 You understand that vaginal birth and a major surgical procedure are not the same thing, right?  RIGHT?

Quoting Kelseyciarah:

 REALLY? ...

If a quick c-section would kill the mother, then the means it would take to "abort" the baby would be too much for the mother to handle, so your point is moot.

Quoting LauraKW:

 What if the c-section would kill the mother?

Quoting Kelseyciarah:

 This makes me sick.

And if its "deemed medically necessary" during the 3rd tri, deliver the baby by c-section and let it have a fighting chance to LIVE. What the fuck is wrong with people?!!!

Babies come out crying at that point, what kind of sick human being can cut the spine onf a crying preemie????!!!!! I think you have to be a sick human being to carry out abortion in general, but to do it to a kicking screaming, thoughtful fetus is FUCKING SICK.

 

 

 

 

 

AdellesMom
by on Jan. 22, 2013 at 7:56 PM
It's comparable to a vegetative state. A person on life support can't live without it; they aren't viable without life support. A fetus is the same way. They're not exactly the same thing. However, they're the same thing in terms of viability.

Quoting LoganTroyMom:

no, it's NOT in a vegetative state. it's PERFECTLY FINE until you KILL IT. THERIN LIES THE DIFFERENCE. if a person in a vegetative state will be a "normal person" in 9mos, there's no reason to cut life support because of your own selfish reasons.



Quoting AdellesMom:

Many people that are pro-life, are for/against those things. Anyhow, it's not hypocritical. A baby is viable around 24 (or 26) weeks. At that point, abortion should be considered murder. Before then, a baby isn't viable. As a PP stated, it's like a vegetable attached to a life support machine.





As for the comparison, it's not strange or silly.






Quoting LoganTroyMom:

well now that's funny, because i'm not anti pa (although it needs serious reform), not pro war (although sometimes it's necessary, i do not support the wars we are in but i support the troops), i do support the 2nd amendment (funny how the "right to choose" wasn't as important as the right to bear arms! how strange to compare the right to defend yourself from tyranny to the "right" to kill a helpless child for your own selfish desires). oh and i don't support the dealth penalty.







it IS hypocritical, though. i already explained why so i will not repeat myself.








Quoting AdellesMom:

...and I find it hypocritical when pro-lifers are anti-PA, pro-guns, pro-war, and pro-death penalty.









The fact of the matter is that third trimester abortions are illegal, unless they're deemed medically necessary. FTR: I don't know anyone that's pro-choice that "condones" abortion. People that actually "condone" abortion are few and far between. It's not hypocritical to be pro-choice, and against late term abortions. Hell, I'm pro-choice, and against most abortions--for myself.










Quoting LoganTroyMom:

I find it incredibly hypocritical when pro choicers condone abortion yet are against 3rd trimester abortions. It's only ok when the baby doesn't look like a baby because it's easier to dehumanize them. Once they look like a Pampers ad, it's not "the mothers choice".
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
StarburstKisses
by Bronze Member on Jan. 22, 2013 at 9:14 PM
1 mom liked this

Are you serious? A "Horrifying life of pain and suffering"? For myself, yes. I'd give my life if I was in my third trimester of being pregnant and told it was either me of my baby. I would not commit murder, especially not on my child. To feel morally superior? Sure, if that's what they're calling it now a days for wanting to protect a life. 


Quoting Momniscient:

You would really doom your child or worse yet, other peoples children, to a horrifying life of pain and suffering just because you have a need to feel morally superior?
Sick.


Quoting StarburstKisses:

Now this is wrong. This is something you can't try to slide any way to say you're in the right in this. This, This is murder. There is no question if your baby at three terms is full of life. This is ridiculous, that man should be jailed and those women as well. Pull his fucking liscence! I don't believe in"Well...if it's medically necessary" Well you know what? Your baby could be living at as little as 23 WEEKS. Don't give me that ration of shit. This is just too messed up on one to many things. This is murder, any way you try to shave it. 



Momniscient
by Ruby Member on Jan. 22, 2013 at 10:28 PM
You didn't answer the question. Third trimester abortions are not done 'just because' an you do not get a martyr medal if you die for a fetus and leave behind motherless children. Then the fetus is likely to die to. For your hubris.

Sorry.


