Where should the line be drawn on abortion?

[manifold]

Is there a medical consensus on when the fetus can feel pain?

Yes, Amelia. I posted the video showing the fetus in an abortion trying to elude the things they were poking him with. It fought for its life with all its being, somehow fully aware of the danger and the location of the extinguishing equipment. It was considered to horrible and removed by the mods.

The physician discussing the fetus' elusive actions was quite clinical, but the skull removed before the body was taken out was a little too much of an ick factor for most people.

I've had university work in the anatomy using human cadavers donated to science. I don't see life, disability, dismemberment and death as some others, although I was the first to faint on day one in class.

Even back in the 80s when I took that class, there were studies being examined that claimed fetuses can feel pain. I didn't know they knew they were being threatened, though, until I located that video which must not be shared here. Oh, and the fetus/victim was 12 weeks when it was trying to get away from its certain death by extermination equipment.

You get over it.

I'd like to see that. Can you PM me the link?

 

[catzmeow]

Is there a medical consensus on when the fetus can feel pain?

Last of all to mature is the cerebral cortex, which is responsible for most of what we think of as mental life--conscious experience, voluntary actions, thinking, remembering, and feeling. It has only begun to function around the time gestation comes to an end. Premature babies show very basic electrical activity in the primary sensory regions of the cerebral cortex--those areas that perceive touch, vision, and hearing--as well as in primary motor regions of the cerebral cortex. In the last trimester, fetuses are capable of simple forms of learning, like habituating (decreasing their startle response) to a repeated auditory stimulus, such as a loud clap just outside the mother's abdomen. Late-term fetuses also seem to learn about the sensory qualities of the womb, since several studies have shown that newborn babies respond to familiar odors (such as their own amniotic fluid) and sounds (such as a maternal heartbeat or their own mother's voice). In spite of these rather sophisticated abilities, babies enter the world with a still-primitive cerebral cortex, and it is the gradual maturation of this complex part of the brain that explains much of their emotional and cognitive maturation in the first few years of life.

ZERO TO THREE:

 

[freedombecki]

Is there a medical consensus on when the fetus can feel pain?

Yes, Amelia. I posted the video showing the fetus in an abortion trying to elude the things they were poking him with. It fought for its life with all its being, somehow fully aware of the danger and the location of the extinguishing equipment. It was considered to horrible and removed by the mods.

The physician discussing the fetus' elusive actions was quite clinical, but the skull removed before the body was taken out was a little too much of an ick factor for most people.

I've had university work in the anatomy using human cadavers donated to science. I don't see life, disability, dismemberment and death as some others, although I was the first to faint on day one in class.

Even back in the 80s when I took that class, there were studies being examined that claimed fetuses can feel pain. I didn't know they knew they were being threatened, though, until I located that video which must not be shared here. Oh, and the fetus/victim was 12 weeks when it was trying to get away from its certain death by extermination equipment.

You get over it.

I'd like to see that. Can you PM me the link?

Oh, I just saw this. Well, manifold, if I can find it again. I tried to find it right after it disappeared, but couldn't. I'll try again.

 

[BDBoop]

Arizona drew the line, and it was upheld.

Judge says Arizona's abortion ban can take effect - Boston.com

The New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights said it and another group that challenged the law plan to file an emergency appeal of Monday's decision with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"Today's decision casts aside decades of legal precedent, ignoring constitutional protections for reproductive rights that have been upheld by the United States Supreme Court for nearly 40 years and threatening women's health and lives," said Nancy Northup, the center's president and CEO.

Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery, who was sued as part of the challenge, said there was no telling whether the appeals court would prevent the law from taking effect. Commenting on Monday's decision, Montgomery said, "I thought it was sound legal reasoning and reached the appropriate conclusion."

Teilborg held a hearing Wednesday on a request from abortion-rights groups that he temporarily block the law's enforcement.

The groups' lawyer said during the hearing that the ban crosses a clear line on what U.S. Supreme Court rulings permit, and it intrudes on women's health decisions at a key point in pregnancy. Montgomery argued the state Legislature was justified in enacting the ban to protect the health of women and to shield fetuses from pain.

