South Dakota Bill a ‘Backdoor’ Attempt to Ban Abortions Near 20 Weeks


A bill introduced in the South Dakota house would restrict abortion services in the state by targeting second-trimester abortions with never-before-used legislative language.

HB 1241 would make illegal any abortion performed in which a “living” fetus is “dismembered” during the procedure—an apparent reference to dilation and evacuation (D and E) procedures, which may be used in a second-trimester abortion. A D and E is often used when it is the safest means of preserving the life, health, and perhaps future fertility of the woman. The bill could, in practice, have the effect of banning all surgical abortions in the state.

If a doctor violated the law, it would be considered a Class 2 felony, with a maximum sentence of 25 years’ imprisonment and $50,000 in fines. Another provision allows for a violation to be considered a Class B felony, which carries a possible life sentence.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Isaac Latterell (R-Tea), told the Argus Leader that the legislation “just makes clear that a certain procedure that is totally horrific and gruesome to any reasonable person would not be an acceptable method of ending a child’s life, and that is to dismember or decapitate a living, unborn child.” 

Abbie Peterson, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice South Dakota, told RH Reality Check that the bill is another attempt to further restrict access to abortion. Peterson noted that the language targets later abortions, which have been the targets of 20-week bans that are being struck down by the courts. “This is just a backdoor attempt to ban later-term abortion care,” said Peterson.

“This is a poorly drafted, inflammatory attack on a woman’s ability to make a decision about her pregnancy in consultation with her family, her doctor and her faith,” said Connie Lewis, vice president for external affairs of Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota.

“South Dakota is already one of the most restrictive states for women’s health in the country,” said Lewis, noting that state voters have already twice rejected ballot measures that would have banned nearly all legal abortions in the state. Now, “politicians have introduced yet another bill that could do just that,” she said.

Laws already on the books severely restrict access to abortion and impose unnecessary regulations on providers in the state. Many of the restrictions in place were resoundingly rejected by voters in the state and passed anyway by the legislature.

Currently there is only one clinic in the state that provides abortions. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 98 percent of South Dakota counties have no abortion clinic, and 77 percent of South Dakota women live in these counties. 

The legislation currently has 17 co-sponsors and has been referred to the House Health and Human Services Committee.

Correction: A version of this article noted that South Dakota voters had twice rejected anti-abortion constitutional amendments; in fact, citizens have voted twice against anti-abortion ballot measures. We regret the error.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Follow Teddy Wilson on Twitter: @txindyjourno

To schedule an interview with Teddy Wilson please contact Communications Director Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • fiona64

    Cardiac surgery is also “totally horrific and gruesome.” Shall we ban that as well?
    I am so sick of legislators practicing medicine without a license.

    • five_by_five

      Ron Paul has a license, is an OBGYN and knows a whole hell of a lot more about abortion than you do.

      And that’s why he’s against it.

      • lady_black

        Then Ron Paul should never have an abortion. See how easy that is?

        • five_by_five

          And women should never electively murder post 20 week fetuses.

          See how easy that is?

          Oh, wait, is that not easy for you? Do you really want to have an elective abortion after 20 weeks you sicko?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You do not understand the meaning of the word “elective.” All surgery is elective unless it is emergency surgery.

            This is basic first aid type medical knowledge.

            YOU DO NOT KNOW THIS but you want to be in charge of my sexual life? Of course you do. And you are calling lady black a sicko?

            Not one of you perverts is sane. Not one.

          • five_by_five

            No, I understand quite well.

            And I reiterate: ELECTIVE abortions should be banned after 20 weeks.

            That really isn’t hard to understand. And if your sex life has a lot to do with murdering babies, then maybe you should reexamine your sex life.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Babies have been born. And all surgery is elective unless it’s emergency surgery. Elective means any surgery that is scheduled. My friend’s surgery for her breast cancer is scheduled for March. Therefore it’s elective.

          • http://pandarogue.blogspot.com/ Yǒuhǎo Huǒ Māo

            80% of abortions are during the first trimester and probably about 95% of those are for birth control reasons. Nearly every second and third trimester abortion is due to issues such as life of the mother or of the infant. This legislation targets those kinds of abortions, making it illegal to perform an abortion to save the life of a woman, or to prevent a child being born only to have it die moments after birth.

          • five_by_five

            Well, it’s a good thing there is an exemption for health of the mother in the bill. I guess actually reading the bill would be important next time you comment. (Hint: there’s a link in the article)

          • lady_black

            There is no health exception. You lie.

          • five_by_five

            Oh look, another person who didn’t read the proposed law.

            “Section 2. The provisions of section 1 of this Act do not apply to any medical treatment for
            a life-threatening condition provided to the mother by a physician licensed to practice medicine
            in this state which results in the accidental or unintentional injury or death of the unborn child.”

          • lady_black

            That is not a health exception. You CANNOT be that dense.

          • five_by_five

            “life-threatening condition” isn’t a health exemption?

            Wow. Then what is?

          • lady_black

            A death-trap for women.

          • fiona64

            No, dumb-fuck, it isn’t. It’s a *life* exception. Not all threats to health are threats to life.

          • L-dan

            As fiona notes, a life exception isn’t a health exception. So pregnant people and their doctors have to spend time and energy going “is this person sick *enough* for an exception” and that’s fucked up.

            ‘This pregnancy has a 50% chance of killing her and a 50% chance of leaving her alive but with weakened kidneys….well, that’s likely going to lose me my license if someone sues over it, better send her to the next state over instead.’ That’s not a mental calculation doctors should have to make.

            Additionally, these sorts of medical calculations mean that people end up hearing that their fetus has little chance for survival but there’s enough of a chance that the state has decided they don’t get to make their own choices there. That’s not something I want to putting people through. That’s horrible and cruel.

            And finally, you end up with ruptured membranes and incomplete miscarriages falling in the category of “well the mother’s life isn’t in danger yet, so we can’t do anything.” If you think that doesn’t happen, look up the many reports of precisely this at Catholic hospitals already. Look at the lawsuit against the Bishop’s Council for their edicts that drive these situations.

            A ban at 20 weeks *might* stop a few of those ‘frivolous’ abortions* done by people who just can’t make up their minds right away (or perhaps can’t find the money and days off right away). It will also increase the stress and pain of those that even you admit are ‘allowable’ abortions, as well as risking the lives and health of pregnant people as their doctors wait for them to deteriorate enough to fit within the confines of such a law. That’s a crappy trade off, and makes 20-week bans morally fucked up.

            *Frivolous as depicted by forced-birthers. I don’t think they’re frivolous at all.

          • Ivy Mike

            And that sort of non-health exemption is what gets women killed. Doctors and medical staff, worried that they might be held criminally liable for aborting a fetus that the lawmakers did not think was “dead enough” or “life threatening enough”, would wait too long and hesitate too much before taking necessary action.

            You really do need to read up on what happens in cases like this. Abundant evidence exists.

          • five_by_five

            Cite one source where doctors waited to treat because they were afraid of litigation.

            Just one. Go.

          • Ivy Mike

            Savita Halappanavar.

            You lose, genius.

          • five_by_five

            Savita Halappanavar died of a ESBL blood infection and her failure to be treated with antibiotics. So, try again.

          • lady_black

            You have just enough knowledge to be extremely dangerous. Antibiotics do not work inside the uterus of a pregnant woman. The pregnancy was the source of the infection and needed to be aborted, THEN treated with antibiotics.

          • five_by_five

            Antibiotics don’t work in the terus (I think you meant fetus)?

            That’s interesting. Then how do certain antibiotics cause birth defects?

            Oh, wait. You’re full of shiyat.

          • Defamate

            If someone were to stick a rotting porcupine up your ass, and then give you antibiotics to kill the infection, the antibiotics wouldn’t do a goddamn thing unless the *source of the infection* is removed first.

            Derp.

          • HeilMary1

            Exactly!

          • lady_black

            No, I meant the UTERUS of a pregnant woman, not “fetus.” If it were that easy, pregnancy could be maintained indefinitely post membrane rupture. It can’t. There is a definite expiration date on how long membranes can remain ruptured prior to the need to induce labor. The reason is because the pregnancy will eventually become septic. Ruptured membranes in a pre-viable pregnancy are a medical emergency. There is no hope of saving the fetus, and if the fetus isn’t expelled, antibiotics are ineffective.

          • five_by_five

            Well, then you should know that the uterus blood supply is the same as the rest of the body and antibiotics most certainly go there. Now, if you were talking about crossing the placenta into the FETUS, then that’s another issue. But most antibiotics cross the placenta as well.

            And just so you know, she was showing signs of infection (elevated WBC) upon admission to the hospital on Sunday October 21st, 2012. Her membranes didn’t rupture until the 22nd. The infection predated the PPROM.

            In other words (and in the opinion of the consulted microbiologist, James Clair), sepsis killed this woman. Not her not having an abortion.

          • lady_black

            OF COURSE sepsis killed this woman. CAUSED by not completing the miscarriage she was having. The pregnancy wasn’t terminated and she died from it! End of story. It was a septic miscarriage. The proper treatment for a septic miscarriage is to complete the miscarriage, and treat with broad-spectrum antibiotics. And the infection didn’t precede the PPROM. You’re spinning. All pregnant women have elevated white counts.

          • five_by_five

            Except that the infection predated the miscarriage and she had a septic abortion.

            But whatever….the timeframe obviously isn’t important to you.

          • HeilMary1

            Using fetuses to murder women is your holy mission, pig.

          • five_by_five

            flagged

          • HeilMary1

            Dumbass, her DEAD ROTTING fetus killed her! And what is your reward here? — will your favorite pedophile priest give you a Valentine smooch?

          • HeilMary1

            Just like my infected porous-material chin implant that kept getting re-infected after all kinds of antibiotics. The oral surgeon finally told me the implant was the source of the infection, that no antibiotics could kill the organism lurking in the holes of the implant, and that it had to be removed. The underside of my chin was starting to develop a fistula. Even though my jaw was shot full of pain killers, I felt IMMEDIATE relief when he yanked the implant out.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, it was the failure to remove the non-viable fetus which was being miscarried and which is what caused the infection.

          • Ivy Mike

            Her conditions were caused by an untreated miscarriage, jerk. Every medical professional that examined the case agrees. However, thanks for outing yourself as nothing more than an apologist for forced-birth propaganda and talking points.

            The dying, rotting fetus was the cause of the infection. Medical best practices direct that the fetus be immediately aborted and antibiotics administered. Instead, the medical staff waited too long out of fear that they would face prosecution.

            Once again, your sources LIE and SPIN facts they prefer not to face, such as the fact that their insane beliefs about fetii caused a horrible, tortuous murder.

          • five_by_five

            The infection predated the miscarriage. But you knew that.

          • Jennifer Starr

            The fetus was non-viable and being miscarried. There was no reason at all to delay removing it and treating the infection.

          • five_by_five

            While that’s true, it was the infection in her blood and the fact that she didn’t get antibiotics for 3 days that killed her.

            Not her miscarriage.

          • Jennifer Starr

            But if they had removed the fetus immediately, she probably would have lived. No reason not to remove the fetus.

          • five_by_five

            No, if they had treated her blood infection from day one she might have lived.

            I’ve yet to see a report that claims the fetus was the source of the infection, so unless you can provide that report, you’re really just making assumptions.

          • Jennifer Starr

            What sense does it make to not remove the fetus of a woman who is in active miscarriage?

          • HeilMary1

            5×5 is a Munchausen by Proxy psychopath — she keeps moving the goal post / gaslighting her targets so that she “always wins”. Her criminal goal is to legally kick her MUCH PRETTIER COMPETITION into early graves by using fetuses as fists or stand-your-ground guns. She gets holy orgasms whenever fetuses maim and murder their mothers as divine punishment. My family did this to me constantly. I could never suffer enough to please them. Finally, I cut them completely out of my life because Munchausen by Proxy perps are as relentless as pedophiles. When they lose one victim, they substitute others for their holy sadistic fix.

          • fiona64

            Well, then, I suggest you look at your notifications … since I provided a link to the inquest report that says just that.

          • five_by_five

            You mean the inquest report that has comments by the microbiologist James Clair who stated that the cause of death was the blood infection not being treated with broad spectrum antibiotics – not the patient not having an abortion.

            That inquest?

          • fiona64

            Thanks for proving that you didn’t bother to read the link.

            Now, why don’t you go watch cartoons or play with your friends?

            Oh, wait … my bust. You don’t have any friends, do you?

            Go back to your kiddy spaces and leave the adults alone.

          • HeilMary1

            Liar, she was was treated on Day One and the DEAD fetus caused the infection.

          • HeilMary1

            Lying mother killer, she got antibiotics on DAY ONE, but the poisons pumped out by the ROTTING DEAD fetus overwhelmed any benefits from the antibiotics. But psychopath Munchausen by Proxy perp you won’t admit it because you get off on the senseless suffering of millions of women.

          • cjvg

            Her membranes broke at 17 weeks and subsequently an infection set in

          • HeilMary1

            The fetus caused its own death and her death. Her death could have been prevented if the DEAD fetus had been removed on day one! You refuse to know that FETUSES MAIM AND MURDER their captive hosts by the millions!

          • cjvg

            She was treated by antibiotics, you should take your own advise and read the reports.

            However if you fail to remove the ever increasing source of infection, then there is no fighting that infection even if you use all the antibiotics in the world

          • five_by_five

            She had an elevated white count when she was admitted and antibiotics weren’t given until hospital day #3.

            The fetus was never determined to be the source of the infection

            Now you know, Nice hyperbole though.

          • cjvg

            Lying does not help you.
            She was admitted on Monday and given antibiotics (IV) right away (it is routine medical practice everywhere (even in catholic hospitals)to administer antibiotics when the membranes break)

            An induction was requested and denied until Wednesday when the fetus’s hearth rate finally stopped. They treated her with antibiotic right away but did not remove the source of the infection until 3 days later. That is where your 3 days come from!

            Obviously you heard the bell but have no idea where the clapper is!

            interesting to note is that you think removing the source of an infection is hyperbole. This so clearly demonstrates a lack of common sense that it becomes understandable why you are so unable to understand and read responses to your ignorant statements

          • Jennifer Starr

            She doesn’t even know what a clapper is.

          • cjvg

            You are probably right.
            She certainly is unable to read, follow logic or display reason and a functional thought process.

          • Defamate

            You are wrong, as usual. She died of chorioamnionitis, an infection of the fetal membranes. When left untreated the bacteria of chorioamnionitis will march across the umbilical cord into both the maternal and fetal circulation. Left untreated, the outcome is maternal death.

            The hospital did in fact inform Savita that her pregnancy was doomed. But, they could not, and would not, perform an abortion as long as there was a fetal heartbeat.

            Treatment for chorioamnionitis IS abortion + removal of the fetus (either through delivery or abortion)

            In both Canada and the United States, once chorioamnionitis is diagnosed the treatment is antibiotics and delivery. An “expeditious delivery…regardless of gestational age,” according to the guidelines of the American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG).

            Ruptured membranes at 17 weeks, an open cervix, back pain, and an elevated white blood cell count means chorioamnionitis. The diagnosis was clear. But they waited…

          • HeilMary1

            Liar, they knew on day one that the DEAD ROTTING fetus was the source of her infection! Some have speculated that since she was from India, Catholic fetal idolaters racially profiled her for “self-aborting a female fetus,” thereby giving themselves a George Zimmerman excuse to legally murder her with a DEAD ROTTING fetus! She was executed by a DEAD ROTTING fetus as punishment for having a miscarriage while being Indian!

          • HeilMary1

            Mother-killing Liar, you refuse to accept proof that fetuses and their idolaters do indeed murder women like Savita! Her PREVENTABLE LETHAL INFECTION was caused by the DEAD ROTTING fetus that you mother killers refused to remove! By your disgusting logic, gangrene and tumors shouldn’t be removed and instead only be treated with drugs!

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            http://www.christianpost.com/news/catholic-bishops-sued-by-aclu-for-not-allowing-abortion-in-catholic-hospital-110407/

            Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, responded Friday to a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union alleging that Catholic health directives encourage poor treatment of pregnant women by not allowing abortion.

            The ACLU is suing the USCCB on behalf of Tamesha Means, who suffered a miscarriage at a Catholic hospital in Michigan.

            According to the ACLU, “Tamesha rushed to Mercy Health Partners in Muskegon, Michigan, when her water broke after only 18 weeks of pregnancy. Based on the bishops’ religious directives, the hospital sent her home twice even though Tamesha was in excruciating pain; there was virtually no chance that her pregnancy could survive, and continuing the pregnancy posed significant risks to her health.”

            The USCCB is being sued because, according to the suit, its directives prevented Means from getting an abortion, and thus the bishops are responsible for “unnecessary trauma and harm.”

          • fiona64

            Savita Halapannavar.

            You’re welcome.

          • fiona64

            That’s not a *health exception,* dumbass. That’s a life exception.

          • lady_black

            No you do NOT understand well. If you did, you wouldn’t talk so dumb.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Elective abortions will never be banned. An elective abortion is legal until just before delivery if the fetus will kill its host or maim her. And that is as it should be.

