partial birth abortion

Specialties Ob/Gyn

Published

THE OUTCOME of what is almost certain to be a legal battle fought all the way to Supreme Court will hinge on whether the justices accept the findings of Congress that the procedure is never medically necessary and poses additional health risks to the mother.

DENOUNCED AS 'UNCONSTITUTIONAL'

Abortion rights supporters have pledged a court challenge. "This bill is unconstitutional," argued Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., citing the lack of an exemption in cases where the health of the mother is in jeopardy. The bill does exempt a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother.

The procedure involves partial delivery of a fetus until the head or part of the lower body is outside the mother's body.

At that point, the doctor punctures the skull of the fetus with a scissors, then inserts a suction tube and vacuums out the developing brain, killing the fetus.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., says the procedure "blurs the line between abortion and infanticide in the killing of a partially born child just inches from birth."

It was approved by a vote of 64 to 33, with 16 Democrats joining 48 Republicans in supporting it, while three Republicans and independent Jim Jeffords of Vermont joined 29 Democrats in opposing it.

Advertisement

Not voting were Sens. Joe Biden, John Edwards and John Kerry, all Democrats.

The House is expected to pass the bill in about a month. Congress twice before passed legislation to impose a ban, but former President Clinton vetoed both measures.

JAIL SENTENCE OR FINE

The bill says that anyone who performs the procedure known as partial-birth abortion "thereby kills a human fetus" and will be fined or imprisoned for not more than two years.

A woman upon whom a partial-birth abortion is performed may not be prosecuted under the bill.

The Santorum bill includes a non-binding amendment, approved by a 52 to 46 vote Wednesday, that says it is the sense of the Senate that the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized most abortions in every state, "secures an important constitutional right" and should not be overturned.

Supreme Court Justices

MSNBC Interactive

* Nine who have the final say

The battle after Bush signs the bill will center on how much deference the courts give to the findings of fact that Congress made with regard to the abortion procedure.

The bill says that based on testimony Congress has found that "a partial-birth abortion is never necessary to preserve the health of a woman" and "poses significant health risks to a woman upon whom the procedure is performed."

The legislation also says that Congress found that "the gruesome and inhumane nature of the partial-birth abortion procedure and its disturbing similarity to the killing of a newborn infant promotes a complete disregard for infant human life."

SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT

In a 2000 decision called Stenberg v. Carhart, the Supreme Court affirmed lower court rulings that had struck down a Nebraska abortion statute similar to the Santorum bill.

A five-justice majority held that the Nebraska law was invalid because it lacked an exception for the preservation of the health of the mother.

The majority also said the Nebraska law imposed an undue burden on a woman's ability to get an abortion. The court had ruled in a case called Casey v. Planned Parenthood in 1992 that states could regulate abortion but not place "a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus," that is, a fetus that could not survive outside the mother's womb.

The majority relied on a lower federal court's factual findings that the partial-birth abortion procedure was medically as safe as, and in many cases safer than, alternative abortion procedures. The Santorum bill relies on congressional testimony that disputes that federal court's findings.

MSNBC.com's

Maybe it's strange, but I'd have more problems looking after a mother choosing to die rather than intervene than I would a mother choosing to induce birth when it was medically indicated.

We had one woman with horrible PIH refusing a c-section or induction because the baby was pre-viability (on my old unit). It was really hard for everyone involved. If it had been her choosing to die so her baby could live, I would have understood that. But in this case it looked like it was either going to be her surviving alone or them both dying. That baby was going to die regardless of her choice, the only question was if she was going to go with it. It was horrible.

I don't get emotionally involved in these topics anymore. I will correct misinformation about the procedure itself and why its chosen. Beyond that I don't care that someone who doesn't work with the type of patients I have in high risk OB has judgements about the procedure and the people who do them. They have a right to their opinions. I have a right to mine.

I certainly don't get as incensed as I once did, but while others have the right to their opinions, I have a real problem when they vote those opinions based on emotion rather than knowledge and we end up with a SCOTUS decision permitting the states to make medically indicated (thanks, Kell) procedures illegal even for the health of the mother.

OK just to add some thought for the fire. Granted this isn't about partial birth abotion. I don't belive there is a place for it. I belive there are enough alternatives that this shouldn't be used maybe there is an extreme case where this would be appropriate but those would be few and far between, but here is the food for though with all the pro-lifers (just to make things clear, I am pro life for me and pro choice for everyone else.) I have a one year old and when I first found out i was pregnant she didn't show up on ultrasound for 6 weeks. They thought she might be an ectopic. The doctor said if this was an unwanted pregnancy I would not be against giving you a medication incase it was an ectopic (I chose to wait until she declared her location one way or another. Obviously she was in the right place

anyway. For all of these prolifers who would rather die than have an abortion or a baby who won't survive. (extremly preterm delivery) what do you think happens when you die. You take the baby with you. you essentially kill your baby and any future babies by not seeking the proper medical care that may or may not save you and your child. Just wondering what the thoughts were on that.

Specializes in Ante-Intra-Postpartum, Post Gyne.

It they consider a baby "viable" at 28 weeks, and the mother needs a partial birth abortion because she will die if the baby stays in; why not just deliver the baby and do what they do for all other 28 weekers; or just let nature take its course once it is out? I find it strange that some can not consider this murder; when Mr. Peterson got two counts of murder, one for his wife and one for his unborn baby.

It they consider a baby "viable" at 28 weeks, and the mother needs a partial birth abortion because she will die if the baby stays in; why not just deliver the baby and do what they do for all other 28 weekers; or just let nature take its course once it is out? I find it strange that some can not consider this murder; when Mr. Peterson got two counts of murder, one for his wife and one for his unborn baby.

If it was a normal baby at 28 weeks, they would likely do a c-section or induction and all measures would be taken to save the baby. Viability is more like 23-24 weeks, sometimes as low as 22. There would be no reason for a D&X at that point unless the fetus were severely deformed (severe hydrocephalus). That's why this procedure is so rare (it is RARELY necessary).

This is the nastiest procedure I have ever heard of and cannot imagine any circumstance where it would be necessary. How horrible and unnatural for people to even think this is a procedure that anybody would want to do. I just cannot imagine the people who think up things like this and how can they participate in such a procedure either as the mother or physician.

:yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat:

+ Add a Comment