 

[freedombecki]

I understand full well that nothing pulls extremist automatons from all sides out of the woodwork faster than an abortion thread, but since we now have a clean debate forum I'm going to try anyway.

I ask that if you wish to participate in this debate you first concede the following two points:

1) Aborting a fetus within a week of conception is not murdering a child.

2) Aborting a fetus after 8 months of gestation, that could survive outside the womb, is murdering a child.

The debate I'm interested in is where between point 1 and point 2 should that line be drawn? At what point in the pregnancy has the mother forfeited the right to 'choose' so to speak?

Why do I get the feeling that mani is going to do his fracking best to frack up this silly frack zone with the most fracked up <First Stage Freudian reference omitted>.

Actually, he is doing ok, TwoThumbs. He is actually curious about a video I posted that was removed a couple of weeks ago due to its extremely bloody photographs of the aborted child. All I could find was the sanitized version of the same youtube and sent him a link. You can only view it at YouTube after you show you are older than 18. I'd say he's being a pretty standup guy about the issue. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt. I've only seen the funny and silly side. This is good to see his rational side. Let's give Kudos to those who asked for a rational debate area. It's how things get discussed in the real world.

 

[blackhawk]

Yeah I have no answer for this one.

 

[saveliberty]

One of the better threads on the subject folks. Nice job.

Roe v. Wade was a long time ago and our understanding of a fetus/baby has improved greatly since. I have a granddaughter on the way with a possible cleft palate. Will know more next Monday afternoon.
So the whole subject is pretty real and immediate for us.

I think the point at which you can still have an abortion needs to be revisited and push back closer to the inception. Maybe that is a couple of weeks sooner, maybe a bit more.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And that's why Roe v Wade and the one that followed (can never remember) HAVE to be on the books. Because what works for me doesn't work for you or Beck or Jake (who shall never be pregnant anyway).

Each woman has to make her own decisions and handle any fallout that may or may not occur. This isn't a spectator sport. We don't get to Monday morning quarterback.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey, it ended the time limit established in Roe and replaced it with the &#8216;undue burden&#8217; standard.

Arizona drew the line, and it was upheld.

Likely because it doesn&#8217;t manifest an undue burden to a woman&#8217;s obtaining an abortion, where 20 weeks was deemed an appropriate time limit to make a decision. That&#8217;s also why the &#8216;personhood at conception&#8217; law in Oklahoma was struck down by that state&#8217;s Supreme Court.

To answer the OP, it should be left up to the states to determine provided any measure complies with Constitutional case law.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And that's why Roe v Wade and the one that followed (can never remember) HAVE to be on the books. Because what works for me doesn't work for you or Beck or Jake (who shall never be pregnant anyway).

Each woman has to make her own decisions and handle any fallout that may or may not occur. This isn't a spectator sport. We don't get to Monday morning quarterback.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey, it ended the time limit established in Roe and replaced it with the ‘undue burden’ standard.

Arizona drew the line, and it was upheld.

Likely because it doesn’t manifest an undue burden to a woman’s obtaining an abortion, where 20 weeks was deemed an appropriate time limit to make a decision. That’s also why the ‘personhood at conception’ law in Oklahoma was struck down by that state’s Supreme Court.

To answer the OP, it should be left up to the states to determine provided any measure complies with Constitutional case law.

Just so. State determination within SCOTUS guidelines.

 

[koshergrl]

I understand full well that nothing pulls extremist automatons from all sides out of the woodwork faster than an abortion thread, but since we now have a clean debate forum I'm going to try anyway.

I ask that if you wish to participate in this debate you first concede the following two points:

1) Aborting a fetus within a week of conception is not murdering a child.

2) Aborting a fetus after 8 months of gestation, that could survive outside the womb, is murdering a child.

The debate I'm interested in is where between point 1 and point 2 should that line be drawn? At what point in the pregnancy has the mother forfeited the right to 'choose' so to speak?

Heartbeat


period

Hmmm?

About how far along does that happen? (I know I should remember ).

four weeks.
"Just four weeks after conception, the neural tube along your baby's back is closing and your baby's heart is pumping blood."