          • five_by_five

            That’s not an elective abortion genius.

          • Jennifer Starr

            It is if you can schedule it.

          • goatini

            Since NO pro-choice woman’s sex life has anything whatsoever to do with “murdering babies” – it’s obvious that YOU have sick and perverted sexual fantasies and fetishes.

          • lady_black

            I don’t think anyone really wants to have an abortion, ever. But I don’t believe women should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term that involves a fetus that is incompatible with life, or need to hesitate when her own well-being is in jeopardy. At 20 weeks, an ultrasound is done that diagnoses fetal anomalies that can’t be seen earlier. At that point, if she decides not to continue the pregnancy, an abortion will be scheduled.

          • five_by_five

            Ultrasound, amnio, and CVS can be done months before 20 weeks.

            Try again.

          • Jennifer Starr

            And a lot of fetal anomalies don’t develop or can’t be detected before twenty weeks. A fetus is not simply a little person that just gets bigger. A lot of organ development takes place and can go wrong during the second and the third trimesters.

          • five_by_five

            Name one fetal abnormality that develops after 20 weeks.

            I’ll wait.

          • lady_black

            Nobody said that the abnormalities are not present. They just cannot be seen in an ultrasound. For example anencephaly and renal agenesis.

          • five_by_five

            Those can both be seen before 20 weeks.

            Try again.

          • Defamate

            Well then ask yourself this. If it’s soooo easy to detect all abnormalities before 20 weeks then why isn’t it standard practise huh?

          • lady_black

            Nope. 18-20 weeks.

          • five_by_five

            From UptoDate:

            “Prenatal diagnosis of renal agenesis… The fetal kidneys and adrenal glands can be visualized by transabdominal ultrasound between the 12th and 15th week of gestation.”

            “The anencephalic fetus can be definitively identified by the 12th
            postmenstrual week by TVS, although in some cases this diagnosis has been made at 9 to 10 postmenstrual weeks.”

            Care to reconsider your comment?

          • Defamate

            Then why doesn’t every woman get every single test? Especially if they are poor and don’t have insurance! Heck, all of these tests will only cost 20k+ aaand the woman will spend the first months of the pregnancy constantly in and out of the hospital!

            http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PRENATAL.html

            You won’t care if your insurance company picks up the cost for all these tests, will ya?

          • five_by_five

            Most people don’t get the test because the risk is low. 0.01% of pregnancies.

            But you knew that I’m sure.

            Use your brain.

          • Defamate

            It’s a waste of time and money to get every single test in a wanted pregnancy. And women who do NOT WANT to be pregnant are not going to wait til week 20 or week 30 and have an abortion because they suddenly find out that their bikini is too tight.

            Standard practise, for purely PRACTICAL reasons, is to get the tests done at 16-20 weeks which is completely reasonable.

            Your entire rationale has been that women have abortions 20 weeks + for purely frivolous reasons and you have been proven wrong. Time and time again.

          • five_by_five

            Well, you’ve completed misunderstood my numerous posts then.

            I agreed that most abortions done after 20 weeks are done for the health of the mother and/or fetus. And I’m ok with that.

            What I’m not ok with are elective abortions after this time. And in this context “elective” means NOT REQUIRED for the health of the mother and/or fetus. We agree that these are rare as most elective abortions are performed before 16 weeks.

            Which is why there should be zero problem banning elective abortions after 20 weeks.

          • cjvg

            The mental health of the woman/girl/female child in question is still considered a part of health!

            Yes even those who are genetically female and can be impregnated are still considered humans worth and deserving of optimal health status (including mental health)

            A pregnancy does not diminish a female to less deserving of health then a potential life

          • five_by_five

            We don’t allow people to kill their offspring because they are a burden and might negatively effect their mental health.

            But maybe you think we should.

          • cjvg

            Before there is an actual life present you are not killing a life, at best you are “killing” a potential!

            Proclaiming concern for a life that not even is, to the detriment of a fully realized and present life that is, is hypocritical at best.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Poor comparison. Anyone can care for a baby once it is born. Only the woman can be pregnant.

          • Ramanusia

            We don’t allow people to kill women because they have decided to that a woman’s life is meaningless and that she’s nothing more than an incubator, nor do we allow them to enact policies that ignore medical realities to impose their science defying beliefs on women’s health and lives.

            But maybe you think we should ignore the medical realities and just let the prejudices and bigotry of a minority of religious fundamentalists impose their will on the population at large? Apparently you’d be fine with being denied blood transfusions etc, due to the doctrine of a few people.

          • fiona64

            Maybe you should grow the hell up.

          • HeilMary1

            Fetuses spreading lethal face- and breast-rotting cancers do imperil their captive hosts’ mental health. Fear of bodily harm and death is a good enough reason for self-defending abortions. If “threatened” gun lovers can shoot teens for strolling while black, women can stand their ground by aborting any threatening fetuses.

          • Defamate

            Every abortion is for the health of the woman. There is no such thing as a safe pregnancy.

            FACT.

          • Ramanusia

            Actually elective procedures such as abortions post 20 weeks are elective because it’s not EMERGENT, as in her life in not yet in imminent peril, and it’s being done when her life won’t be put in greater jeopardy by waiting.

            And no, we didn’t misunderstand, you’ve made it quite clear that nuance isn’t your thing and that you think that people who support abortion after 20 weeks are “sickos” regardless of why the abortion is happening.

            We do disagree about BANNING procedures that are required after 20 weeks, because you simply cannot grasp that there are real and valid reasons for them to happen.

            The context you’ve created is nonsensical. Since performing a procedure when a patient is stable, rather than when her health is in imminent danger is the rational thing to do, which is why you have zero ground to stand on to ban anything.

          • Amanda Kazarian

            We really aren’t concerned about what bothers you. The thing is, you would never know if a woman has had an abortion unless you take an intrusive interest in her life. No one will allow you that anyway, lives tough.

          • HeilMary1

            Dumbass, you are deliberately conflating 20 week+ elective abortions with manicures. Banning such abortions would grossly maim and murder countless women because all such $30,000 abortions are FOR HEALTH REASONS.

          • five_by_five

            If they are for health reasons, it’s not an elective abortion.

            Please learn the correct terminology.

          • HeilMary1

            No, dumbass MOTHER KILLER, ALL abortions are for health reasons but you refuse to admit it because you then would have to consider the monstrous complications, disabilities, disfigurements, humiliations, betrayals, annulments, and bankruptcies in YOUR future!

          • Ramanusia

            Which ironically is the percentage of abortions done after 20 weeks, and when the average woman gets ultra sounds and amnio.

            But you “knew’ that I’m sure, because it invalidates pretty much every thing you said. Do you have a brain?

          • five_by_five

            The average women doesn’t get an amnio.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I am statistically the “average” woman. I am 5ft 4inches, size 12, 150 pounds. I had two babies at ages 43 and 45. I had two amnios.

          • five_by_five

            Great. So you’re claiming the average women has an amnio based on your personal experience.

            That’s very scientific of you.

          • Ramanusia

            Says who?

          • five_by_five

            So now you’re claiming that the average women going through childbirth has amniocentesis done.

            OK.

          • lady_black

            No I do not. I have no idea what “TVS” means, but it’s not a routine prenatal test. You need to link to the original information, as your understanding of what you read is not reliable. You also need to understand that because everything checks out normal in 12 week ultrasound, does not mean that it will check out normal in a 20 week ultrasound. As you have already been informed, a fetus isn’t a little person that grows bigger. Critical development takes place between 12 and 20 weeks that cannot always be predicted.

          • five_by_five

            You claimed that the conditions you mentioned (renal agenesis and anencephaly) were not detectable by ultrasound until 18-20 weeks.

            That’s incorrect. Both are detectable by 12 weeks. I’ve include the diagnostic criteria from UpToDate. I’m assuming you know what that website is. I don’t care if you don’t know what a TVS is. Look it up. Hint: It’s in the UpToDate article on anencephaly that I quoted.

          • cjvg

            So were are those diagnostic criteria from UpToDate you included?!
            Since the rest of your typed reply does show up here why are those criteria mysteriously absent? Again!

          • five_by_five

            Scroll up

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            It’s a transvaginal. Which is invasive. Which is why it’s not routine. Idiot here seems to think that a woman should get 20k worth of tests prior to 20 weeks because technically, a lot of abnormalities CAN be detected that way.

            But, here in the real world, women can’t, and won’t, be getting 20k+ worth of invasive tests just to see if the embryo/fetus is developing normally. May as well wait for the ultrasound, when it can be confirmed 100pct.

          • five_by_five

            You know what’s even more invasive than a trans-vaginal ultrasound?

            An abortion.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            Nope. Not a chemical abortion – which is how the majority are performed.

          • five_by_five

            Well, it’s a good thing that this bill has nothing to do with abortifactants then.

          • HeilMary1

            Vaginal, bladder and bowel shredding by fetuses is far worse than abortion.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            All you’ve been doing is quibbling over semantics. You don’t have an argument – you never did. Just the definitions of words. Keep plugging your ears and thinking you have ‘won’ because you deny the facts and instead act as if your opinions are fact.

            They aren’t. And your an idiot. And everyone knows it. The only person you’re fooling is yourself. Which is kinda sad. You’re not even a good troll.

          • Ramanusia

            Care to provide an actual link to what you’ve quoted?

            These are when they’re actually, specifically searched for and even then, it’s not something that can be effectively relied upon until later in pregnancy.

            It’s funny how you keep pointing to the exceptional cases while ignoring the average age when these conditions are diagnosed and when the tests are done.

          • five_by_five

            I wrote a comment with the links. RH hasn’t published it. So look it up on UpToDate yourself.

            I’ve included the topic headingsand quotes from the articles in my comment above.

            I know, I know. You don’t have a subscription to UpToDate and you don’t know what that website is. Tough.

          • cjvg

            So were are those “topic headings and quotes” you included?!

          • five_by_five

            Posted 2 days ago in reply to Lady Black on this thread:

            “From UptoDate:

            “Prenatal diagnosis of renal agenesis… The fetal kidneys and
            adrenal glands can be visualized by transabdominal ultrasound between the 12th and 15th week of gestation.”

            “The anencephalic fetus can be definitively identified by the 12th
            postmenstrual week by TVS, although in some cases this diagnosis has been made at 9 to 10 postmenstrual weeks.” ”

            Happy now? I’m not sure what’s so difficult. All you had to do was scroll up.

          • cjvg

            Also quoted “when a specific family history or other specific indications to look for these conditions are present”

          • five_by_five

            Yeah, so?

            Those condition are fairly rare and there would be no need to test the general population for them. It would be a huge waste of money and time.

            And even when they are detected late (post 20 weeks), I’d include that in the “theraputic abortion” category if a mother choose to abort because it would obviously be for the health of the fetus (or lack thereof). Do you remember when I was trying to point out to you the difference between therapeutic abortions and elective abortions? Make sense now?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Source or it did not happen.

          • five_by_five

            You’re right, UpToDate is a source for dummies.

          • Ramanusia

            Please provide the evidence to back up this statement. You’ve singularly failed to back up these nonsensical comments, while demanding that others do, and ignoring them when they provide the evidence to defeat you.

            Stop being a hypocrite and try for once to substantiate your claims.

          • five_by_five

            I guess the quote from the article wasn’t enough for you.

          • cjvg

            No quote is provided by you! please use ” ” to indicate were that mysterious quote might be. None of what you wrote is to be fond anywhere!

          • cjvg

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu

            CONCLUSION:
            At 11-13 weeks some abnormalities are always detectable, some can never be and others are potentially detectable depending on their association with increased NT, the phenotypic expression of the abnormality with gestation and the objectives set for such a scan.

            Specifically note that at 11-13 weeks it concludes;”some can never be and others are potentially detectable”
            Also note that you can find this information on UpToDate

            If you bother to read the whole research you will be informed in minute detail which abnormalities can NEVER be detected before 20 weeks

          • HeilMary1

            Just because a few experts can detect them before 20 weeks doesn’t mean most other experts will be able to spot such defects on most other fetuses.

          • cjvg

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21210483

            CONCLUSION:
            At 11-13 weeks some abnormalities are always detectable, some can never be and others are potentially detectable depending on their association with increased NT, the phenotypic expression of the abnormality with gestation and the objectives set for such a scan.

            Here, 5 medical experts answered your question for you

          • five_by_five

            I wrote “Name one fetal abnormality that develops after 20 weeks. ”

            So the answer continues to be none…..just like I wrote.

            Your link did not state any fetal abnormality that develops after 20 weeks. Please stay focused.

          • cjvg

            Lifted from the conclusion “some can never be and others are potentially detectable”

            And you think that means that all fetal abnormalities can be detected before 20 weeks?!

            If you are incapable of reading or understanding the English language I can not help you.

            I’m not in the habit of holding one-sided conversations with a rock.
            Enjoy your density, that seems to be all you really have!

          • five_by_five

            Again, you’ve provided zero fetal abnormalities that develop after 20 weeks. Thanks for the edification.

          • Defamate

            It doesn’t matter if they are detectable before 20 weeks or not.

            The fact is, we are talking about REALITY here, and the REALITY is that these things are often not tested until 20 weeks. We deal with reality, not theory.

            Anyways, from the conclusion that cjvg provided you with:

            Lifted from the conclusion “some can never be and others are potentially detectable”

            This is REALITY. I am sorry you don’t like it. But, I will trust the opinions of ob/gyns over yours any day.

          • fiona64

            STOP BEING DELIBERATELY OBTUSE.

          • cjvg

            Here is the whole file http://www.fetalmedicine.com/fmf/2011_18.pdf
            Learn to read is very good advise , you should take it

          • five_by_five

            Yet, again, you’ve provided zero fetal abnormalities that develop after 20 weeks and are STILL confused about the difference between “developed” and “detectable.”

          • cjvg

            You made very clear that you only wanted experts to inform you, you now want me to read the research data for you?
            It is all in there!
            Tell me if an abnormality can not be detected by a medical professional until 20 weeks how should a woman e should chose an early abortion and not wait until 20 weeks? (because according to you those lazy sluts that do not want to abort their pregnancies until they know if it has severe abnormalities should be denied an abortion)

          • cjvg

            In this instance, it is the same. If you can not detect them, you can not respond to them= abortion after 20 weeks when you can detect them
            Nice game of semantics but ultimately irrelevant, it proofs that women and their doctors need to have the medically necessary option to have abortions after 20 weeks.
            So you give me ONE good reason why women should be able to KNOW that their fetus has an abnormality before 20 weeks if modern medical science clearly can NOT
            Also give me ONE good reason why your personal non medical expert opinion should over ride the opinion of the whole medical expert opinion of ACOG?

          • colleen2

            So, basically you are wasting our time quibbling about semantics?

          • cjvg

            If you would actually take the effort to read the WHOLE research it will list in detail exactly each and every single abnormality that was NOT found with earlier testing!
            Any other clarifications needed!?

          • HeilMary1

            How about DEAD AND ROTTING fetuses? Rubella at 20 weeks can still be damaging. Maternal illnesses like fetus-induced cancers, accidents, assaults by fathers, prescriptions, diagnostic x-rays, and environmental poisons can also injure fetuses.

          • Ramanusia

            Please name the fetal abnormalities that are detected PRIOR to 20 weeks.

            We’re waiting.

          • Ivy Mike

            You are sadly, almost comically, incorrect.

          • five_by_five

            Really, how? Are you stating that amnio, cvs, and ultrasound can’t be used before 20 weeks?

            Please go on Mikey……

          • Ivy Mike

            No, child, I am stating, as others have above, that many abnormalities are not DETECTABLE until 20 weeks. Why does this simple fact evade you?

          • five_by_five

            Which abnormality is not detectable until 20 weeks? Be specific.

          • Ivy Mike

            I’ve got an idea, sweetie…how about you do some searching in actual medical journals and records, or on medical and scientific websites, and educate yourself with something not provided by forced-birth liars-for-doctrine, and then come back?

            You are, at this time, simply regurgitating debunked talking points and demonstrating an astonishing level of Dunning-Kruger syndrome. Go do your own homework.

          • five_by_five

            Oh, so none.

            Got it. Thanks Mike. I didn’t think you’d be able to provide any.

          • cjvg

            Where is your expert proof? You are just opinionating away and expect others to do the work to dispute your unsubstantiated personal opinions
            Arrogance galore here!

          • Ramanusia

            Funny how you don’t provide any yourself to back up the claims you keep digging out of your GI tract.

          • HeilMary1

            LOL! Dunning-Kruger syndrome helps explain my uber Catholic but incompetent Munchausen by Proxy nurse’s aid mom!

          • cjvg

            Obviously you have such issues with the fact that it MUST be specialists who inform you of the very real and very obvious fact that 20 week abortions can be a necessity. You should read this account from a pediatric cardiologist in defense of the absolute need for these procedures.
            http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2013/07/texas_abortion_ban_after_20_weeks_prenatal_testing_reveals_birth_defects.html

          • five_by_five

            Read the bottom of the article.

            “The Texas bill technically does contain an exception for fetuses with “severe fetal anomalies.””

