Failed Abortions

BabyRN2Be · Mar 14, 2006

Not exactly the New York Times is it? 22 weeker? That baby wouldn't last a week if it was.

Yeah, WND isn't exactly the New York Times. WND lost a lot of my respect when they stated outlandish instances in the Terri Shiavo case.

There are a lot of holes in the story, pieces are missing and things don't seem correct.

Kalico · Mar 14, 2006

Sorry Liz, I didn't make that comment refering to you at all. Just a general comment about that story.

I know you weren't referring to me Fergus but I still wanted to let everyone know about that. I totally agree with what you said about that story as well.

dawngloves, BSN, RN · Mar 14, 2006

Ok...just to let you guys know, I am not one for doing everything possible if the situation does not warrant it. I am glad to hear that you are able to do comfort cares on a child if the parents don't want anything done. I was more questioning what would happen if there was a viable infant after a failed abortion and you all have mainly said that that never happens. I also agree that there are people out there who would want everything under the sun done even when there is no hope. I get discouraged by this because I know there are times, lots of times, especially in NICU, where it is better to let the child go and I hope that I will have the strength to be a good patient advocate during these times and help the parents make that difficult decision.
Thank you all for your input on this highly controversial topic.

Kalico, I don't think there is a health care professional that could let anyone suffer needlessly,no matter how small or the circumstance.There is a lot of crazy propaganda out there, but when you start working you'll see what really goes on.

And you'll do fine.If it's in your heart to be compassionate it comes natural.

SuesquatchRN, BSN, RN · Mar 15, 2006

I really don't buy that story. I can't imagine a woman would consider a 2nd trimester abortion, but also plan it down to the details of his death, including the method that would cause the least pain. Either you believe that abortion inflicts pain on a living being in the process of terminating a beating heart and active brain waves, or you believe that you are simply eliminating a blob of tissue. If she cared so much about causing her "prenamed" baby boy so much pain while she had him killed, she wouldn't have decided to abort him. One couldn't possibly think about abortion that deeply without hating it. I don't mean to fire anyone up, but that's just my humble opinion. I say give 'em a chance. There are millions of couples who are trying to adopt.

Well, I've thought about it very deeply and still don't hate it.

Late term abortions (third trimester) are obtained under only the most dire conditions, usually life of the mother, followed by a baby that will simply not survive its congenital problems. And that's under the law. Whims are not accomodated.

And I am not required to be an incubator for a childless couple.

LilPeanut, MSN, RN, NP · Mar 15, 2006

Well, I think (think!) she was framing it in the article....to decide to abort an otherwise healthy 22w fetus because you've decided to not be pregnant anymore, that's pretty weird and horrible, IMO.

I support a right to choose politically because there is no one answer as to when "L"ife begins, and the ethics and legalities of giving an embryo, fetus or egg the exact same rights as a born human being are just too difficult to imagine. (think of women who are non-compliant on bedrest, are they guilty of child endangerment? What if they have other children they must care for?) I prefer to think of a rolling set of rights. When the woman first finds out she is pregnant, typically before a HB, then she has full rights as to what to do w/ her body. As time goes on and the embryo develops, there becomes more rights and responsibilities, up until the point at which a child can survive outside the womb.

So, once you are that close to viability, the child should be heavily considered. But, unless she chooses otherwise, her life still "trumps" that of the child, and unless the child has serious issues, the pregnancy should be allowed to continue. Clear as mud? *L*

allnurses Guide · Mar 15, 2006

Nowhere are doctors or nurses forced to agressively treat 22 weekers. They are before the age of viability.
I do wonder about this story, partly because this doesn't look like a 22 weeker to me and partly because this woman sounds off.

I was involved recently in the delivery of a 26 weeker (didn't make it) . . . didn't look too much different than the one in the photo - a little bigger maybe. Ears more defined.

I have a friend who is a CRNA who said alot of the training that some CRNA's get is doing anesthesia for abortions. And he has seen things like this. I imagine it is rare but it does happen.

