Abortion at 38 Weeks: A Thought Experiment?

[treemom]

Where I live, liberal as it is, I've searched and searched and there is not a clinic or doctor that I can find who will do fully elective abortions no questions asked past 22 weeks. You can't be more than 21.5 weeks when they first see you so there's another bit of a limit.

that us pretty normal. Do you have a clause that requires later than 22 weeks to be done in a hospital?

[treemom]

Is an abortion at 38 weeks safer than a delivery? Anyone know?

I don't know, and it would be a very, very fine line. What would make it safer is that there would be no concern for the fetus. There are only a couple of options that late and both would kill the fetus in utero and then the options are normal delivery or a hysterotomy.

But again, since this never, ever happens it is so hard to speak to. It is all in theory, the sample size could never be large enough to compare abortion at 38 weeks to childbirth.

[valsa]

I am seeing obtaining the abortion more akin to obtaining the prescription or not.

Even with that (though I don't think it's an apt comparison)- okay, you ask for a prescription and your doctor chooses whether or not to give you one after discussing it with you. With abortion, you ask for one and instead of allowing the decision to be made between you and your doctor, a bunch of assholes who have nothing to do with the medical profession butt in.

[treemom]

But that doesn't happen. I mean, it's conceivable that somewhere in the age of history some doctor gave a woman an elective abortion at 38 weeks because she just decided she didn't want to be pregnant anymore.

But the reality is that late stage abortions are incredibly rare and the medical standard of care does not support this. The reality is that late stage abortions are almost always done to protect the life or health of the mother.

There are some "late" abortions (post 20 weeks) that are done because of access issues, cost issues or other problems that are elective. But even those are not because the woman SUDDENLY decided she didn't want to be pregnant. She's never really wanted to be pregnant, but the law and anti-woman people have made it difficult for her to get earlier treatment.

It's a thought experiment, but it's not realistic. Some of us deal in reality rather than theory.

I want to say, even with exceptions abortions at 38 weeks don't happen.

If a mother develops medical complications, she most likely wanted the baby so they will do an emergency c-section. The type of late abortions that happen for this happen much closer to mid twenty weeks.

I have never heard of a case of incompatible with life diagnosis terminating that late. I was an outlier in dr. Tillmans clinic and I was two months before this. Most of his abortions happened between the 20-28 week mark. Those who were outliers we're sort of like me...late diagnosis, restrictive state laws, desired pregnancy who wanted to be as confident as possible in their choice. That pushed me to 30 weeks.

It just doesn't happen. Ever. And if it does, well it is so extreme, I support it because there has to be some extenuating circumstances.

(not that I in general support or not support...but I have less moral qualms about 38 weeks than I probably have about my own abortion).

And it needs to remain a legal option.

[treemom]

Even with that (though I don't think it's an apt comparison)- okay, you ask for a prescription and your doctor chooses whether or not to give you one after discussing it with you. With abortion, you ask for one and instead of allowing the decision to be made between you and your doctor, a bunch of assholes who have nothing to do with the medical profession butt in.

I would like if I were not on tapatalk.

[J'ean Skirt]

But the thought experiment is based on a particular premises. There are all sorts of different opinions/ arguments/ views people might have regarding medical necessity, which is entirely different than the idea of making late-term abortion available for elective reasons.

But that's like arguing whether Adam rode a t-rex or a triceratops. It might be a fun thought-experiment, but the premise is not rooted in fact. It's a meaningless discussion.

It doesn't seem realistic at all that there would be more than a handful of people who would do this, but it is the view that many here are advocating for.

Did it ever occur to you that the reason we're advocating for it is because we understand it doesn't and won't happen? That unless there is massive medical malpractice going on, a doctor isn't going to give a woman an elective abortion at 38 weeks just because she says she wants one? That it Does Not Happen.

Yes, I will say it should be legal. I will say I am uncomfortable with it. And I will say that I understand what standards of care are and trust women and doctors to make the right decision for that woman and that baby.

[Coconut Flan]

that us pretty normal. Do you have a clause that requires later than 22 weeks to be done in a hospital?