            This is not about abortions that are performed due to health of the mother and/or fetus. This is about banning post-20 week abortions that are NOT done for the health of the mother and/or fetus.

          • cjvg

            Read again and see how that technicality plays out in real life!
            Technically Ireland allows for abortions to protect the live of the mother, however that technicality did cost savita her life!

          • five_by_five

            Not treating her septicemia with antibiotics cost her her life.

            Sorry, I know you want to spin this into a pro-abortion stance but that’s going to work with me.

          • cjvg

            She was treated with antibiotics from the start read the report, since it was done in English you can even read it in its original non translated form!

            What you are willfully and arrogantly are dismissing is that women are actual lives that are going to be endangered if legislators start practicing medicine!

            Why are you so dismissive of doctors that you rather have untrained legislators make this decisions?

          • Ramanusia

            Actually not providing the abortion at the time that was necessary is what CAUSED the septicemia. They did treat with antibiotics, but when you keep a woman with a ruptured amniotic sac, which is the equivalent of an open head wound, in a place where antibiotic resistant bacteria abound, is something that anyone with a functional brain and a medical education, could foresee.

            Not treating her incomplete miscarriage is what caused her to exposed to and infected with the strain of e.coli that killed her.

            Sorry, I know you want to avoid responsibility for the reality of the monstrous nature of your politics, to pretend that your anti-choice stance isn’t the pro-death, pro-pain and pro-murder stance that defines it.

            The facts are not spin, and your attempt to spin inconvenient facts have failed.

          • five_by_five

            I’d hate to parse words with someone so obviously knowledgeable about medical things and stuff but a couple of things:

            1. The infection was present before the PPROM. The timeline tells us this.

            2. She had an inevitable abortion (probably septic abortion). Not an incomplete abortion.
            Look up the difference.

          • lady_black

            Abortion was both inevitable AND incomplete. Her body was trying desperately to rid itself of the source of the infection, the fetus, and should have been assisted by induction. The malpractice (yes, MALPRACTICE) was in attempting to continue the pregnancy until the dying fetus naturally expired. And it’s all too typical of the way pregnant women who are miscarrying are treated in Catholic hospitals.

          • cjvg

            So if the abortion was complete why did the doctors have to go in and do an abortion 3 days after she was admitted!
            Would you please bother to use some basic logic and remember the claims you made previously!

          • five_by_five

            You didn’t look up the difference, did you? You really need to familiarize yourself with the terms of spontaneous abortion before you proceed.

            It was not a “complete abortion.” I didn’t claim it was.
            It was not a “incomplete abortion” because there was not any passage of products of conception.

            It was an “inevitable abortion.”

            Had they not gone in and done a therapeutic abortion (one of the two types of induced abortions – the other is elective), she somehow lived though the sepsis, and the fetal remains were in place for 6 weeks, it would have been termed a “missed abortion.”

          • Ramanusia

            You really need to familiarize yourself with your own definitions.

            It was in inevitable abortion, and delaying the process of clearing out the uterus of a fetal tissue is what caused the septicemia and killed the woman.

            And had they done what the standard procedure was and done the elective procedure when they diagnosed the inevitable abortion, it would have saved her life. Instead they waited until her life was in danger AFTER she became septicemic, with an organism she picked up during her 24 hours in the hospital without antibiotics, that caused her death.

            You have no way of dancing around the simple fact that denying her the ELECTIVE abortion is what directly led to her death.

            Oopsie, you got lost in “schooling’ people on definitions and forgot that you undermined your own arguments didn’t you?

          • five_by_five

            Yes, I stated it was an inevitable abortion. I’m not sure what you’re trying to argue here.

            And in this context, if you believe the abortion would have saved her life, it’s called a “therapeutic abortion” not an “elective abortion” FYI.

          • HeilMary1

            You holy mother killers also oppose therapeutic abortions and removing already dead and rotting fetuses because you have criminal Munchausen by Proxy psychosis and get off on legally maiming and murdering women with deadly and ALREADY DEAD fetuses.

          • cjvg

            I guess we need to start taking screen shots of your statements before they miraculously change!

          • five_by_five

            And what did I change? By the way, my comment should be saved in your email.

            You can copy and paste what you think I originally wrote if you think it is somehow different.

            Please proceed to do so….this will be fun.

          • Ramanusia

            It seems that parsing words about topics you clearly do not understand is literally the only component of your verbal arsenal, thus YOU LIE, you do love to parse words, it’s literally all you do, and might I add, you do not do them well?

            Actually, no it wasn’t. The strain that caused the septicemia is one that is nosocomial in nature, thus the infection came after the PPROM, and if you have proof that states otherwise in this case, I invite you once again PROVIDE IT. The timeline says no such thing, in fact the timeline proves that the infection followed the PPROM. Since her condition at her time of her two hospital visits has been reported. Frankly if your claim as to the timeline is true, it makes the murder you and your anti-choice buddies committed even more heinous. It’s bad enough that your incompetent buddies MISSED the PPROM in the first place, but you missed an infection too, and you made her wait in pain for a week, until she got septicemic 3 days later (oops that timeline again, doesn’t work for you!), and only took her days after that?

            3. She had an inevitable abortion, she died of septicemia there is not evidence at all to prove that it was a septic abortion, and I challenge you to prove otherwise in this case.

            Look up the timeline, and then realize just exactly what you’ve said here.

            She had an inevitable abortion on Sunday morning, when her PPROM was diagnosed after having been missed an hour before.

            If what you say is true, your women hating friends killed her by admitting her, failing to diagnose her AND waiting 23 hours to start her on antibiotics. Had she gone to a hospital that didn’t share your political and religious beliefs, she would have had a D&C at the time of her admission, and there would have been no time for infection to take hold nor for septicemia to set in.

            No matter how you try to spin it, it’s the anti-choice disrespect for human life that killed this woman. All for the flutter of an immature heart that was never, ever going to be fully formed. Look up the facts.

            You seems to have hoist yourself on your own petard. I guess that’s what happens when the facts are against you and you’re not the word master you think you are.

          • five_by_five

            The timeline showed that she had an elevated white count on admission to the hospital. The PPROM happened the following day.

            So how do you justify that the PPROM caused the infection if it happened AFTER?

            Your logic needs work.

            And yes, they missed the infection. They have admitted that they should have begun her on broad spectrum antibiotics days before they did. That alone is probably enough for a lawsuit. But what does that have to do with the abortion? Unless you’re claiming that they withheld antibiotics until the fetus had no heartbeat. If that’s the case, then where is the proof of that?

          • HeilMary1

            You pompous mother killers should all be jailed!

          • fiona64

            Dummy, even the Irish Catholic inquest determined that the abortion would have saved Savita’s life and prevented the septicemia.

            http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/04/22/1900171/jury-savita-death-abortion-care/

            Quote: The two-week fact-finding probe into Halapannavar’s case found that the hospital is to blame for failing to effectively diagnose and treat Halapannavar during her stay. During the inquest, the key expert witness — the former head of a major Dublin maternity hospital — said he was “confident” that Halappanavar’s death would have been averted if she had received an abortion one or two days earlier. He also criticized Ireland’s abortion law, explaining that since doctors can’t
            perform a termination “unless the woman looks like she is going to die,” the policy sets up a Catch-22 where it can already be too late to save the woman by the time doctors finally reach the conclusion that she is in danger.

          • HeilMary1

            Her ROTTING DEAD fetus continually re-infected her and removing it was the only way to end re-infections, you stupid FETAL CORPSE WORSHIPER.

          • Ramanusia

            Post 20 week abortions are nearly ALWAYS done for the medical reasons. Please provide your evidence than ANY are done for reasons not involving medical realities. You seem to think they exist, back up your claim.

          • cjvg

            I gave you the link to expert medical research done by 5 medical researchers several times, stop being so ignorant

          • Ramanusia

            All the chromosomal ones and the physical ones that can only be SEEN in u/s after this stage. Please tell us all which abnormalities are detectable prior to the point where a safe amnio can be performed.

            Do be specific and provide evidence to back you up.

          • Ramanusia

            Provide your sources that back you up. You keep bleating about it, prove your point.

          • five_by_five

            UpToDate

            Look it up,

          • fiona64

            Telling other people to “look it up” is not citing your source; it’s demanding that other people do your homework for you.

          • lady_black

            Your source requires a subscription, and the little that can be seen there doesn’t prove your point. Women are not going to undergo every expensive prenatal test in the book just so you can claim that abortions after 20 weeks are never necessary. These things you keep talking about are not routine prenatal care. In three pregnancies, I have had exactly one amnio, in a highly problematic pregnancy, and zero trans-vaginal ultrasounds, and zero CVS tests. The amino was NOT done to check for fetal abnormalities, but for lung maturity when I was in pre-term labor. These tests are just not routinely done. PERIOD.

          • five_by_five

            You mean you don’t have a subscription to UpToDate?

            What kind of professional are you?

          • cjvg

            you are promoting a for profit site although published research paper can be found free of charge?
            Seems to me you are just desperate to use a source that can not easily be accessed by everyone
            So tell me your search parameter and exactly where you want me to look for your “proof”

          • five_by_five

            I already provided the article titles and the website.

            I posted the direct link, but RHRC hasn’t published my comments, so blame them if you cannot just click to get to it.

            Are you really trying to bash me for using UpToDate? The site that most clinicians use for everyday practice? I thought I was dealing with professionals here.

            I guess not. Why don’t you ask fiona64 for her subscription info. She’s a doctor or something.

          • Ramanusia

            Oh, sure you provided all the stuff that made your point, but “they” wouldn’t let it come through! Sure …..

            No, we’re bashing you for failing to provide evidence to back up your statements. What kind of a professional are you that you can’t find a citation without a paid service?

            Um, sweetie, clinicians don’t cite uptodate when they’re asked to provide citations, they cite the source. Were you the professional you claim to be and not the poseur your comments prove you to be, you’d use the sources that physicians use in their everyday practice, like texts, papers and pubmed. You’re dealing with people who are professional and educated enough to see through your sad evasions, and who keep trying to hold you to the standards that real professionals wouldn’t have trouble with.

            We don’t need to ask anyone else about anything, you’re the one making up things, you’re the one asserting things, it’s up to you an you alone to come up with sources for the silly things you’re saying.

            Just snapping out “uptodate” shows that you’re not a professional at all. I’m guessing you’re just a high school/ college student whose education isn’t nearly complete enough to challenge your politics. You keep contradicting yourself all over the place, and you don’t seem to know what you’re talking about.

            As your debate instructor would tell you if s/he was any good, put up or shut up, you’ve been called out numerous times and you keep losing your point.

          • five_by_five

            What exactly are you trying to deny here?

            Are you denying the CVS can be done months prior to 20 weeks? Is this even debatable? Did you not actually know that CVS can be done at 12 weeks? Wow.

          • cjvg

            I can get on, I’m also a clinical pharmaceutical and neurological research coordinator and my husband is a doctor.
            However I can not find any of the parameters that you claim you listed in your statements!
            Separate from that most research that is published and peer reviewed can be freely found on the internet. If your claims are true there should be plenty of medical research papers supporting this on medical and governmental sites (the same sites routinely used by medical undergrads I might mention)

          • five_by_five

            So you can log on to UpToDate?
            Type in “Chorionic villus sampling” in the search window?
            Look at the first article?

            And you still don’t see where it states:

            “CVS can show if there is something wrong with the fetus’ genes or
            chromosomes. Chromosomes are structures within cells that contain
            thousands of genes. This test is done between 10 and 13 weeks of
            pregnancy. Results come back in a few days”

            Oops. I guess that proves my point. Hey, but better luck next time. It’s been fun.

          • cjvg

            Exactly you should read a little more and there it is CVS can detect around 200 different abnormalities.
            If you think that is all that can go wrong you are extremely and willfully ignorant and worse you reveal in that ignorance

          • cjvg

            Soooo, since you can get on UpToDate you should really read up on Cordocentesis or PUBS as it is also called.

            What do you see there?; Cordocentesis is done when the required information is inconclusive or cannot be obtained from amniocentesis, ultrasound or CVs.

            This test is done when the patient is just over 17 weeks pregnant. (after the complete development of the umbilical cord)

            Oops I guess you have no point!

          • five_by_five

            That’s still under 20 weeks bub.

          • cjvg

            Except that there is more then one woman taking that test so the actuality of a daily clinic makes it more likely that it is closer to 18 or 19 weeks AT BEST that the test takes place!
            After that it still takes some time before the results are returned to the doctor and subsequently the patient and by that time you are well into 20 weeks.
            Deliberate and willful ignorance by uneducated lay people like you and the writer of this bill is not a reason to force the medical profession to provide substandard care to a woman.
            Do no harm is the first directive, subjecting a woman to a futile pregnancy is risking her life!

          • Mirable

            Your links are not getting published because of the automatic spam filter.

            if you really want to argue in good faith and post your links, I would suggest you paste the entire link, with spaces around the dots.

          • five_by_five

            Thanks. I’ll give it a try.

            But it’s weird that other people on this thread seem to be able to post links without their post going to moderation never-never land.

          • Mirable

            Because they are regulars and the spam filter ignores them.

          • five_by_five

            Thanks for the info again. I thought only mods got special posting privileges.

            I like how I got downvotes for thanking you!!

          • HeilMary1

            We’d rather you see the light and recognize already born women’s right to bodily integrity.

          • Ramanusia

            You don’t have one either or you wouldn’t be so weasely about providing your sources.

          • Ramanusia

            How much do you want to bet that this guy doesn’t even have an uptodate subscription?

          • cjvg

            He/She does not, as soon as I requested the exact parameters he/she was looking at there was only silence and some mumbling about not being able to post links

          • Ramanusia

            Yes, I caught that. Amazing how the evidence only exists on uptodate but not on the material uptodate bases its content on, right?

          • five_by_five

            Yeah, except I posted the quote. If you don’t believe the quote, you’re more than welcome to verify it by logging onto UpToDate and verifying yourself.

            Go ahead.

          • Mirable

            five by five is a grade seven middle school student who is studying this stuff through shit’s school – and the school has the account with UpToDate

          • cjvg

            Everything that can be found on UpToDate is backed up by published peer reviewed research, You should be able to provide the links to these published papers, we all can!

          • five_by_five

            I already tried. Comment goes into “moderation” and then doesn’t get posted.

            Anyway, it’s not that difficult to look to see that CVS can be done at 12 weeks. Nuchal translucency can be done at around 11 weeks.

            This isn’t rocket science. In fact, this is such common knowledge that I’m not sure why you are even questioning it.

          • cjvg

            Sure they can, nobody is disputing that
            The problem is that not all abnormalities can be detected that early, not even with these tests, but you just don’t want to hear that!
            Also an NT very limited in the conditions it actually can detect and has a fairly high risk of wrong interpretation since it is not a hard number we are working with but an interpretation of the technician doing the scan
            A CVS is more accurate and more versatile but has a much higher risk of inducing a miscarriage/ infection/fetal malformation etc. and therefore is only used if there are some very clear indication of risk.
            Neither tests are able to detect all fetal abnormalities!

          • five_by_five

            “Neither tests are able to detect all fetal abnormalities”

            You’re right. We should just throw away the ones that aren’t “perfect.”

            Cleft lip. Abort.
            Down syndrome. Abort.
            Brown eyes instead of blue. Abort.
            Girl. Abort.

          • fiona64

            If you were as smart as you claim, you would know that some cleft palates are so profound that they are incompatible with life ex utero.

            I do note your ignorance about infant development, though; no one can tell an infant’s final eye color until several weeks after birth.

            It’s not up to you to decide how much medical and financial risk a given woman should assume when it comes to matters like profoundly cleft palates, trisomy disorders, etc. You don’t know her circumstances, so you should just STFU.

            Furthermore, if your issue is with female fetii being aborted, perhaps you should address the misogynistic cultures that place male infants at higher value than female rather than griping about what the woman does.

            But that would take nuanced thinking … and you’ve already demonstrated yourself to be incapable thereof.

          • five_by_five

            Abort those nasty Trisomy 21 kids. Who needs em. Right?

          • fiona64

            If it’s not my pregnancy, it’s not my decision to make. I know that this is a concept that is difficult for you to comprehend, but (unlike you) I lack the hubris to tell some woman other than myself how much medical and financial risk she should be required to assume.

            What one woman would do in a given situation does not dictate what another woman does under identical circumstances.

            You really are not good at nuanced, critical thinking, are you? Your mummy isn’t homeschooling you very well.

          • expect_resistance

            Don’t to be pregnant, abort. What’s your point? If I don’t want to be pregnant, I will get an abortion. End of discussion.

          • HeilMary1

            Mothers with obstetric incontinence, stretch marks and wrinkles — burn at the stake for devil worship!

          • cjvg

            Seriously , this is all you got?!
            You want me to dignify this drivel as if it is an actual argument?!

          • cjvg

            d what exactly you were looking at on UpToDate and you conveniently can not provide me with that information either?!
            How odd

          • lady_black

            Well, no they can’t, and this is not THAT kind of diagnostic test, as in looking for genetic issues. This is more of a structural examination, and cannot be done earlier, as the structures being examined wouldn’t be expected to be present in any developed manner earlier.