Fetal development: The first trimester - MayoClinic.com

 

[koshergrl]

I understand full well that nothing pulls extremist automatons from all sides out of the woodwork faster than an abortion thread, but since we now have a clean debate forum I'm going to try anyway.

I ask that if you wish to participate in this debate you first concede the following two points:

1) Aborting a fetus within a week of conception is not murdering a child.

2) Aborting a fetus after 8 months of gestation, that could survive outside the womb, is murdering a child.

The debate I'm interested in is where between point 1 and point 2 should that line be drawn? At what point in the pregnancy has the mother forfeited the right to 'choose' so to speak?

For me the line is drawn when the fetus can survive without a host. A stand alone life. A life without the requirement of being connected to another living being.

By the time a fetus is at that point it is a baby..... and if a woman wanted to have an abortion she should have done it well before that point.

I do not agree with late term abortion unless it is for medical reasons.

Is a woman a "host"? Can you support that?

 

[Amelia]

And that's why Roe v Wade and the one that followed (can never remember) HAVE to be on the books. Because what works for me doesn't work for you or Beck or Jake (who shall never be pregnant anyway).

Each woman has to make her own decisions and handle any fallout that may or may not occur. This isn't a spectator sport. We don't get to Monday morning quarterback.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey, it ended the time limit established in Roe and replaced it with the ‘undue burden’ standard.

Arizona drew the line, and it was upheld.

Likely because it doesn’t manifest an undue burden to a woman’s obtaining an abortion, where 20 weeks was deemed an appropriate time limit to make a decision. That’s also why the ‘personhood at conception’ law in Oklahoma was struck down by that state’s Supreme Court.

To answer the OP, it should be left up to the states to determine provided any measure complies with Constitutional case law.

And we the people, the citizens of these states, have an interest in the determinations our states make. Do you have an opinion to share about the topic in your role as citizen of your state?

 

[Vidi]

I understand full well that nothing pulls extremist automatons from all sides out of the woodwork faster than an abortion thread, but since we now have a clean debate forum I'm going to try anyway.

I ask that if you wish to participate in this debate you first concede the following two points:

1) Aborting a fetus within a week of conception is not murdering a child.

2) Aborting a fetus after 8 months of gestation, that could survive outside the womb, is murdering a child.

The debate I'm interested in is where between point 1 and point 2 should that line be drawn? At what point in the pregnancy has the mother forfeited the right to 'choose' so to speak?

Three years ago, my wife happily announced she was pregnant...and I was furious. It was not something I wanted at this point. I have grandkids for christs sake!

But nine weeks in we went for an ultrasound. I had never actually seen anything in any previous ultrasounds I saw...just some glob on the screen that the nurse would excitedly announce was my child...whatever...its a glob of nothing....

But this time, there was a glob with arms and legs waving wikldy like it was going LOOK HERE I AM! SEE ME?!?!?!

And I knew THAT was my child.

My wife and I were not getting along because I had felt I had been dragged into a life changing situation that would last well into my final working years ...so much for travel and peace and quiet...

But I turned to her right then and said," Im in."

And that was that.

Now my daughter is 26 month old and the very best thing that ever happened to me.

Sure her niece is a year older than her but hey, life is strange.

At 9 weeks I saw arms and legs and saw a person. For others it might be different.

So the answer is this:

I dont know.

 

[koshergrl]

And that's why Roe v Wade and the one that followed (can never remember) HAVE to be on the books. Because what works for me doesn't work for you or Beck or Jake (who shall never be pregnant anyway).

Each woman has to make her own decisions and handle any fallout that may or may not occur. This isn't a spectator sport. We don't get to Monday morning quarterback.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey, it ended the time limit established in Roe and replaced it with the ‘undue burden’ standard.

Arizona drew the line, and it was upheld.

Likely because it doesn’t manifest an undue burden to a woman’s obtaining an abortion, where 20 weeks was deemed an appropriate time limit to make a decision. That’s also why the ‘personhood at conception’ law in Oklahoma was struck down by that state’s Supreme Court.

To answer the OP, it should be left up to the states to determine provided any measure complies with Constitutional case law.