As to the woman who attempted to abort the 22 weeker, I would never say never to someone else's experience just because it doesn't sound like something we would think about or say. There are all kinds of people in the world.

Remember the story about the woman pregnant with triplets who decided to abort two of them so she wouldn't have to buy the Costco size of mayo? People make decisions all the time based on what is best for themselves.

steph

fergus51 · Mar 15, 2006

I was involved recently in the delivery of a 26 weeker (didn't make it) . . . didn't look too much different than the one in the photo - a little bigger maybe. Ears more defined.
steph

That was my point. 22 weekers don't look like 26 weekers.

The things that make me skeptical about this story (other than the picture) is the conflicting attitudes this woman seems to have and how her descriptions don't jive with standard practice. She didn't want the baby to suffer but wanted it to die. She read all about the best ways to abort in detail, but didn't notice they missed a pretty significant step (which she may or may not know depending on what type of meds she was given). The clinic website makes it clear that the digoxin injection is only done for 22.5 weeks and up too. Plus they make it clear that a second trimester abortion patient has to spend the night, yet this woman went to a hotel instead. Plus, I don't see what she expected the clinic nurses/docs to do after she had delivered (her choice to do btw). They can't save a baby of that gestation. This wasn't a perfectly healthy baby like she claims.

Also, the clinic admission criteria for second trimester abortions is pretty straightforward but not alluded to at all in that article:

Admission Criteria

http://www.womenscenter.com/second_trimester.html

In order to provide services to you we require that your personal doctor, genetic counselor, or Perinatologist, provide documentation of the diagnosis for your child indicating that continuing the pregnancy will be a threat to your life, or your health

This article makes it sound like a purely elective decision on the mother's part, saying it took her weeks to make the decision (22 weeks apparently).

Frankly, the whole thing sounds fishy to me. The tie in with the born alive infant protection act makes it more so.

LilPeanut, MSN, RN, NP · Mar 15, 2006

*stands behind fergus, nodding head*

travduck, BSN, RN, CNM · Mar 17, 2006

Yes, it happens. If the babe is "normal" then you have options, You have them even if the babe is not "normal", but I believe that you must consider consequences to all. You can kick the situation to Social services for intervention. You can intervene to obtain a trasfer of "parental rights" to the State. You can give the babe normal care. You can try to understand "why" and then act in accordance with your own moral and ethical mores, within your current nurse practice act. You can call administration. You can go where this is not a "standard". You can cry. You can work to see that the situation never happens again.

DutchgirlRN, ASN, RN · Mar 17, 2006

somehow this baby made it through the first few hours and was fighting to survive yet the nurse wasn't allowed to do anything for the baby except watch her die. I am wondering if this is allowed and if so how as a nurse can I legally fight having to partake in something like this? Or does this even happen anymore? Thanks in advance.

It happened in our nursery 15 years ago. The mother thought the baby was stillborn and we were not allowed to tell her otherwise or do anything to help the baby who was delivered at 21 weeks. The doctor said. "This child will not survive, no matter what." I held that baby for 3 hours before he died. I hope to never re-live an experience like that. If I had it do do over again I may have done things differently. I just honestly don't know. Decisions had to made quickly, five minutes later was too late to change the outcome.

JeanettePNP, MSN, RN, NP · Mar 17, 2006

It happened in our nursery 15 years ago. The mother thought the baby was stillborn and we were not allowed to tell her otherwise or do anything to help the baby who was delivered at 21 weeks. The doctor said. "This child will not survive, no matter what." I held that baby for 3 hours before he died. I hope to never re-live an experience like that. If I had it do do over again I may have done things differently. I just honestly don't know. Decisions had to made quickly, five minutes later was too late to change the outcome.

Why wasn't the mother allowed to hold the baby for those three hours? What do you mean a decision had to be made within 5 minutes - the baby lived for three whole hours.

fergus51 · Mar 17, 2006

Dutchgirl, you could not have changed the outcome no matter what you did. Even today a 21 weeker can not survive. I'm sorry for your experience.