          • Defamate

            For example:

            The ‘heart’ that is present at 6 weeks is not the heart that will be present at 20 weeks. The heart at 6 weeks is nothing more than thin tube. If that heart fails to develop properly, the problem will not necessarily be detectable until much later in the pregnancy. You can’t look at the heart at 6 weeks and say ‘yep, it’s good, therefore, it will develop normally 100pct oh yea’

            Idiot.

          • five_by_five

            “The heart at 6 weeks is nothing more than thin tube”

            No. The heart has 4 chambers and a heartbeat by 4 weeks.

            Care to tell us some more of your vast embryology knowledge?

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, at week four, it’s still a blastocyst which has developed into two sections and won’t reach the embryo stage until week five, when the circulatory system will start to develop and they will develop two tiny channels known as heart tubes, which begin to beat at six weeks. Four chambers usually develop by week eight.

          • five_by_five

            Well, that’s wrong.

            Please tell me you don’t work in healthcare .

            Ya, know, you’re so interested in refuting everything that I’ve written that you’ve now started to claim things that are known to be false by anyone who has taken high school biology.

            The scary thing is that you’ve got people like Plum Dumpling and Defamate to like your comment which means I guess that they tacitly agree with your incorrect claims of embryological development.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, that really is not wrong. Everything I’ve said is absolutely correct.

          • five_by_five

            Oh yeah? What’s your source?

            This should be interesting.

          • Jennifer Starr

            “The primordium of the heart forms in the cardiogenic plate located at the cranial end of the embryo. Angiogenic cell clusters which lie in a horse-shoe shape configuration in the plate coalesce to form two endocardial tubes. These tubes are then forced into the thoracic region due to cephalic and lateral foldings where they fuse together forming a single endocardial tube.

            The tube can be subdivided into primordial heart chambers starting caudally at the inflow end: the sinus venosus, primitive atria, ventricle, and bulbus cordis.

            The heart tube begins to grow rapidly forcing it to bend upon itself. The result is the bulboventricular loop. Septa begin to grow in the atria, ventricle and bulbus cordis to form right and left atria, right and left ventricles and two great vessels- the pulmonary artery and the aorta. By the end of the eighth week partitioning is completed and the fetal heart has formed.”

            www dot meddeanluc dot edu/lumen/MedEd/grossanatomy/thorax0/heartdev/index1 dot html

            Week 5

            According to Medline Plus, your baby’s heart begins to develop in the fifth week of pregnancy, along with her brain and spinal cord. This stage of development occurs shortly after her implantation into the uterus, and her blood cells have already begun to multiply for different functions.Week 6

            By week six of pregnancy, your baby’s heart is pumping blood. His heartbeat may be visible on a vaginal ultrasound as small blinking light, and will have a regular rhythm sometime between weeks six and seven. If a vaginal ultrasound during the sixth week does not reveal a fetal heartbeat, your doctor may schedule you for an ultrasound in three to seven days to check the baby’s heart development.

            Week 7

            By the seventh week of your pregnancy, American Pregnancy Association states that your baby’s heartbeat will be assessed by your doctor to determine the health of the pregnancy. Once a heartbeat is definitively detected, the chance of the pregnancy continuing is 70 to 90 percent. A healthy heartbeat during this stage is 90 to 110 beats per minute. If your baby is five millimeters or longer and has no heartbeat, a miscarriage may be determined. If she is less than five millimeters long, your doctor may look for a heartbeat in a few days.

            Week 8 and Beyond

            At the eight week of pregnancy, your baby’s heart, which began as a singular tubal structure, is increasing in length. It develops to include a wall separating two chambers and valves that keep blood moving throughout the chambers. By week nine of pregnancy, a normal heartbeat is between 140 and 170 beats per minute. A doctor may be able to hear your baby’s heartbeat with a fetal Doppler around week 13 and a stethoscope around week 22 of pregnancy.

            Sources:

            http://www dot livestrong dot com/article/219801-when-does-a-baby-develop-a-heartbeat/

            http://www dot nlm dot nih dot gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002398 dot htm

            http://www dot mayoclinic dot org/prenatal-care/ART-20045302

          • five_by_five

            You do understand that they are adding 2 weeks for the difference between fertilization and LMP, right?

            Either way, the comment I was replying to (Defamate) claimed that at 6 weeks the heart is just a thin tube. She was wrong. And you tried to back her, but even your sources don’t backup what she wrote – regardless if you’re counting days from LMP or from fertilization.

          • Ramanusia

            You do understand that you were just defeated quite soundly, right?

            So pathetic.

          • lady_black

            All pregnancies are counted from the FDLMP. Nobody is aware of the exact date of fertilization. It’s not like your nose lights up when that happens. The dates being used are THE standard dating of gestation.

          • five_by_five

            Embryologists use embryonic age.

            Obstetricians us gestational age,

            And the comment above “The heart at 6 weeks is nothing more than thin tube” is wrong by both measurements.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            Jennifer and Lady Black are completely correct. You’re wrong. And this ’4 chambers’ thing that you keep talking about actually looks like this:

            http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/Gray461.png

            It’s a tube!!

          • colleen2

            And the comment above “The heart at 6 weeks is nothing more than thin tube” is wrong by both measurements.

            No, it is you who are wrong and misinformed.

          • five_by_five

            Well, I guess if you consider that “thin tube” to have 4 chambers and a heartbeart, it wouldn’t be wrong.

          • Mirable

            Cardiac cells can bet in a petri dish. so ‘beating heart’ = meaningless

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bjn3TwMr4xs

            And I showed you what the ‘four chambers’ look like in another picture (still a thin tube). Big whoop. You don’t understand what you are talking about. It’s still the kids table for you, sweetie.

          • susan g

            And what is YOUR source for this incorrect information?

          • five_by_five

            An embryology textbook.

          • JamieHaman

            Well done Jennifer Star!

          • Ramanusia

            Please tell me you don’t work in healthcare, have you ever opened an embryo text at all?

            You’ve also made claims that are known to be false by anyone who actually passed high school biology, hypocrite much?

            We tacitly approve of anyone who stands up to your idiocy.

          • fiona64

            You are not even out of high school, sweetie. You are displaying all kinds of ignorance about medical matters — and arguing with people who (in many cases here) are actually in the medical profession.

            You should just stop before you get the ass-whuppin’ that you so desperately need.

          • Ramanusia

            Um, no it’s not. Care to get some knowledge of embryology or do you wish to embarrass yourself some more?

            What kind of ignorant fool thinks the cardiac structure at 4 weeks is identical to a fully formed one? One who gets his embryo knowledge from the encyclopedia located in his lower GI tract.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I would actually be interested to know where she’s getting her information from, as I can find no source which claims there’s a fully- formed four-chambered heart by week four. Even anti-choice sites don’t claim that. Perhaps she is pulling it out of her lower GI tract.

          • fiona64

            I remain convinced that it is a teenaged boy … and one who is suffering from cranio-rectal inversion at that.

          • Ramanusia

            She’s just making stuff up and pulling it from the GI encyclopedia. This is not a person who deals in facts, if you observe his/her comments this becomes abundantly clear.

            Anti-choice sites actually just make up a bunch of nonsense, and anti-choicers, who are not terribly wonderful with research, reading or education in general don’t bother with facts.

            if you notice, s/he doesn’t offer proof but dances around and insists on it from those who put out facts that disprove whatever s/he is ranting about. Those who seek to address the points, s/he answers by “quoting” things but never links to the evidence so that one might explain the point since it’s rather clear that s/he does not understand.

          • five_by_five

            1. I didn’t claim the heart was fully formed. It’ obviously continues to form throughout gestation – and even after birth.

            2. At 28 days post fertilization, the heart has 4 chambers and a heartbeat. Are you really denying this?

          • Ramanusia

            You might want to go read over what you said, since your claims are not factual. You did indeed say the words that asserted that point. Perhaps that was not your intention, however, those were your words.

            The heart does not “form” after birth, it grows, which is a different thin all together.

            2. Actually what I”m doing is asking you repeatedly to supply your sources so that we may see exactly what you’re mangling to make your rather odd assertions. Are you really so confused about what it means to provide evidence to back up your assertions?

            Please post your sources so that I may address your confusion, because it seems like you’re being awfully squirrely with what you’re implying, and I’d like to see if you’re just being a dishonest anti-choicer or merely an ignorant one.

            So, either put up your source, as you’ve demanded others do, and then we can see what it is you’re actually asserting and what semantic fallacy you’re employing, because you’re factually incorrect based on what you’re implying.

          • five_by_five

            Why don’t you quote me where I stated the heart is fully formed at 4 weeks post fertilization? I can wait.

            I’ve posted sources but those coment don’t get posted. I wonder why. But anyone with a brain can look at any basic embryology book and see that at 28 days embryonic age (that’s 42 day gestational age if you couldn’t do the math), the heart has 4 chambers and a heartbeat.

            And yes, the heart “forms” after birth by closing the
            ductus arteriosus and the foramen ovale. Would you like a source for that as well or are you going to deny that?

            I’m not really sure what your goal is here. Are you somehow offended that I know something about embryology? Does it offend you to think that a 28-day old fetus can have a heartbeat?

          • Ramanusia

            Why don’t you quote me where I stated that you stated that? I’ll wait while you figure out why that little gambit failed there.

            So what you’re saying is that you’ve posted nothing. I wonder why we think you’re lying, could it be because you began with a lie and continue to do so. I wonder why it is that everyone else seems to be able to post links without an issue …

            Indeed anyone with a brain can indeed look into an embryology book, but none says what you just typed. Are you confessing that you don’t have brain enough to look into a basic embryology book? If you have, please state which embryology book and on what page states that at 28 days post fertilization that there exists a heart with four chambers.

            You’re trying to play some word games here that you’re not equipped to play since you don’t quite understand the terms.
            Um, yeah, the ‘formation’ you’re talking about isn’t formation at all. Do you understand that word in the context of embryology or even physiology? I think not. I’m going to deny that you have any clue what you’re saying in your flailing attempt to rescue an argument you keep losing.

            My goal is to expose your ignorance and force you to stop being so dishonest. I’m quite offended that you keep pretending you know something about embryology when it’s painfully obvious that you do not.

            Does it offend you to actually play the rules you keep making up for other people? Why won’t you post your source? And must you call the fluttering of precardiac structures a “heartbeat” so that your sick lack of concern for the fully formed and beating adult organ with four actual chambers which also has a heartbeat? That would be the living breathing woman whose life you care nothing about, otherwise known in your parlance as the incubator whose heartbeat is a meaningless thing to you.

            Does it offend you to have your ignorance, dishonestly, misogyny and anti-life stance called out? No wonder you refuse to post a source.

          • five_by_five

            Would you care for me to post more links of did google work for you thins time?

          • Ramanusia

            “More” implies that you posted any at all. Which you did not. You did no work at all, you just lied and pretended you did.

            Where are you links? Do post them. And lets see if you’re capable of doing any work at all. It would seem not, is this why you failed embryo?

          • five_by_five

            Oh, by the way, still figuring out that whole “the heart doesn’t form after birth” thing you tried to claim?

            -ductus arteriosos?
            -foramen ovale?

            Heard of these things?

          • Ramanusia

            You think the ductus arteriosus and the foramen ovale FORM after birth?

            Yeah, I’ve heard of these things, and I’m aware of when they form and what they actually are. You don’t know do you?

            Did the cat get your brain? Or just run off with your embryo books before you could read them?

            Please show me where anyone other than you state that these things are FORMED after birth. I’ll wait while you track down that cat, retrieve your brain and try for something that doesn’t prove you to be an ignorant fool who doesn’t understand what words mean.

          • five_by_five

            The foramen ovale closes and fuses, hence forms, after birth.

            Derp derp derp .

            you. lose.

          • Ramanusia

            By the way do you actually HAVE ACCESS to an embryology textbook? You don’t seem to know much and you’re awfully squirrley when it comes to backing up your statements with ANYTHING other than your assertions.

          • five_by_five

            Ramanusia (7 hours ago) “Why don’t you quote me where I stated that you stated that?”

            OK, I will.

            Ramanusia (3 days ago) “What kind of ignorant fool thinks the cardiac structure at 4 weeks is identical to a fully formed one?”

            Let’s recap. You claimed I thought that the fetal heart at 4 weeks was identical to a fully formed one. The problem is that I never claimed that.

            You. Were. Wrong.

          • Ramanusia

            Okay, so you’re REALLY terrible at reading aren’t you?

            i merely wondered what kind of an idiot would equate the outpouchings of the cardiac primoridum with an adult heart, and thus count it’s flutterings as equivalent to the mother’s heart, which is what you implied.

            Let’s recap, I made no such claim, the problem is what you posted doesn’t show I made such a claim.

            YOU. ARE. WRONG.

            Again, when you’re trying to play a semantic game, you have to understand how words work, and you clearly don’t.

            This is why once again YOU FAIL.

          • colleen2

            I’m not really sure what your goal is here.

            You are incorrect. We were telling you how and why

          • fiona64

            Nope, it’s still a tube. Heart tones can barely even be detected at that point.

          • fiona64

            And here you claimed you never said that the heart was fully functional at four weeks.

            So you lied.

            Again.

            Quelle surprise.

          • five_by_five

            What’s not true about that?

          • fiona64

            Your claim that you never said such a thing. When you quite patently did.

            But you knew that, didn’t you, little troll-boy?

            I won’t be bothering with you any further.

          • five_by_five

            I haven’t deleted any of my comments. What are you claiming I said that I’m denying now?

            You can quote me. Please do. Be specific.

          • Ramanusia

            A fully functional heart requires actual chambers not mere cardiac outpouchings. The heart at 4 weeks is not fully function, hence the need for all that development that occurs during gestation. That’s what’s not true about your incorrect statements.

          • susan g

            Wrong. Yes the heart IS beginning to beat, but it does not have 4 chambers.

            The SIX week embryo:

            The embryo has reached a size of about 8 mm (1/4 inch) in length.
            The spinal cord, which until now has been open, is beginning to close.
            The first blood cells and blood vessels are developing.
            Blood moves through these primitive vessels connected to the yolk sac.
            A pipe-shaped heart is formed and begins to beat.
            The brain begins to divide into 5 parts.
            Optic pits form the start of the developing eye.
            The cells destined to be the arms and legs are in place.

          • five_by_five

            1.Please site your source. (as I learned here, people don’t like it unless you provide a direct internet link in your claim).

            2. Although I’m not sure of your source, my guess is that they are referring to gestational age, not embryonic age.

            Ever heard of the “rule of fours” in regards to embryology? Probably not.

            Here’s a review powerpoint from an embryology course at Univ. of Arizona:

            “—Wk
            4 (day 28): heart beat (4 chambers), 4 limb buds, 4 branchial arches

            w w w dot u dot arizona dot edu/~orim/Embryology%2520Review dot pptx

          • Ramanusia

            Did you seriously post a REVIEW powerpoint??????
            You are so failing this class!

            The rule of fours doesn’t save your argument nor make the case for all that you imply. In fact this powerpoint explicitly makes it clear when things begin to go wrong, which makes your other points null and void.

            Also, no where here does the “rule of fours” include the chambers, which are not formed at 4 weeks.

            It even shows you that you’re wrong, on literally everything that you’ve said, including what you claim to have quoted.

            YOU LIE. YOU WERE CAUGHT.

            Go learn some embryo, it’s clear that you don’t know what you’re talking about you power point shows you to be an ignorant liar.

            That’s just sad. No wonder you were sliming your way around providing links or evidence, you knew they wouldn’t support your lies. Ooops!

          • Mirable

            hahahaha

          • five_by_five

            Yeah, the slide that says “4 chambers” doesn’t include chambers?

            OK. That makes sense.

            Ha ha.

          • Ramanusia

            Yeah, that slide didn’t say that, nor did it somehow refute the fact that the four outpouchings are still a tube and not 4 actual chambers.

            Thanks for proving that you have no idea what you’re talking about, it’s no wonder you can’t come up with an actual source.

            You fail.

          • Mirable

            These are the ‘chambers’ that dumbshit is talking about:

            http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/Gray461.png/220px-Gray461.png

            Sure looks like a tube to me!

          • Ramanusia

            I know. Unlike our ignorant, lying “friend” here, I’m actually familiar with Embryo, and I’ve recently been presented with a nice review power-point, which unlike him, I actually perused.

            Sadly he’s too dishonest and ignorant to figure out why he keeps failing and flailing so badly.

            It’s no wonder he’s so reluctant to provide any sources, they all prove him to be a lying ignoramus.

          • Ramanusia

            Also, a review powerpoint is NOT a source. Do you truly not know what sources are?

            It’s the place where your teach GOT the info you just pasted here.

          • five_by_five

            You’re right. You should write the PhD at University of Arizona and tell him that his powerpoint is incorrect….according to you.

          • Ramanusia

            I’ll just tell you that you’re a flaming FAILURE at supporting your argument, and how about I tell whoever taught you to read that they FAILED in their task because you keep showing how illiterate and dishonest you are.