Quoting StarburstKisses:

Are you serious? A "Horrifying life of pain and suffering"? For myself, yes. I'd give my life if I was in my third trimester of being pregnant and told it was either me of my baby. I would not commit murder, especially not on my child. To feel morally superior? Sure, if that's what they're calling it now a days for wanting to protect a life. 




Quoting Momniscient:

You would really doom your child or worse yet, other peoples children, to a horrifying life of pain and suffering just because you have a need to feel morally superior?


Sick.






Quoting StarburstKisses:

Now this is wrong. This is something you can't try to slide any way to say you're in the right in this. This, This is murder. There is no question if your baby at three terms is full of life. This is ridiculous, that man should be jailed and those women as well. Pull his fucking liscence! I don't believe in"Well...if it's medically necessary" Well you know what? Your baby could be living at as little as 23 WEEKS. Don't give me that ration of shit. This is just too messed up on one to many things. This is murder, any way you try to shave it. 





Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
joey125
by Silver Member on Jan. 23, 2013 at 1:50 PM

It depends on the situtaiton but for the most part I do not agree with late term abortions, unless the life of the mother is in danger.   that's why this issue should be a private one ,

lucky2785
by Member on Jan. 23, 2013 at 11:14 PM
I'm not a religious person at all....I don't follow religious "hooey." Late term abortion is flat out The most vile part of humanity.


Quoting SweetChild63:

It's not my job nor station in life to bow down to someone else's religious hooey. My right to life supercedes a any bogus rights anyone thinkins a fetus should have. My body. My property. I'll kill it if I want to. And I'll kill it before I give to anyone else. It's not my purpose on earth to breed for someone else. Heard hearted? Absolutely! I'm looking out for me. 


Quoting lucky2785:

I would rather be breeding stock than a killer. It is flat out. No matter what you're opinion of 1st and 2 trimester abortions are....an abortion between late in pregnancy is a form of low incomprehensible no matter what the reason is.





Quoting SweetChild63:

A better question is , why would she want to? It's highly offensive and ignornant to think women are nothing more than breeding stock. 



Quoting abbie.alder:

Thats a good point. But if the case is that the mother simply cannot afford nor has the time for another child, but the fetus is healthy in every way, why wouldn't she just let someone adopt the baby?

Quoting Arroree:





Quoting abbie.alder:

If the mothers are more than half way done, why don't they just give the child up for adoption?

99% of these cases are cases of the fetus having fatal defects *as in there's NO way they can survive* or the fetus is already dying in the womb.















Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
SweetChild63
by Member on Jan. 23, 2013 at 11:17 PM

If you think that's most vile part of humanity, you live a pretty sheltered life. 


Quoting lucky2785:

I'm not a religious person at all....I don't follow religious "hooey." Late term abortion is flat out The most vile part of humanity.


Quoting SweetChild63:

It's not my job nor station in life to bow down to someone else's religious hooey. My right to life supercedes a any bogus rights anyone thinkins a fetus should have. My body. My property. I'll kill it if I want to. And I'll kill it before I give to anyone else. It's not my purpose on earth to breed for someone else. Heard hearted? Absolutely! I'm looking out for me. 


Quoting lucky2785:

I would rather be breeding stock than a killer. It is flat out. No matter what you're opinion of 1st and 2 trimester abortions are....an abortion between late in pregnancy is a form of low incomprehensible no matter what the reason is.





Quoting SweetChild63:

A better question is , why would she want to? It's highly offensive and ignornant to think women are nothing more than breeding stock. 



Quoting abbie.alder:

Thats a good point. But if the case is that the mother simply cannot afford nor has the time for another child, but the fetus is healthy in every way, why wouldn't she just let someone adopt the baby?

Quoting Arroree:





Quoting abbie.alder:

If the mothers are more than half way done, why don't they just give the child up for adoption?

99% of these cases are cases of the fetus having fatal defects *as in there's NO way they can survive* or the fetus is already dying in the womb.

















jaxTheMomm
by Platinum Member on Jan. 23, 2013 at 11:27 PM
1 mom liked this

I was told the same by my OB/GYN (who specialized in high-risk pregnancies) and my neuronatologist.

The next risky thing is a c-section, which is a major surgery.

"Oh, just do a c-section."

If a doctor feels that a pregnant woman in an emergent situation cannot risk L&D, or a c-section, they will not risk it.  20 years ago when I lost my daughter, it wasn't as big an issue - you were admitted and they did what they needed to do.  It's different now; everybody's got Operation Rescue breathing down their necks.