And we the people, the citizens of these states, have an interest in the determinations our states make. Do you have an opinion to share about the topic in your role as citizen of your state?

Needs more clarification, please. He is a citizen of his state, so his opinion is made as a citizen of his state.

 

[alan1]

I've been involved in numerous message board debates concerning abortion over the years. I used to be 100% against abortion, and I still think abortion is the wrong thing to do, but I have softened up my stance over the years.

Here is how I see it.

The medical community, attorneys and politicians have all agreed that at the point that brainwaves cease to exist in a person, then that person is legally dead. I would use that same standard (albeit in reverse) for abortion. At the point that brainwaves begin to exist in a fetus, then that person is legally alive. I would accept abortion as an option as long as the fetus is absent of brainwaves, but once those brainwaves exist, abortion should not be allowed.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I understand full well that nothing pulls extremist automatons from all sides out of the woodwork faster than an abortion thread, but since we now have a clean debate forum I'm going to try anyway.

I ask that if you wish to participate in this debate you first concede the following two points:

1) Aborting a fetus within a week of conception is not murdering a child.

2) Aborting a fetus after 8 months of gestation, that could survive outside the womb, is murdering a child.

The debate I'm interested in is where between point 1 and point 2 should that line be drawn? At what point in the pregnancy has the mother forfeited the right to 'choose' so to speak?

16 to 20 weeks.

 

[Si modo]

I understand full well that nothing pulls extremist automatons from all sides out of the woodwork faster than an abortion thread, but since we now have a clean debate forum I'm going to try anyway.

I ask that if you wish to participate in this debate you first concede the following two points:

1) Aborting a fetus within a week of conception is not murdering a child.

2) Aborting a fetus after 8 months of gestation, that could survive outside the womb, is murdering a child.

The debate I'm interested in is where between point 1 and point 2 should that line be drawn? At what point in the pregnancy has the mother forfeited the right to 'choose' so to speak?

I agree. I believe elective abortions should be illegal (not ones that are medically necessary for a variety of reasons, but simple elective ones) at the point of viability of a preemie. I believe that is currently around 24 weeks.

So, elective abortions up to that point should be ok.

Now, as technology improves, that time of gestation to viability might change and the law should change accordingly.

That's the way I see it.

And, on elective abortions, I am against those being paid for using government monies.

 

[koshergrl]

The line on abortion can only be drawn with an eye to preventing human rights violations, and promoting safety and health, while at the same time refraining from violating any basic human rights (life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness...the first among these being LIFE, without the other two cannot exist).

Elective abortion should never be an option. Women do not have the right to kill other people, simply because they harbor them in their bodies. The choice of a woman is the choice of wehther or not to engage in reproductive activities, i.e., sex, and if she makes the choice to engage in activities that could potentially result in pregnancy, the ensuing pregnancy and baby therefore becomes her responsibility. Her responsibility to protect and nurture until such time as she can find someone else to protect and nurture it, if that is her desire.

Sometimes the choice has been removed from her, in the case of rape. Some argue that this indicates an acceptable use for abortion. But it is the human condition that sometimes we come under obligation to others through no choice of our own. The law recognizes that a person who sees an untended child, and then leaves that child untended, and something happens to it, is responsible for the harm that comes to it based on an understanding that we are OBLIGATED to protect the vulnerable, even when we did not choose to be a protector of that vulnerable being. Likewise, if a woman is pregnant through no choice of her own, she remains responsible for the life within her, until such time as she can find a suitable protector for that child. This has the additional bonus of removing the option of coercing incest and rape victims into abortions, thereby hiding the crime that resulted in the pregnancy in the first place.

In the rare event of pregnancies that are life-threatening, then abortion must of course be legal. This is an extremely rare occurrence, probably the most prevalent example would be a woman who discovers she has cancer during a pregnancy, and needs to aggressively treat the cancer which would harm the child. Sometimes women in this situation choose to abort, sometimes they choose to suspend treatment until after the birth of the child. They should be accomodated regardless of the decision they make in this case. There are other instances where it could be necessary to remove the baby from the mother's body in order to save the mother; and these decisions should be made by the family.

 

[Luissa]

12 weeks

 

[hortysir]

100 days