            The PhD is not at fault YOU are. Go learn to read and then pick up an Embryo book, you know nothing, according to me, and according to the review slides (which are not fact checked you utter twit). Professors making up slides for their classes prior to exams do make mistakes, it’s not like it’s meant to be used as a source or citation. Only a lazy, dishonest idiot would try to get away with that.

            You were caught, embrace your failure, admit your ignorance and go educate yourself.

          • five_by_five

            ” then pick up an Embryo book”

            Yeah, I’ve got “Before We Are Born” by this guy.

            http://www . amazon . com/Before-Are-Born-Essentials-Embryology/dp/1416037055

            And he agrees with me.

            Oh, by the way, the First Aid for the USMLE also states that a heart has 4 chambers and starts beating at 4 weeks. But maybe they’re wrong and no one decided to correct them.

            http://www . amazon . com/dp/0071802320/ref=asc_df_00718023203031241?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&tag=pg-1583-86-20&linkCode=asn&creative=395097&creativeASIN=0071802320

          • Mirable

            The ‘chambers’ you keep talking about are just tiny pri-mordial ‘pouches’ in the tube that is the future heart. And cardiac cells can beat in a dish – it’s what they do. Heart beating = worthless, if you are trying to say that it is a sacred symbol of personhood or something stupid like that.

          • five_by_five

            Dude, you just got schooled.

            Let it go.

          • Mirable

            tl;dr I don’t respond to posts of people who are too stupid to understand fetal heart development

          • five_by_five

            You’re right. I guess the textbook I referenced wasn’t good enough for you. He’s a “too stupid” PhD and all.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Wrong. I was an elderly Mother. No amnio until 16 weeks, takes 4 weeks to get the results.
            You are ignorant. Or you are a liar.
            AND YET LIKE ALL THE PERVERTS YOU WANT TO BE IN CHARGE OF MY BODY.
            Not going to happen.

          • Ramanusia

            Completely incorrect. You try again.

          • fiona64

            Wrong. YOU try again.

          • JamieHaman

            Can be done, usually aren’t. Most are done at 20 weeks, because the majority of doctors can tell for sure at that point if there is a problem, with out doing more expensive testing. That someone has to pay for.

          • Ramanusia

            One can’t murder a fetus, that’s not how the definition of murder works. See how easy that is?

            What you and your demented “doctor” seem to be ignorant about is that elective abortion after 20 weeks is LITERALLY ALL done for MEDICAL REASONS. The point is that only a true sicko would condemn a woman to endanger her health or her life because he’s too stupid to understand how reality works.

            Only a sicko would force a woman to gestate a dangerous or dysfunctional pregnancy just because he’s dumb enough to think that a safe stillborn extraction is what abortion is about. The miniscule number of abortions done with

          • five_by_five

            “abortion after 20 weeks is LITERALLY ALL done for MEDICAL REASONS.”

            I have mentioned this numerous time. Pay attention.

            And that’s a good reason why we should ban abortions after 20-weeks that are not for the health of the mother and/or child. I’m glad you agree,

          • cjvg

            Except that the professional medical association of obstetricians and gynecologist disagrees with you on that!

            http://www.acog.org/About_ACOG/News_Room/News_Releases/2013/Ob-Gyns_Denounce_Texas_Abortion_Legislation

            I thought you were all for expert advise, so take it!

          • five_by_five

            “ACOG opposes legislative interference,
            and strongly believes that decisions about medical care must be based
            on scientific evidence and made by licensed medical professionals, not
            the state or federal government,””

            I’m all for allowing patients and doctors to have certain leeway in treatment plans. Marijuana for example. If a doctor believes a cancer patient would benefit from MJ, then go for it. I don’t care.

            But with abortion there is a line in the sand. If we allow for complete autonomy from gov’t regs and let the choice be between the doctor and a patient, then we have just allowed Kermit Gosnell and his patients to carry out the murder of 30+ week old fetuses. And I don’t know about you, but I’m not cool with that.

          • goatini

            But since criminal Gosnell was NOT providing safe, legal pregnancy terminations, you’re, again, full of BS.

          • five_by_five

            You’re not quite understanding.

            If we got rid of all gov’t restrictions, then his 30+ week abortions would be legal. That’s the point. Not all restrictions on abortion are bad.

          • ansuz

            Of all the problems I have with Gosnell, the fact that he performed abortions at 30+ weeks is not high up on the list.

          • five_by_five

            For fucks sake I hope you’re not being serious.

          • ansuz

            *tilts head*
            Problems I Have With Gosnell (in rough order of importance):
            1. that conditions are such where he was ‘practicing’ that he actually had pregnant women without other options to prey on
            2. ‘practicing’ medicine in unsanitary conditions, with under-qualified assistants, and generally a ‘holy balls, that’s terrible’ level of unsafe medical stuff
            3. cruel and inhumane treatment of his patients
            4. infanticide of healthy, viable neonates (by active killing, but especially by just leaving them. I’m not sure how often the latter happened, though.)
            5. extortion
            ….
            34. keeping the bodies/feet of the fetuses. I mean, wth?
            35. abortion of very late fetuses

          • HeilMary1

            Gosnell was mainly busted for illegal drug dealing and forcing untrained, unlicensed receptionists to administer anesthesia and other medical procedures.

          • goatini

            Oh, I am completely understanding. You are attempting to conflate the illegal acts of a convicted criminal, with safe, LEGAL minor outpatient medical procedures.

          • five_by_five

            And what made his acts illegal?

            That’s right…..restrictions on abortions.

          • goatini

            The parameters were defined 40 years ago. The problem here is legislators such as those in SD and forced-birthers such as yourself attempting to interfere with those parameters – and attempting to conflate the illegal acts of a criminal who was tried, prosecuted and sentenced, with safe, LEGAL minor outpatient medical procedures.

          • five_by_five

            In case you haven’t notice, the parameters have changed a bit in 40 years. What used to be 28 weeks is now 24 and 20 in many states.

            And that doesn’t change the fact that there are indeed parameters because most sensible people realize that having elective abortions at or around viability isn’t cool.

          • goatini

            What HAS changed are the increasing encroachments upon the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens to the guarantees of the protections of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, by the radical misogynist forced-birther theocrats, such as yourself, who wish to regress female US citizens to the status of chattel property breeding livestock.

            Violating and abrogating the civil, human and Constitutional rights of US citizens, based solely on illegal gender-based discrimination IS what ISN’T cool.

          • HeilMary1

            Our lamestream media rarely reports on grisly pregnancy complications, punk.

          • five_by_five

            Sorry, but fetal viability has changed in 40 years….and so should the abortion laws.

          • Mirable

            Feti are not viable at 20 weeks. They are still barely viable even at 24 – survival rates have improved, but rates of extreme disability remain the same.

          • goatini

            Sorry, but the vast majority of safe, legal pregnancy terminations occur in the first trimester, and the only thing that vicious, vile radical misogynist theocratic forced-birthers such as yourself WILL harm are innocent female US citizens with very much WANTED pregnancies gone terribly and tragically wrong.

            But we well know that bullies, like you and the rest of your forced-birther misogynist tribe, get the most pleasure from piling on to those who are already hurting.

          • HeilMary1

            No, your point is you want to criminalize ALL abortions at ALL stage for ALL reasons because you’ll get a hot date with a pedophile priest if you can convert any of us pagan sluts here.

          • cjvg

            Kermit Gosnell was doing illegal procedures completely outside of best medical practices that the AMA promotes. Obviously he was found criminally negligent and as such you will have to admit that there are already SUFFICIENT laws in place otherwise he could NOT have been convicted of these crimes!
            SO why are you arguing that we need laws that outlaw the doctors professional medical expert opinion in favor of the unprofessional non medical opinion of legislators. It is very apparent we already have excellent laws in place to prosecute the gosnells of the world!
            Laws never prevent all crimes, they only make it possible to punish the crimes after they have been committed, after all we still have theft, drunk driving, people practicing medicine without a license (hint) we already have and that are apparently working when a crime is committed
            You know what I’m not cool with, having you and other ignorant lay people make medical decisions, without ever having received the adequate medical training or a license to practice medicine, for people they have never seen, do not know the medical history off all without ever having to suffer the consequences of this

          • five_by_five

            You claim that you are against legislaters making laws guiding medical practices, but aren’t laws that prevent doctors from performing abortions on 28 week old fetuses allowing legislatures to make medical decisions?

            How do you justify that being OK and not laws for 24 weeks? or 20 weeks?

            Bottom line is that legislatures make laws against abortion because if they didn’t there wouldn’t be laws in place to prevent Kermit Gosnell. And his actions, however distasteful to most people, would be the choice made between a doctor and a patient.

          • HeilMary1

            Next, you’ll be repealing our right to vote.

          • HeilMary1

            Mother killer, how disgusting of you to accuse women of deliberately suffering pregnancy-caused organ failures, infections and cancer just to get $30,000 abortions! Maybe if you didn’t lust after priests, your brain wouldn’t be so pickled.

          • JamieHaman

            Ever heard of spina bifida? How about anencephaly? No? When you are done looking those up, ask yourself this: if it was you and your spouse who had an unborn child with either of these conditions, who do you think should make that decision? You and your spouse, or the state?

            Go ahead, and ask your spouse what he or she thinks too.

            Btw, quit calling people names, it makes you look immature.

          • five_by_five

            You really need to do a quick search through this thread to see your point already made…..and answered.

            Quick recap: Anencephaly can be detected at 12 weeks. That’s almost 2 months before 20 weeks if you were curious.

          • robertallen1

            Anyone who would force a woman to undergo the tribulations of pregnancy and delivery against her will is just about the lowest piece of trash on the face of the earth. Now, keep your nose out of other people’s business.

          • five_by_five

            Yeah, pretty sure the woman willed herself into having sex ROBERT.

            Sorry, ROBERT, men don’t get to have opinions on abortion until they can have a uterus.

          • robertallen1

            Has nothing to do with being a man. You don’t get to abridge women’s LEGAL right to an abortion. You don’t get to decide for them whether to abort. You don’t get to force women to undergo the tribulations of pregnancy and delivery against their will, you goddam piece of ugly, meddling, ignorant trash!

      • cjvg

        One non practicing doctor’s opinion versus the opinion of all the practicing doctors who are members of their professional medical organization the ACOG (The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) in opposition TO 20 week abortion bans

        http://www.acog.org/About_ACOG/News_Room/News_Releases/2013/Ob-Gyns_Denounce_Texas_Abortion_Legislation
        Of course you should go with the opinion of the one outlier!

      • Ramanusia

        He doesn’t have a license anymore, he hasn’t practiced or done much of anything for several decades. He doesn’t know much about abortion since he claims to not have performed it, be unaware of any reason any woman should be in need of it (which disqualifies him as an OB/GYN on its face since there are many medical reasons for an abortion).

        He’s just a misogynistic blowhard who seems to have forgotten everything about medicine, how to practice it and how reality works. He’s “against” it because he’s a hypocritical windbag.

        • five_by_five

          Unless his state took away his license (which I’m sure you’d tell us about), he still has a license.

          • fiona64

            Nope … he has allowed it to lapse. He chose not to keep up his continuing medical education requirements, and let his license expire. Nice try. (Pro-tip: a license to practice medicine is not permanent.)

      • fiona64

        Ron Paul has a license, is an OBGYN

        Nope. His license has lapsed. He has not been involved in the medical profession in decades.

        Nice try, little troll boy.

      • goatini

        Misogynist racist R Paul will never be pregnant.

      • HeilMary1

        Mother killer Ron Paul rarely gets patients with complications because they know to go elsewhere if they want to live.

        • goatini

          I know that’s right.

      • JamieHaman

        Ron Paul is also never going to be pregnant, whether or not he has a license is he?
        He’s also said a few things against contraception.
        The rest don’t. They have legal degrees. They are sure as hell trying to practice medicine without a license.

  • Anon rust

    In 2006, South Dakota put a fetal personhood law on the ballot and the residents rejected it. This legislation is a product of Americans United for Life. Expect to see it popping up all over the US.

    • pull_rank

      The 2006 ban was not a personhood law, nor were either the 2006 or 2008 ban constitutional amendments. Sheesh.

      • Anon rust

        Bring it on.

        • pull_rank

          Personhood bills redefine who a ‘person’ is in law, conferring rights that would in effect make abortion illegal. 1215 banned abortion (i.e. made the procedure illegal with penalties).Personhood measures like we saw in Colorado and Mississippi came later. Obviously, it was a terrible bill, but abortion bans and personhood measures are still different approaches. And again, in no case was it a constitutional amendment as Connie Lewis claims above.

          • Defamate

            Except they only grant legal person hood to feti – not natural person hood. Women could still go to other states for abortion.

    • Ivy Mike

      AUL basically xerox their dream legislation and email it to various state legislators in states they feel they have a chance to pass it.

      In every case, of course, they “forget” to tell anyone that their legislation, if actually passed, will suck millions of taxpayer dollars from their state to pay for the lawsuits.

      I sincerely wonder how many average citizens would support this shit if they knew they would be paying hundreds of lawyers to litigate it. I’m guessing very few indeed, especially in low-population, low tax states.

  • RNfromNY

    Thankfully SD isn’t far from Canada. All they’re doing is making abortion more expensive.

  • Anon rust

    House Bill 1241 (SOUTH DAKOTA LEGISLATURE) February 4th, 2014

    Sponsors: Representatives Latterell, Campbell, Ecklund, Feickert, Greenfield, Haggar (Don), Hickey, Nelson, Olson (Betty), Qualm, Rasmussen, Stalzer, and Steele and Senators Begalka, Jensen, Novstrup (Al), and Omdahl

    Purpose: prohibit the dismemberment or decapitation of certain living unborn children and to provide penalties therefore.

  • Daniel

    dismemberment and decapitation of living children?? I think i’m gonna throw up… how is that still legal?

    • Anon rust

      @Daniel: They got you with the words, didn’t they?

      • Daniel

        who is they? I don’t know what you mean. I’m just upset that physicians are apparently allowed to remove the heads and limbs of living children.

        • Anon rust

          @Daniel: Define “certain living unborn”.

          Read the legislation.

          Is it clear to you?

          • Daniel

            yeah I read it. it’s clear.

          • Anon rust

            @Daniel:

            Define “Certain”

            Define “Living”

          • Daniel

            what are you getting at?

          • Anon rust

            @Daniel: You might want to look deeper into the origin of this legislation.

            South Dakota is one of the early battlegrounds to eliminate abortion care.

            By the way: do you have a dog in this fight? Or are you new to the debate?

          • Ivy Mike

            Simply, that you have little idea of what you are talking about, and have totally fallen for dishonest, hyperbolic propaganda.

          • Jennifer Starr

            What are you getting at? Most abortions occur with the embryo/fetus ranges from a quarter of an inch to two inches. No dismemberment or decapitation.

          • five_by_five

            Yes, most do.

            And this bill is not going after those. It’s going after post 20 week abortions.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Post twenty-week abortions are generally for severe fetal anomalies or to save the life and health of the mother.

          • five_by_five

            Great, then you should have no problem outlawing elective abortions after 20 weeks.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Elective means scheduled. That’s all elective means. If your father has a scheduled heart surgery? Elective.

          • five_by_five

            Exactly. And elective abortions after 20 weeks should be banned.

            Just. Like. I. Wrote.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Abortions for severe fetal anomalies or to save the life and health of the mother would be scheduled, sweetie. Just like your dad’s heart surgery,

          • Ivy Mike

            The problem with your recommendation (besides being completely unsupported) is that post-20 week abortions, being carried out mostly for reasons of health of the mother or fetus, are typically time-sensitive. This idiotic law forces doctors and patients to hesitate, as well as justify their decisions to the authorities.

            Sorry, but just because you and other ill-informed people have weak stomachs doesn’t mean we need to eliminate patient privacy, doctor-patient privilege, and medical best practices, to say nothing of Constitutional rights.

          • five_by_five

            Yes, I have a weak stomach for tolerating elective abortions after 20 weeks.

            Ever seen what an abortion looks like after 20 weeks? I can link some videos if you think you can stomach it.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Well when you get pregnant and have problems, then you get to decide how much risk you’re willing to take. Until then, leave that decision up to the woman who is actually pregnant.

          • Ivy Mike

            Are you some sort of medical professor, in that you can so confidently say that no post-20week abortions should ever be performed? That any decision that such is necessary should be second-guessed by half-bright politicians and squeamish teenagers with delusions of superiority?

            I can stomach far more than you can, apparently. The sight of post-surgery remains doesn’t particularly bother me. Nor does the often-faked pro-birth “shock” photos you invariably have at your fingertips. BTW, most of those so-called “abortion photos” are NOT of abortions.

            Your sources for those lie regularly, blatantly, and provably. Some of them are even now demanding that the SCOTUS grant them an inalienable right to outright lie, because otherwise they cannot do their work! You believe these people?

          • Jennifer Starr

            She or he is an over-privileged teenager, probably home schooled, who thinks that she/he knows absolutely everything.

          • fiona64

            Ever seen what childbirth looks like? Or ophthalmic surgery? Or any number of medical procedures that are “icky”? Should we ban those as well?