Women with a doomed pregnancy don't have as many options these days, depending on their situation, insurance and the state they live it.

I'm just saddened by these young women that think it's all so easy.  But then, my mother says the same thing - and she and my dad can name you women they knew who died trying to abort when it was illegal and there were no safe options.

It's all so ignorant - nobody ever heard of conditions that make it deathly to allow a woman to labor and deliver?  To withstand a major surgery?

And then to sit back and call these mothers heartless, after what they go through...

Quoting 1REALQT:

I was told by a mid wife that one of the most risky things to a woman is giving birth vaginally. A woman literally comes close to death due to the baby passing through the birth canal, it passes very close to an artery that can rupture and cause nearly instant bleeding out.
Quoting LauraKW:

 You understand that vaginal birth and a major surgical procedure are not the same thing, right?  RIGHT?

Quoting Kelseyciarah:

 REALLY? ...

If a quick c-section would kill the mother, then the means it would take to "abort" the baby would be too much for the mother to handle, so your point is moot.

Quoting LauraKW:

 What if the c-section would kill the mother?

Quoting Kelseyciarah:

 This makes me sick.

And if its "deemed medically necessary" during the 3rd tri, deliver the baby by c-section and let it have a fighting chance to LIVE. What the fuck is wrong with people?!!!

Babies come out crying at that point, what kind of sick human being can cut the spine onf a crying preemie????!!!!! I think you have to be a sick human being to carry out abortion in general, but to do it to a kicking screaming, thoughtful fetus is FUCKING SICK.

 

 

 



lucky2785
by Member on Jan. 23, 2013 at 11:27 PM
Possibly so.


Quoting SweetChild63:

If you think that's most vile part of humanity, you live a pretty sheltered life. 



Quoting lucky2785:

I'm not a religious person at all....I don't follow religious "hooey." Late term abortion is flat out The most vile part of humanity.





Quoting SweetChild63:

It's not my job nor station in life to bow down to someone else's religious hooey. My right to life supercedes a any bogus rights anyone thinkins a fetus should have. My body. My property. I'll kill it if I want to. And I'll kill it before I give to anyone else. It's not my purpose on earth to breed for someone else. Heard hearted? Absolutely! I'm looking out for me. 



Quoting lucky2785:

I would rather be breeding stock than a killer. It is flat out. No matter what you're opinion of 1st and 2 trimester abortions are....an abortion between late in pregnancy is a form of low incomprehensible no matter what the reason is.








Quoting SweetChild63:

A better question is , why would she want to? It's highly offensive and ignornant to think women are nothing more than breeding stock. 




Quoting abbie.alder:

Thats a good point. But if the case is that the mother simply cannot afford nor has the time for another child, but the fetus is healthy in every way, why wouldn't she just let someone adopt the baby?

Quoting Arroree:






Quoting abbie.alder:

If the mothers are more than half way done, why don't they just give the child up for adoption?

99% of these cases are cases of the fetus having fatal defects *as in there's NO way they can survive* or the fetus is already dying in the womb.
























Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
LauraKW
by "Dude!" on Jan. 23, 2013 at 11:37 PM

 Ok?  Is that relevant to how vaginal birth and a major surgical procedure are vastly different to the body?

Quoting 1REALQT:

I was told by a mid wife that one of the most risky things to a woman is giving birth vaginally. A woman literally comes close to death due to the baby passing through the birth canal, it passes very close to an artery that can rupture and cause nearly instant bleeding out.
Quoting LauraKW:

 You understand that vaginal birth and a major surgical procedure are not the same thing, right?  RIGHT?

Quoting Kelseyciarah:

 REALLY? ...

If a quick c-section would kill the mother, then the means it would take to "abort" the baby would be too much for the mother to handle, so your point is moot.

Quoting LauraKW:

 What if the c-section would kill the mother?

Quoting Kelseyciarah:

 This makes me sick.

And if its "deemed medically necessary" during the 3rd tri, deliver the baby by c-section and let it have a fighting chance to LIVE. What the fuck is wrong with people?!!!

Babies come out crying at that point, what kind of sick human being can cut the spine onf a crying preemie????!!!!! I think you have to be a sick human being to carry out abortion in general, but to do it to a kicking screaming, thoughtful fetus is FUCKING SICK.

 

 

 

 

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