          • HeilMary1

            Ever seen girls carrying bowls between their legs because childbirth left their shredded bladders and bowels continually leaking and stinking? Ever wonder why Depends diapers are only marketed to women? Ever wonder why Catholic annulments and divorces are sky high? Ever see mastectomies and face cancers triggered by female fetuses? Ever see Sheehan’s Syndrome which leaves new mothers permanently bald and prematurely menopausal? I could list a thousand more, jackass.

          • lady_black

            Wrong.

          • HeilMary1

            Mother killers like you should be in jail. Your dad cheats on your mom because he is grossed out by her embarrassing childbirth injuries and disfigurements. Why do you think the Vatican banned priests’ marriages to “piles of dung” MOTHERS?

          • five_by_five

            flagged

          • lady_black

            You do not understand the meaning of the word “elective.” It isn’t interchangeable with “unnecessary.” If you decide to terminate a pregnancy that is doomed, OF COURSE they are going to schedule the procedure. That’s what “elective” means.

          • five_by_five

            Elective…as in not required for the health of the baby and/or mother.

            Comprende?

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, that’s not what elective means. Elective means scheduled. This has been explained to you a few times now.

          • five_by_five

            I place elective abortion in the same category as elective surgery…like liposuction. Meaning: not required.

            If you want to get technical, abortions – both induced and spontaneous (also called a miscarriage) happen before 20 weeks.

            After 20 weeks, it is a pregnancy, childbirth, and death.

          • lady_black

            Well I don’t give a fat rat’s ass what you consider elective to mean. In medicine, elective means scheduled in advance (as opposed to being rushed into surgery from the emergency room to save your life). Scheduled surgery is most often necessary. You do not get to make up your own definitions.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, that’s still not what elective means. You have no education in medicine and you don’t get to make up your own definitions. And people only get abortions after 20 weeks for reasons of health, life and severe fetal anomalies. This has all been explained to you several times now.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You are the “lowest common denominator” this Father is talking about. Just like the women in the video. You are out here screaming and you do not know what you are talking about.
            https://www.google.com/search?q=dad+confronts+abortion+protesters+youtube&oq=father+confronts+abortio&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l2&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8

          • cjvg

            “I place elective abortion in the same category as elective surgery”.

            Your personal choices are ultimately meaningless to the rest of us, and are in no way binding for the rest of humanity.

            Eventually most of us grow up and realize that the world and reality does not revolve around us and our perceptions of how we think things should be explained or understood.

            After 24 weeks it is childbirth since that is where viability falls

          • fiona64

            It doesn’t matter where *you* “place” something when you make up your definitions. Thanks for continuing to display your ignorance, though; it demonstrates just how stupid anti-choicers can be.

          • HeilMary1

            Google obstetric fistulas, episiotomies and symphysiotomies to get some clues about grisly commonplace childbirth dangers.

          • lady_black

            No that is NOT what elective means. Elective means scheduled. Comprende???

          • Ivy Mike

            You do not get to make up your own definitions. You really need to learn this lesson…you’d look much less uninformed.

          • five_by_five

            Did I make up the definition? Let’s ask Merrian-Webster what he thinks:
            e·lec·tive [ih-lek-tiv] adjective

            1. pertaining to the principle of electing to an office, position, etc.
            2.chosen by election, as an official.
            3.bestowed by or derived from election, as an office.
            4.having the power or right of electing to office, as a body of persons.
            5.open to choice; optional; not required: an elective subject in college; elective surgery.

            Oh, look at number 5. Oops.

          • lady_black

            You need a medical dictionary, if you’re going to discuss medical matters, cupcake. I guarantee you that those definitions will not be found in a medical dictionary.

          • Ivy Mike

            Oh, OOOPSIES! It happens that the definitions used in a professional context do not line up with those placed in dictionaries, as in this case.

            Do you realize that some of the people you are attempting to “explain” things to are medical professionals?

            Every post you make reveals you further as an uninformed, but self-righteous, know-it-all kid.

          • five_by_five

            Mike, when you get school by someone, it’s difficult to admit you were wrong. That’s cool.

            ELECTIVE means NOT REQUIRED FOR SURVIVAL.

            Elective boob jobs.

            Elective eye correction surgery.

            Elective abortion.

            I guess those things don’t qualify as “medical” enough for you.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Again, that’s still not what elective means. And putting it in all caps doesn’t make you any less wrong.

          • Defamate

            I already proved you wrong on that.

            Can you not read?

          • Jennifer Starr

            I think she’s being deliberately dim.

          • Defamate

            Speaking of dim..

            http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2014/02/06/un-child-rights-panel-defends-children-girls-throws-gauntlet-holy-see/#comment-1236041011

            A self-proclaimed ‘physicist’ who has discovered the inherent value of life and who believes that women have abortions for selfish ‘preferences’

          • Jennifer Starr

            Oh good lord, it’s another long-winded gasbag who uses fifty words to say something that could be said in five.

          • Defamate

            Yep. He even accused me of being a ‘goddess’ who believes that ‘zygotes are warts on a womb’ which is hilarious and WTF.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I think it is the same troll. It attaches itself to certain posters. Congrats. You have a fan.

          • Defamate

            I’m not sure. I checked his history. I think he’s just a self-righteous dork who thinks the RCC isn’t all that bad, and that human life is pwecious. And that, as a ‘scientist’, his opinions are more valid than anyone else’s.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Excellent summary of its stance.
            Maybe I am paranoid. I have a fan who chases me about. I guess I am more creeped out about it than I let myself know.

          • HeilMary1

            Why how selfish of women to not want to end up like Amy Herbst or my friend who died of pregnancy-caused face rot!?

          • five_by_five

            Not, you proved that an abortion when done non-emergently is, in fact, elective.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Any surgery which is scheduled is elective. My friend’s mastectomy, scheduled for March, is elective. My grandfather’s bypass was elective. What you ‘consider’ to be elective is meaningless.

          • Defamate

            If your brain tumour isn’t going to grow big enough to be a problem until at least 2 years go by, then you are not under ‘immediate threat of death’. But if you schedule a surgery SOONER rather than LATER before it becomes a life threatening problem, you are in fact scheduling *elective* treatment for your cancer.

          • lady_black

            Which is NOT the same thing as “unnecessary.”

          • HeilMary1

            Is that how pedophile priests explain it to you, dumbass?

          • five_by_five

            flagged

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, I don’t think she can. She’s like a three-way bulb set permanently on dim.

          • Ivy Mike

            He/she is deliberately ignoring anything that contradicts or debunks her assertions, and then claiming victory. Teenager for sure, most likely indoctrinated by forced-birth guardians.

          • Defamate

            Elective surgery or elective procedure (from the Latin eligere,
            meaning to choose is surgery that is scheduled in advance because it
            does not involve a medical emergency. Semi-elective surgery is a surgery
            that must be done to preserve the patient’s life, but does not need to
            be performed immediately.

            By contrast, an urgent surgery is one that can wait until the patient
            is medically stable, but should generally be done today or tomorrow,
            and an emergency surgery is one that must be performed without delay;
            the patient has no choice other than immediate surgery, if they do not
            want to risk permanent disability or death.

            Most surgeries are elective.

            Elective surgeries include all optional surgeries performed for
            non-medical reasons, i.e., cosmetic surgery. They also include most
            surgeries necessary for medical reasons.

            Cosmetic surgery, such as a facelift or the placement of breast
            implants, is typically performed to subjectively improve a patient’s
            physical appearance. Cosmetic and aesthetic surgeries are elective
            surgeries pre-scheduled at a time that is mutually convenient for the
            patient, the surgeon, and the medical facility.

            Many medically necessary surgeries are also elective surgeries.
            For example, inguinal hernia surgery, cataract surgery, mastectomy for
            breast cancer, and the donation of a kidney by a living donor are
            performed as elective surgeries.

            —————-

            So if you have 6 months to live, and you need a new kidney, the surgery to replace the kidney will be ELECTIVE.

            Sources:

            Mosby’s Medical, Nursing and Allied Health Dictionary (4 ed.). St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby. 1994. p. 530. OCLC 29185395.

            Surgery, elective”. MedTerms. MedicineNet.Jump up ^ Mosby’s Medical,
            Nursing and Allied Health Dictionary (4 ed.). St. Louis, Missouri:
            Mosby. 1994. p. 530. OCLC 29185395. Jump up ^ “Surgery, elective”.
            MedTerms. MedicineNet.

          • lady_black

            Why would something NEED to be required for survival? If it’s necessary, it’s necessary. My neck surgery and hysterectomy were elective. But they were necessary.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Little child, you haven’t even proven that you’re competent enough to make your own medical decisions, let alone anyone else’s. So I think you need to grow up a bit more and leave pregnancy decisions up to the woman who’s actually pregnant, her doctor, and whomever else she wishes to include.

          • Ivy Mike

            i’ll wait until you learn to spell “schooled”, child.

            But, it is fun to watch a youngster thrash and flail in ignorance.

            Protip: You could not even HOPE to “school” me.

          • fiona64

            ELECTIVE means NOT REQUIRED FOR SURVIVAL.

            No, it goddamned well does NOT. Elective cholecystectomy does not mean you just think you’ll have your gallbladder out for no reason.

            This has been explained to you with remarkable patience, repeatedly — and in more than one thread.

            Stop it.

          • HeilMary1

            Elective means REQUIRED FOR SURVIVAL AND AVOIDANCE OF CATASTROPHIC DISABILITIES.

            Abortion saves women with gestational diabetes from needing KIDNEY TRANSPLANTS.
            Abortion saves all women from marriage- and job-ruining bladder and bowel incontinence.
            Abortion saves women with breast and face cancers from DEATH.

            I could list a thousand more abortion saves.

          • Defamate

            Elective surgery or elective procedure (from the Latin eligere, meaning to choose is surgery that is scheduled in advance because it does not involve a medical emergency. Semi-elective surgery is a surgery that must be done to preserve the patient’s life, but does not need to be performed immediately.

            By contrast, an urgent surgery is one that can wait until the patient is medically stable, but should generally be done today or tomorrow, and an emergency surgery is one that must be performed without delay; the patient has no choice other than immediate surgery, if they do not want to risk permanent disability or death.

            Most surgeries are elective.

            Elective surgeries include all optional surgeries performed for non-medical reasons, i.e., cosmetic surgery. They also include most surgeries necessary for medical reasons.

            Cosmetic surgery, such as a facelift or the placement of breast implants, is typically performed to subjectively improve a patient’s physical appearance. Cosmetic and aesthetic surgeries are elective surgeries pre-scheduled at a time that is mutually convenient for the patient, the surgeon, and the medical facility.

            Many medically necessary surgeries are also elective surgeries. For example, inguinal hernia surgery, cataract surgery, mastectomy for breast cancer, and the donation of a kidney by a living donor are performed as elective surgeries.

            —————-

            So if you have 6 months to live, and you need a new kidney, the surgery to replace the kidney will be ELECTIVE.

            Sources:

            Mosby’s Medical, Nursing and Allied Health Dictionary (4 ed.). St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby. 1994. p. 530. OCLC 29185395.

            Surgery, elective”. MedTerms. MedicineNet.Jump up ^ Mosby’s Medical, Nursing and Allied Health Dictionary (4 ed.). St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby. 1994. p. 530. OCLC 29185395. Jump up ^ “Surgery, elective”. MedTerms. MedicineNet.

          • five_by_five

            Great, so you agree that an abortion done without an emergent situation (most abortions) are, in fact, ELECTIVE procedure.

            Thanks for clarifying.

          • Jennifer Starr

            So is a heart bypass.So is a kidney transplant from a living donor. So is a mastectomy. All elective.

          • Defamate

            So you agree that cancer surgery is an ELECTIVE procedure, and therefore, does not need to be done?

            Right? (just let the patient die instead, because hey, removing a tumour is optional, not necessary to preserve life)

            You are acting purposely obtuse.

          • lady_black

            An abortion does NOT require an emergent situation to be necessary. Neither does any other type of surgery.

          • five_by_five

            Yes, and therefore, according to your understanding of the term, an abortion is elective.

            Thanks for understanding.

          • lady_black

            Well of course it’s elective. It’s probably also necessary. It should in no way be banned.

          • fiona64

            You continue to misuse the term, and then try to pretend that you are using it in a correct medical fashion.

            Why don’t you go back to school and learn something, little troll boy?

          • L-dan

            And you would like to ban all elective abortions past 20 weeks.

            For which we say you’re an idiot because you seem to think all elective abortions past 20 weeks are unnecessary. Elective does not mean unnecessary.

          • HeilMary1

            Because ALL pregnancies cause injuries to women, ALL abortions are for health reasons. The number one childbirth injury is bladder and / or bowel incontinence affecting at least half of all mothers. Try keeping a husband and a job with such a humiliating problem!

          • Jennifer Starr

            No. An elective surgery can be medically necessary, such as heart bypasses, cataract surgery, cancer surgery, an organ donation from a living individual, etc. All that elective means, in a medical sense, is that the surgery can be scheduled. It’s not an emergency surgery that must be done as soon as possible.

          • five_by_five

            A heart bypass isn’t a surgery that must be done as soon as possible?

            Interesting. Where did you get your medical degree?

          • Defamate

            Many medically necessary surgeries are also elective surgeries.
            For example, inguinal hernia surgery, cataract surgery, mastectomy for breast cancer, and the donation of a kidney by a living donor are performed as elective surgeries.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Maybe you’ve never had a relative who’s had a heart bypass, but they usually are scheduled procedures. Meaning elective. My grandfather’s bypass surgery was scheduled two weeks ahead of time.

          • lady_black

            Exactly, Jennifer. They can do cardiac catheterization to determine what % of the arteries are open and determine the need for bypass surgery, which will be scheduled for as soon as possible.

          • Defamate

            And yes, the sooner the better for abortion – with each passing day the pregnancy becomes MORE dangerous and the chance of life and health threatening side effects increases.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Heart surgery is elective surgery unless it is done in the emergency room to save the patient from immediately dying.

          • five_by_five

            Why don’t you ask a cardiothoracic surgeon about your incorrect use of “elective” in regards to heart surgery?

            You might realize how wrong you are.

          • Jennifer Starr

            That’s not incorrect. Any surgery that can be scheduled is elective.

          • expect_resistance

            No you’re wrong. I know several people who have recently had heart surgery. These were planned elective surgeries that were life saving. My friend Gary was working the day before his heart bypass surgery, which was an elective surgery. If he had elected not to have the surgery he probably would die of heart failure. Maybe not right away, but his life would be cut short by heart disease.

          • five_by_five

            It’s interesting that you ignore the definition of “elective” as “not required” when you deem it is necessary.

            And what does that have to do with elective abortions?

          • lady_black

            That’s because, speaking medically, your “definition” of elective is false. Elective surgery has NOTHING TO DO with “not required.” Except in the case of cosmetic surgery, ALL elective surgeries are required. That’s why insurance companies cover them. Because they ARE required. Think, for example of a C-section. They are most often elective (scheduled in advance). They are always done for medical indications, meaning they ARE necessary.

          • expect_resistance

            Your interpretation of “elective” is formed from a myopic anti-choice viewpoint that’s not accurate.

          • expect_resistance

            And…

            Are you equating cosmetic surgery to abortion? As in you think cosmetic surgery is “not required” and therefore “elective?” Have you ever thought about why people might have cosmetic surgery? They may have been injured in the war, they may have had a mastectomy, they may have been in an accident. So no, I guess their want to have corrective cosmetic surgery is “superfluous.” Sounds like your doing a lot of judging when it’s not necessary. As for abortion being elective, damn right it is. If I’m pregnant and do not want to be, I can elect to have an abortion. It’s none of your business or anyones business.

          • fiona64

            It is a teen with a very narrowed and uninformed view of the world. Pitiful.

          • HeilMary1

            ALL fetuses maim and /or murder their captive hosts.

          • fiona64

            I’m in the medical profession, Captain Dumbass. YOU are the one who is wrong.

          • five_by_five

            a nurse.

            hahahahahah

          • fiona64

            Nope, not a nurse.

            Just keep showin’ your ass, sweetie.

          • five_by_five

            a tech. Even better. I like techs. They help my grandmother when she needed a MRI.

          • fiona64

            Nope, not a tech either. But you just keep showing your ass, sweetie. You are doing a fabulous job of representing the “intellectual” level of the typical anti-choicer.

          • lady_black

            As you have ALREADY been told, a surgery that should be done “as soon as possible” is an elective surgery. For example, a person with severe degenerative joint disease who’s knee is bone on bone should have a knee replacement as soon as possible. As soon as possible is anything other than “right this minute,” or “as soon as the patient is stable.”

          • fiona64

            Well, since little homeschooled high school boys don’t have medical degrees (nor do they seem to know that the book is Merriam-Webster, not Merrian-Webster), your question is a joke. Yes, cardiac surgeries are scheduled. I had one. It was elective — and not because it wasn’t necessary, but because it could be scheduled.

            As has been repeatedly explained to you. Stop being deliberately obtuse.

          • cjvg

            From a government accredited school, you?

          • cjvg

            ER’s do not have elective surgery!

            Almost every procedure performed outside of an ER is an elective procedure.
            (except for instance an emergency C-section since that is also not a previously scheduled or planned procedure)

            Any procedure that is scheduled and is not urgently needed to preserve the patients life right now is an elective (!) procedure

            The patient and the hospital elect (!) on what day and time the procedure is going to take place

          • five_by_five

            And how does that change my comment that we should ban elective abortions after 20 weeks?

          • Ivy Mike

            You have yet to actually support that assertion with anything but emotional hyperbole.

          • lady_black

            It doesn’t change your comment, nor the fact that you do not know what you’re talking about.

          • L-dan

            Because you somehow think that abortions after 20 weeks are mostly done because ‘oops’ someone forgot to deal with it earlier. It’s an incorrect view.

            A small percentage of abortions are at 20+weeks. Most of those are due to maternal health or fetal abnormality, with the vast majority of the rest being people who have had to take weeks to chase down the money and the time for an abortion. I don’t think there needs to be a law that makes doctors second-guess whether or not this fetus is ‘doomed enough’ to risk his/her license over. That makes the lives of people in those situations much harder, for no real gain.

          • cjvg

            So you propose that a doctor waits until the health of a pregnant woman deteriorates until she is dying before the doctor performs the needed abortion!

            So a woman who has pregnancy induced pulmonary hypertension
            , or pregnancy induced renal failure or lupus etc. should be forced to conyinue the pregnancy that induced this fatal decease until it is almost to late. A doctor knows that the only way to save her life is to schedule an abortion but he should wait until it is an emergency?

          • five_by_five

            Gestation hypertension, by definition, happens after 20 weeks.

            The treatment include antihypertensives and possible induction of labor (hint: that’s not abortion)

          • ansuz

            Induction of labour is an abortion. Often, the fetus does not survive.

          • five_by_five

            Wow. That’s incorrect.

            But please proceed….

          • ansuz

            You can induce labour expecting that the fetus will survive (live birth), and you can induce labour expecting that it will not (e.g., low gestational age, fetal death in utero, etc.).
            If you have to induce labour, you are ending a pregnancy before its ‘natural’ ending.

            But we can quibble about definitions forever.

          • cjvg

            You are so far wrong that it becomes criminal to claim such a dangerous and quit possible fatal assertion. DO NOT ever repeat this to a woman actually suffering from this disease, any fatality ensuing would be on your conscience if she actually believes you!

            You are playing with peoples lives (yes women are human beings deserving of life even when they can not carry a pregnancy to term)

            Are you actually trying to claim that a woman suffering from pregnancy induced pulmonary hypertension that is so sick she can not continue the pregnancy should go through (induced) labor? She would most certainly die from hearth failure

            PS anti hypertensive’s do not do much for pregnancy induced hypertension and rarely manage to treat the condition. Abortion, or at the best a C-section is the most common treatment.

            Do you even know what labor is and how hard it is on the body. Sometimes perfectly healthy women without any indication of heart disease or family history die of hearth failure during labor or soon after labor!

            YOU kill women if you treat this as some easy decision YOU should make for women you do not know!
            http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/story/patient-safety-catholic-hospitals-questioned-after-nun-punished-allowing-abortion-arizona-hosp
            http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/05/19/Nun-excommunicated-for-abortion/UPI-20511274289412/
            SHE was 11 weeks pregnant and dying from it!

          • five_by_five

            You’re right.

            I read your comment too quickly and was thinking about gestation hypertension.

            You are 100% correct about pregnancy induced pulmonary hypertension.

          • cjvg

            Do you now understand how extremely dangerous your position is. You clearly do NOT know enough to make medical decisions that have far reaching consequences for another.
            Gestational hypertension can also be fatal, it might also result in severe growth and developmental retardation of the fetus (IE non viable fetus= abortion or miscarriage)

          • five_by_five

            I admitted I was wrong. It’s interesting that I’ve yet to see other commenters on here do the same when I have been correct.

          • cjvg

            About what, I have yet to see a single medical claim you made that either not disputed or blatantly wrong

          • five_by_five

            You mean like when another person claimed that renal agenesis and anencephaly couldn’t be detected before 20 weeks? And I provided the source that stated that they can?

            Or how about that a fetal heart has 4 chambers and a heartbeat at 4 weeks embryonic age. That claim? (which people tried to deny for some reason – probably just because I mentioned it and they don’t like me)

          • Jennifer Starr

            And you’re still wrong. No, sweetie–not in the pipe and not five by five. You are right about one thing though–people don’t like you.

          • cjvg

            What you fail to realize is that no one here (not even the medical professionals) is trying to legislate the idea that you and others like you without any medical training or personal knowledge of the patient get to make medical decisions for that patient.
            We know that doing something so unethical and abhorrent as practicing medicine without having the skills and the knowledge to do so is going to get women killed!
            This is not a hypothetical death these are real preventable deaths of real living breathing women!
            If you try to claim that women should lose the right to make their own medical decisions as soon as they are pregnant, you are in effect reducing women to the status of possessions of the state .
            It is nothing personal but your position is so abhorrent and so indefensible with any medical knowledge that you will not find anyone here holding back!

          • five_by_five

            Women don’t have the right to kill the fetus whenever we want. Not even Roe v Wade allowed this.

            And as viability changes, so should the law…..regardless of the fact that some women might feel that it is their right (“my body, my choice”) to abort 30-week old fetuses.

            I’m not sure why this is even contested. We all admit that elective abortions after 20 weeks are pretty rare. So why not outlaw them and be done with it? — while still allowing for abortions for the health of the mother and/or fetus post 20 weeks.

          • HeilMary1

            Because, DUMBASS, ALL abortions performed past 20 weeks are for fetal and maternal health reasons as everyone here has already proved to you! What low- and middle-income woman can afford a $30,000 abortion??!! Do you have a clue that such late abortions have nearly the same costs as deliveries?! No woman would capriciously blow $30,000 on an abortion without dire medical issues!

          • five_by_five

            Great , then ban elective abortions after 20 weeks then. What’s the problem?

          • HeilMary1

            The problem is that criminal Munchausen by Proxy perp YOU wants to kick all other sexually active women into early graves by denying them LIFE- AND HEALTH-SAVING abortions for unexpected late term complications! Maybe they’re all PRETTIER THAN YOU and you see DEAD ROTTING fetuses as the perfect legal weapon for getting rid of your competition! You are a disgusting pig!

          • ansuz

            1. because it impairs physician decision-making and introduces a ball of thorny legality in the realm of ‘how dangerous does it have to be for this to be allowed’
            2. because it has a disproportionate negative impact on the young, abused, poor, and/or disabled (including mentally ill and developmentally disabled), who are most likely to have difficulty with access (among other things)

          • L-dan

            Some of the confusion is because all those non-emergency procedures do have an element of choice to them. You’re allowed to choose not to get live-saving heart surgery. But it’s necessary if you want to live, which most people don’t think of as much of a choice.

            You can choose not to get that hip replacement. But you’ll never walk again.

            You can choose to carry that doomed fetus to term, or not. But the choice should be yours to make, every bit as much as the two above. Somehow, for forced birthers, this choice becomes the one they have to pile on and deny. As if this particular choice is the one made on a whim, or a lark.

            Non-medical usage of the word tends to settle on the ‘choice’ element and drag it into a non-medical context of ‘choice’.

          • cjvg

            I’m not sure what you are trying to tell me, was this comment for me or the 5×5 brick?

          • L-dan

            Yep, wrong reply.

            Mostly just noting that yes, there are differences in how we use ‘elective’ and it’s confused more by both colloquial and medical ‘eclective’ having an element of choice. Doesn’t make them the same. Stupid hill for 5×5 to decide to die on there.

          • cjvg

            “Stupid hill for 5×5 to decide to die on there”

            That just made me giggle like a hyena, I just got a mental image of a little brick with stick arms desperately trying to swat us with its little rolls of paper filled with “very important” personal musings on the evil of letting women chose what is best for them

          • L-dan

            XD. That’s about right.

            Every time I see the ’5X5′ I keep thinking clue by four. So now I’ll imagine the brick battling the cluebat with little stick arms. ^^

          • cjvg

            Oooh, even better, now I see it desperately trying to avoid being hit by a clue and having to think!

            something different, my disqus is a little wonky today and yesterday, how is yours?

          • L-dan

            *wobbles hand* seems ok, though notifications were coming in rather late for a bit there.

          • HeilMary1

            Think of 5×5 as a Petri dish Don Quixote.

          • cjvg

            Telling how you place the health of the “baby” before that of the mother!
            You would think (at least normal humans do) that the life of the living present fully sapient aware and able to feel pain and distress MOTHER would come before the POTENTIAL life of the fetus!
            It is very apparent you do not have much respect for the live that is commonly known as a woman

          • fiona64

            So, you are deliberately misunderstanding medical terminology. Got it.

          • five_by_five

            Type “elective abortion” into google and tell me what you find.

          • cjvg

            Type elective coronary bypass into google and tell me what you find

            http://www.science.gov/topicpages/e/elective+coronary+bypass.html
            There I helped you out so you can get started with a reliable expert opinion back by the government of the united states

          • five_by_five

            I found that you don’t know the difference between “elective coronary bypass” and “elective abortion.”

          • HeilMary1

            YOU don’t understand the difference between unscheduled emergency abortions and scheduled MATERNAL HEALTH-SAVING abortions.

          • cjvg

            YOU are the one arguing that ALL elective procedures are non necessities and NOT needed for the health of the patient!
            You are the one claiming that live saving surgeries are never called elective !
            YOU tell me why you are changing your tune all of a sudden!

          • five_by_five

            Here’s a little interesting test for you.

            1. Go to google.
            2. Type in “elective abortion medical definition”
            3. Enjoy.

          • cjvg

            Here is a little test for you
            1. go to google
            2. type in elective coronary surgery medical definition
            3. pop your fingers in your ears, scrunch your eyes closed and start nanananananan……….. Oh you were already doing that the whole time !

          • Jennifer Starr

            And only five days ago you were denying that elective heart surgery even existed.

          • fiona64

            He doesn’t seem to realize how easy it is to track his history. Of course, the mods have deleted his most obviously trollish posts … which probably has him holding his breath and kicking his feet on the floor in typical tantrum style.

          • five_by_five

            So an elective coronary bypass is the same context as an elective abortion?

            (Hint: it isn’t)

            And your confusion is not uncommon. That’s why the authors of the wiki article on abortion made a specific comment on your confusion.

            Care to read it?

            “An abortion is referred to as an elective or voluntary abortion when it is performed at the request of the woman for non-medical reasons.[12] Confusion sometimes arises over the term “elective” because “elective surgery” generally refers to all scheduled surgery, whether medically necessary or not.[13]“

          • cjvg

            Seriously, you are now admitting that all surgeries that can be scheduled are elective regardless of the FACT that you previously denied this over and over and over and over!
            But you are now using wiki as an expert medical source?!
            Please by all means quote what UpToDate says on your elective abortion conclusion from wiki (hint) it is NOT the same!!!!!!!!

          • five_by_five

            Why are you so hung up on the word “elective?” Does it somehow make you angry that some women choose to have abortions for non-medical reasons?

            “Elective” has different definitions. In the context of abortion, it means for “non-medical reasons.” (aka not needed for survival)

            The wiki article has links to the medical definitions. Nice try though.

            (and I can’t post links or the comment doesn’t post. You can thank the mods for that.)

          • Mirable

            1) you are hung up on the word ‘elective’

            2) do try to argue in good faith – I told you how to get your links past moderation. You can put a space around the . , you can just leave it out, or you can type ‘dot’ in place of the .

            Really easy!

            So start posting links to uptodate . com there is no excuse!

          • cjvg

            YOU are the one who is making frivolous and incorrect claims, we are trying to disabuse you of your ignorant personal medical definitions!

            You then claim we are hung up on the terms YOU bring into the conversation?

            Weak and transparent attempt at distraction!

          • five_by_five

            Yeah I’m making it up.

            “Elective abortion”

            1. an abortion without medical justification but done in a legal way, as in the United States.

            http://www dot medilexicon dot com/medicaldictionary dot php?t=147

          • ansuz

            I’m fairly certain that abortions are not classified in the same way in Canada (which is where I live). And probably you should make sure that any studies you want to cite for rates of elective abortions use that definition.

          • five_by_five

            Well that’s great that you live in Canada.

            This article is about South Dakota.

          • Mirable

            I already explained to s/h/it how to post links so they can get past moderation. S/h/it refuses to post links with the . removed, or with spaces around it.

            hmmm

          • HeilMary1

            Mother killer you simply wants sexually active women dead or maimed by childbirth.

          • five_by_five

            You were maimed by childbirth?

          • HeilMary1

            My mother was and she burned me as her permanent abstinence excuse.

          • fiona64

            When referencing medical procedures, “elective” does not mean “because I feel like it.” It means that the procedure can be scheduled. The opposite number is “emergency.” One can, for example, have an elective cholecystectomy — that means you scheduled the procedure to remove a gallbladder, not that you just thought it would be something to do on a quiet Thursday.

            Adults know these things.

          • five_by_five

            You clearly don’t understand context.

            The term “elective” in reference to abortion means – not necessary for the health of the mother and/or fetus.

            This is quite clear. Only someone arguing in bad faith would try to argue otherwise.

          • fiona64

            You clearly don’t understand context.

            One can only presume that you were looking in the mirror when you wrote that. The context has been explained repeatedly. It’s no one’s fault but your own that you are too stupid to understand it.

            Good day.

          • five_by_five

            Yep, that’s what I thought.

            You continue to argue in bad faith….knowing precisely what the term “elective abortion” means.

          • Jennifer Starr

            It means a procedure that can be scheduled. That is what it means.

          • five_by_five

            Is that what you get when you google “elective abortion?”

            That’s right, it isn’t.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You can google people who believe that all the past presidents have been six-foot tall lizard people. You can google Jill Stanek who believes that the Chinese eat fetuses, though she has no credibilty whatsoever. You can even google Liar Rose at Live Action News, though that site is full of lies. Just because you can google something doesn’t make it so..

          • five_by_five

            ha ha

            I’m guessing that you actually did google “elective abortion” and now know precisely what that term is referring to. It refers to abortions that are done without the need for health of the mother and/or fetus. ELECTIVE = NOT NEEDED FOR THE HEALTH OF MOTHER.

            This really isn’t a hard concept. But you and others keep interjecting “elective surgery” or “elective cholecystectomy” to muddle things – knowing clear well that they mean completely different things.

            That’s arguing in bad faith.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            Every abortion is for the health of the mother. Pregnancy is most definitely not a healthy condition. All of the side effects associated with pregnancy are decidedly unhealthy. And labour and birth itself are incredibly dangerous and even in the best case scenarios lead to long term damage.

            Pregnancy is not a normal healthy state for a woman. Period.

          • expect_resistance

            Yes! This is what 5×5 can’t understand.

          • lady_black

            That proves ONLY that there are millions of other people who are as dumb, or dumber than you. People believe all kinds of silly things that can be googled. If it’s on the internet, it must be true, right?

          • five_by_five

            Ah, I see you finally bothered to look it up. Thanks.

            And it proves that the commonly accepted meaning of “elective abortion” is one that is done for reasons other than the health of the mother and/or fetus.

          • lady_black

            I didn’t look it up, and I will not look it up. As a nurse I am perfectly aware of what an elective abortion means. It means it’s not being done with you being rushed into surgery to save your life. It STILL doesn’t mean unnecessary.

          • five_by_five

            “I didn’t look it up”

            Yeah, that’s been pretty obvious throughout this entire thread that you’re still, for some weird reason, clinging to the hope that “elective abortion” doesn’t mean unnecessary.

            So that brings me to this question. What would you prefer we call abortions that are done for convenience (vs. health of mother and/or fetus)?

            How about “convenience abortions?” Is that better than “elective abortions?”

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            Not being pregnant is safer than pregnancy. Therefore, abortion is a necessary thing. Pregnancy kills and maims. Abortion = 14x safer than pregnancy.

          • five_by_five

            Yes, abortion is safer than pregnancy. And you know what’s safer than abortion? Not becoming pregnant in the first place.

            And yet still 49% of women receiving abortions didn’t think it was prudent to use birth control when they got pregnant.

            Imagine that.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            irrelevant.

          • HeilMary1

            Mother killer you opposes contraception as well.

          • five_by_five

            Since when?

            I’m all for people using contraception.

          • HeilMary1

            So home-skooled teen jackass you knows more than an experienced, licensed nurse?

          • five_by_five

            Flagged.

          • Jennifer Starr

            She thinks she knows things. But she doesn’t know much of anything. Typical ‘pro-lifer’, really.

          • HeilMary1

            This is for 5×5 who flagged me, but then got deleted:

            5×5, you’re flagging me because YOU are the abusive, ignorant liar here?! You’re just furious that we know the ugly truth behind your mother-killing fetal idolatry.

          • ansuz

            Commonly accepted meaning != medical meaning.

          • five_by_five

            The medical term IS “elective abortion.”

            Ya see, there are two categories of abortions. Spontaneous (sometimes called a miscarriage) and induced.

            Under the induced category, there are two types: therapeutic and elective.

            I’ll let you figure out the rest.

          • ansuz

            The commonly accepted meaning of the term “elective abortion” does not match the medical meaning of the term “elective abortion.”
            The medical use of the term, as has ben repeatedly explained to you, requires solely that a procedure is able to be scheduled ahead of time.

          • five_by_five

            Wrong.

            Hey here’s a clue. Look at the wiki page about abortion. Down in the first few paragraphs they have explanations of the different types of abortions. Induced vs spontaneous, etc. Even a little explanation about the confusion you are having about the term “elective” in regards to abortion.

            Yeah, I know, “wiki isn’t a source bloggle blargle”….. The medical definition is linked on the wiki page.

            Enjoy.

          • HeilMary1

            ALL abortions are for health reasons because ALL fetuses damage their hosts’ bodies, whether those hosts share their embarrassing reasons with you or not. It’s not your business to know which women scrurrying past you have obstetric incontinence. Most such women don’t even inform their ob/gyns or tell their kids “that’s why Daddy left for the teen babysitter”.

          • lady_black

            Wrong again little boy. You’ve been told what elective means in the context of medicine.

          • five_by_five

            goggle the term “elective abortion” just to see how wrong you are.

            I’ve already posted links to that definition, but RHRC won’t publish my posts. I wonder why.

        • cjvg

          Abortion can not be obtained after viability (24 weeks)

    • Defamate

      So you would prefer that women die instead?

    • Ivy Mike

      No “children” are affected by such procedures. Please try to view the entire situation with reason i stead of emotion.

      Protip: Children are already born.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      If you are revolted by the realities of childbirth, do not get pregnant. You probably should not have an abortion.

      Jewish law not only permits, but in some circumstances requires abortion. Where the mother’s life is in jeopardy because of the unborn child, abortion is mandatory.

      An unborn child has the status of “potential human life” until the majority of the body has emerged from the mother. Potential human life is valuable, and may not be terminated casually, but it does not have as much value as a life in existence. The Talmud makes no bones about this: it says quite bluntly that if the fetus threatens the life of the mother, you cut it up within her body and remove it limb by limb if necessary, because its life is not as valuable as hers. But once the greater part of the body has emerged, you cannot take its life to save the mother’s, because you cannot choose between one human life and another.

    • Jennifer Starr

      No one is talking about the dismemberment or decapitation of children.

      • five_by_five

        What do you think happens with late term abortions?

        • HeilMary1

          What do you think happens during obstructed labor? — the violently contracting uterus bashes off fetal skulls and leaves mothers with bladder and bowel incontinence, if they don’t die.

    • fiona64

      All children, everywhere, are born.

      And thanks for demonstrating, once again, how easy it is to a) be ignorant and b) be an anti-choice male.

    • HeilMary1

      Two female fetuses basically de-faced and de-brained my best friend BEFORE KILLING HER WITH FACE-ROTTING SKIN CANCER. You looksist misogynist forced birthers are just the type to throw up over such childbirth disfigurements and to bully such women and any of their disabled kids with insults.

  • Daniel

    I just read the fiscal impact statement which says that it’ll be very difficult for physicians to violate this law: “However, violations are likely to be very rare and it is inconceivable that anyone who is not a well-trained specialist physician with ready access would ever be in a position to violate this Act. It is equally inconceivable to assume that anyone, in that position, would violate this Act. Hence, its impact on jail and prison populations is statistically irrelevant.”

    • Ivy Mike

      Does the fiscal impact statement include the inevitable legal costs to the state’s taxpayers in defending this legislation (which those same taxpayers didn’t request in the first place) in court?

      I ask because forced-birth politicians rarely remind their voters of this.

    • ansuz

      No, the bit you quoted says that it will be very difficult for anyone who is not a physician to violate that law, and that, for some reason, it is “inconceivable” that any physician would violate the Act.

      • Daniel

        it says anyone who is not a very specialized physician. meaning it’s inconceivable that normal physicians would dismember or decapitate.

        • ansuz

          it is inconceivable that anyone except ___x___ would be in a position to __y___. It is inconceivable that anyone in such a position (i.e., people of group x) would __y___.

  • Anon rust

    @Daniel:

    Define “certain living unborn”

  • five_by_five

    Wait, you mean that I’m not going to be able to wait until 5 months of being pregnant to abort my baby?

    Oh the horror.

    • Jennifer Starr

      You are a youngster. What could you possibly know about what happens and what could possibly go wrong during a pregnancy?

    • fiona64

      Why must you continually display your ignorance in this manner?

      Most fetal anomalies cannot even be *detected* prior to 20 weeks’ gestation, as has already been explained to your ignorant person. At 20 weeks’ gestation, we are talking about wanted pregnancies gone wrong.

      Go back to your mommy’s basement and color while the adults talk.

      • five_by_five

        And which fetal abnormalities would you be referring to?

        Another person tried to claim renal agenesis and anencephaly – to which I provided the proof that those are detectable at 12 weeks.

        So, please. Tell us what abnormality you are referring to.

        • fiona64

          No, you provided jack shit. But I’ll play your stupid game this time:

          Fetal lung maturity
          Spina bifida.
          Trisomy 21
          Trisomy 18
          Molar pregnancy
          Skeletal abnormalities

          And the list goes on. But hey, continue rocking on with your delighted ignorance.

          I’m done with you. I don’t debate with ignorant children; it’s a little bit too much like playing with one’s food.

          • five_by_five

            “Spina bifida.
            Trisomy 21
            Trisomy 18
            Molar pregnancy
            Skeletal abnormalities”

            All detectable BEFORE 20 weeks. But the funny thing is that you’ll probably claim that they aren’t detectable regardless of what information I post.

            When you graduated from your 2 year nursing program, did they give you a diploma?

          • Jennifer Starr

            I’d be interested in knowing what your ‘education’ is. My guess is that you’re still struggling to graduate from high school.

          • five_by_five

            I’m in middle school. 7th grade. I thought that was obvious.

            My middle school has access to UpToDate which is why I’ve been reading their diagnostic criteria for fetal abnormalities in my spare time.

            I’m not quite sure I believe the articles that are saying TVUS can detect abnormalities as early as 12 weeks, so I’m trying to get enough money to buy an ultrasound machine and start some experimenting on friends.

          • Jennifer Starr

            So you’re around twelve and thirteen years old. Meaning that you don’t actually know what you’re talking about–about pregnancy, or contraception, or much of anything in the real world. You might think you know, but you actually don’t. Grow up and learn some things, little one, and maybe someone will take you seriously in the future. Maybe.

          • five_by_five

            No, I’m 18. I stayed back a couple of years.

            You see, I have Trisomy 21. If only my mom had an abortion I wouldn’t have to deal with all of this.

          • Ivy Mike

            And now I’m convinced that you are a complete liar, in addition to being an ignorant, arrogant jerk.

            18? In middle school? Sure, right. My oldest boy is starting middle school next September, and he’ll be 11.

            Oh, and Trisomy 21? Interesting you haven’t mentioned that until it was brought up earlier in the thread.

            Also interesting that a purported “18-year old” spends a few days, at all hours, attempting to debate female reproductive health online. Guess you have a pretty boring life.

          • five_by_five

            Yeah, I have downs, in middle-school and I’m 18. It’s not like I’d make that up to see who the idiots on this board are (JenniferStarr believed it).

            And as far as commenting history goes:

            fiona64: 10,500+ comments
            Plum Dumpling: 11,500+ comments
            Me: 470 comments.

            I guess besides defending Kermit Gosnell and his ilk, their lives must be pretty boring too.

          • Ivy Mike

            Keep going, liar. You have zero credibility anymore, having been soundly destroyed on every assertion you have made.

          • five_by_five

            Yeah, except the incorrect claims made by others that

            1. renal agenesis cannot be detected by ultrasound at 12 weeks.

            2. That a 28-day old fetus doesn’t have a heartbeat

            What other things would you like me to clarify for you?

          • Jennifer Starr

            You would have more comments if you hadn’t been flagged and deleted from so many message boards for the same kind of childish and uninformed trolling that you’ve been doing here.

          • Ivy Mike

            Please, refresh my memory…did anyone at RHR defend Kermit Gosnell? Any poster or published author? At all?

            In fact, wasn’t this very site att he forefront of exposing Gosnell’s crimes and reporting on them?

            Whoops. Looks like 5×5 lied again. No surprise.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, no one here defended Gosnell. In fact, we’ve been reporting his illegal activities on here since 2010.

          • five_by_five

            HeilMary1 comes to mind. But you’ll just claim that she doesn’t represent the true pro-choice crowd. Deny. Deny. Deny.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, HeilMary1 has never defended Gosnell. And once again, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

          • five_by_five

            She tried to deflect blame from Gosnell and the women who choose to abort their own 30+ week old fetuses and blamed it on policies that somehow forced the women to go to unsafe clinics – even though this happened in Philadelphia were there are numerous Planned Parenthoods.

            Deny. Deny. Deny.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            1) women have abortions because they do not want to be pregnant

            2) why would a woman who does not want to be pregnant wait until really late in the pregnancy to abort?

            Can you give me an answer to #2? Why would a woman who *desperately* does not want to be pregnant have a reallllly late term abortion.

            Apply some critical thinking, kiddo. I am interested in what you have to say.

          • five_by_five

            Stupidity.

            Laziness.

            Pick one. Maybe both. And that doesn’t give them the right to kill a 30+ week old fetus.

            Did you think it did?

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            1) stupidity? You said earlier that all women knew when they were late, at all times. Can’t be stupidity

            2) laziness? Do you think that a woman who is so desperate that she would go to Gosnell would also be too *lazy* to get an earliera bortion?

            Try again, dumbfuck.

          • five_by_five

            If they weren’t stupid or lazy, they would have gotten an abortion earlier…at a reputable provider.

            I stand by my claim that they were stupid, lazy, or both. I guess you could add sociopathic as an addition differential.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            Explain why and how they were too stupid and lazy to go to another abortion provider when they desperately wanted an abortion.

            Details please.

          • five_by_five

            Explain how they weren’t.

            If you really wanted an abortion, would you wait until 30 weeks to do anything about it? Wow. I hope not. I hope you’re a little more responsible than that.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            Not good enough. Try again.

          • HeilMary1

            Only women with just diagnosed cancer and / or DEAD fetuses would wait that long, Village Bully.

          • HeilMary1

            You’re the sociopath here with your opposition to contraception and sex ed.

          • five_by_five

            I have no opposition to contraception or sex ed.

            But, hey, Jennifer Starr upvoted your comment and will most certainly downvote this one. So you win.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            So are you in favor of compelling such evil incapable women by law to give birth?
            Do you dislike children?

          • five_by_five

            You’re right. We should just murder kids with bad parents. What was I thinking.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, yes she does.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Agree. Children are not important. Making women have them when they do not want to is important. Freak.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I did not see a smidgeon of caring for the 14 year old forced to have a 30 week abortion. It is a psychopath. It is all about what IT wants and thinks.
            Trolls just want to have fun.
            http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886914000324

          • HeilMary1

            Why would a low income woman wait months so she can splurge $30,000 THAT SHE DOESN’T HAVE on an abortion that would only cost $500 months earlier?! — your Crisis Pregnancy Centers, funded by pedophile priests, ran out her clock with criminal malpractice lies!

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            One of the young women was a 16 year old Teen whose Mother forced her to have the abortion. She concealed the pregnancy.

          • fiona64

            I don’t think it’s capable of critical thinking …

          • Jennifer Starr

            Pinpointing the reasons why some women might have felt desperate enough to go to a criminal butcher like Gosnell is not the same as defending him.

          • five_by_five

            You are certainly trying to defend women who knowingly tried to abort their own 30+ week old viable pregnancies.

            How does that make you feel? Good?

          • Jennifer Starr

            One day when you actually become an adult, you’ll realize that nothing is that simple and black and white.

          • HeilMary1

            How do you feel about causing women to suffer deadly obstetric incontinence, cancers, organ failures, sepsis, strokes, autoimmune diseases and death on behalf of spoiled pedophile priests? You’re gloating, I’m sure, because you’re a sadist.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Did you read the trial transcript? Which woman knowingly aborted a 30 plus week fetus? Be specific. Better yet, link me to the trial transcript.

          • five_by_five

            “As the grand jury report noted, the department was also alerted by the
            medical examiner of Delaware County that Gosnell had performed an
            illegal abortion on a 14-year-old who was thirty weeks pregnant.”

            That quote is from an article by Katha Pollitt title “Kermit Gosnell’s Horror Show” which was originally publish on The Nation website and reposted by this very website.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Yep. That is the one I was writing about. She got towed to Gosnell’s by an insane Mother. Shall we hang her?

            And Gosnell did not do a surgical late term abotion on her. He induced labor and killed the child born alive and breathing.

            Keep trying to prohibit abortion and make it illegal. You will have lots more Gosnell clinics to keep your dingle up. Freak.

          • HeilMary1

            Liar, I pointed out that you fetal idolaters oppose sex ed, contraception and affordable health care and daycare, thereby forcing low income women to rely on the Gosnells TO FIX YOUR RESULTING MESSES.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Deny what? All whackjobs like you have for argument is shaming and blaming and innuendo. So tiresome.

          • five_by_five

            Amie Newman, on this website, pointed the finger at “stigma” and lack of access to abortion “care.”instead of blaming Gosnell.

            I’d link her article but then I know you won’t see this comment.

            The article is “Doctor Who Performed Illegal Abortions Indicted for Murder” dated Jan 19, 2011.

          • goatini

            Yes, RHRC started reporting on criminal Gosnell’s crimes in 2010, before any other news outlet.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Boring middle school quality arguments. Is it soup yet?

          • fiona64

            Yep. It seems not to understand that some of us have been using the DISQUS system for *years,* across numerous sites … and it is only trolling pro-choice sites to spew its nonsense.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I don’t know how old it is, but it’s a teen. And not a particularly bright or educated one. But like most ‘pro-life’ teens, he/she is convinced she knows just everything.

          • Ivy Mike

            I no longer buy a word of its bullshit. Lies upon lies upon misrepresentations upon unsupported assertions all day, and all of them straight out of the forced-birth playbook. From the spin about Savita Halappanavar to the new claims about having Down’s, he or she is following all their steps.

          • Jennifer Starr

            That’s why we call them ‘pro-liars’.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            Oh god. LoL. Most middle schoolers are smarter than this one right..

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, you’re right–most of them are far more intelligent.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            Hmmm…

            Are Calvin and pj middle schoolers too?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Calvin is fresh out of college and prematurely balding–he’s been mommy’s little right-wing indoctrinated boy since he was young. I think PJ is probably still in high school.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            I know that Calvin is fresh out of college. But he debates like a two year old.

          • Jennifer Starr

            That’s about his maturity level. Look at five_by_five–that’s his/her level as well.

          • lady_black

            Yeah, Calvin seems not to know what he’s talking about most of the time. That little sn ot nosed pu nk thinks he’s remotely qualified to tell women old enough to be his mother what their rights and responsibilities “really are.”

          • L-dan

            I’m sure TVUS can detect some abnormalities that early. However, that’s not the standard way to do an ultrasound unless you have cause. Most pregnant people I’ve known were cautioned against even getting too attached and telling everyone about the pregnancy until they’ve gotten past 12 weeks, due to the high percentage of pregnancies that miscarry before that point. Thus, there is very little ultrasound monitoring of pregnancies that early. The exception is in cases where abortion is the planned outcome, and that is primarily to verify the gestational age.

          • HitlerWasNeverPregnant

            s/h/it thinks that because it is theoretically *possible* to test for all of these things prior to 20 weeks, that it is therefore standard practise.

            i disabused shit of this notion earlier on, but shit does not listen. In the real world, women do not get 20k worth of (mainly invasive) tests…on a weekly basis.

          • HeilMary1

            Hope you get arrested for playing doctor.

          • Mirable
          • fiona64

            I’ve already told you that I’m not a nurse. You need to go back to class, sweetie; apparently you cannot read very well.

            And no, none of those are detectable prior to 20 weeks’ gestation. But you keep telling yourself that you’re right; I remember being a know-it-all teen, too.

            The real world learning curve is going to smack you hard, little boy.

          • L-dan

            Let’s see…the chromosomal ones are detectable earlier via amniocentesis, which isn’t normally done as a ‘just checking’ test because it’s a more invasive and therefore more risky test.

            Skeletal abnormalities: it depends. But you’re not going to have a really solid view of some of them much before 20 weeks. You’ll get a “that looks odd, let’s keep an eye on it as it develops” result for many.

            Molar pregnancy: I don’t care if you don’t discover this until 38 weeks. Anyone arguing against getting rid of these at any stage is an idiot.

            Regardless of when the absolute earliest point you can find abnormalities is, the fact is that they simply don’t do weekly ultrasounds unless there’s a reason to (I’m not sure they do this ever, but I’m not an ob/gyn, so I’m not ruling it out.) So the one near 20 weeks is often the first chance to spot things.