I don't know about that and have never heard of such a requirement, but I've heard from other women that generally the doctors here won't do abortions beyond 22 weeks. There are one or two who will but only with a referral from a physician they know and for serious medical reasons and they don't advertise. I found one hospital a few hundred miles away that will go to 23 weeks.

[Mama Mia]

I would like if I were not on tapatalk.

That's really not true. The Doctor has regulations regarding what can be prescribed, how much, for how long. For some medications you can buy what you need over the counter, for others the doctor can fax it to the pharmacy, for others you have to go in and get the hand written scrip every time to directly deliver. It is all regulated. How is that any different than there being regulations regarding under what points in pregnancy you can get an abortion ?

[treemom]

That's really not true. The Doctor has regulations regarding what can be prescribed, how much, for how long. For some medications you can buy what you need over the counter, for others the doctor can fax it to the pharmacy, for others you have to go in and get the hand written scrip every time to directly deliver. It is all regulated. How is that any different than there being regulations regarding under what points in pregnancy you can get an abortion ?

actually no, that isn't true. The FDA has recommendations, but doctors can prescribe off label, or more or less.

[valsa]

actually no, that isn't true. The FDA has recommendations, but doctors can prescribe off label, or more or less.

This is true. Doctors can not only prescribe off label but they can adjust dosages to be patient-specific. Medical standards of practice (ie- not O.D.ing your patients) shouldn't be confused with non-medical politicians banning a medical procedure for non-medical reasons.

Also, the regulations for medication are far more in line with the regulations for, say, sterilization of the OR during surgical abortions or dosage recommendations for chemical abortions.

Try all you want, they're not the same thing, S2004.

[Mama Mia]

I'm leaving for the weekend so don't want to be accused of flouncing.

The "more-or-less" off label is partially true, but there most definitely legal guidelines that can lead to Doctors facing charges if they are not followed - particularly regarding narcotics. The point isn't what the particular legal thresholds are - the point is that there is not complete and total medical autonomy in any other part of health care - so why would abortion be any different ?

And I believe the point some people have made is that even the doctor shouldn't have any input on the decision, isn't that correct ?

[2xx1xy1JD]

Thanks for the link, it is interesting reading. I wonder what they are counting as a crisis pregnancy centre. I know of a church that has a sign outside saying "Pregnant? We can help." When they really have nothing set up. I wonder if they count that as a crisis pregnancy centre or not?

I didn't see any reference to crisis pregnancy centres in the link.

Here, abortions are often performed in free-standing clinics, not hospitals. In Quebec, they can also be done through community health care centres called CLSCs.

There are no provincial criminal laws - that's federal jurisdiction in Canada. The provinces, however, regulate health care. So, it may be technically legal to abort, but the abortion may not be paid for by the provincial health plan beyond a certain point, and it may also be very difficult to find a place that will perform a late term abortion.

[treemom]

I'm leaving for the weekend so don't want to be accused of flouncing.

The "more-or-less" off label is partially true, but there most definitely legal guidelines that can lead to Doctors facing charges if they are not followed - particularly regarding narcotics. The point isn't what the particular legal thresholds are - the point is that there is not complete and total medical autonomy in any other part of health care - so why would abortion be any different ?

And I believe the point some people have made is that even the doctor shouldn't have any input on the decision, isn't that correct ?

I don't think a doctor should counsel a woman about whether she should abort because she is unstable, or not because she can thought it out. I do however feel like doctors need to have good standards of care and they may opt not to perform abortions or a specific abortion. of course I was speaks of the more common abortions in response to feministing taking a very paternalistic approach with future patients.

In the case of a thirty eight week termination, doctors are going to be all over the spectrum on the safety issue alone I suspect.

If doctors put their patients at risk of developing abortion addiction, well I guess I support them being tried? Keep in mind thought that is regulation after the fact to some extent. With abortion the regulation often prevents people for even being able to seek out a provider.

[valsa]

The point isn't what the particular legal thresholds are - the point is that there is not complete and total medical autonomy in any other part of health care - so why would abortion be any different?

Because it is treated differently than every other medical decision, including prescriptions. Do you believe that politicians should be able to limit when people can use antibiotics or when they can have liposuction?

[Boogalou]

I didn't see any reference to crisis pregnancy centres in the link.

Here, abortions are often performed in free-standing clinics, not hospitals. In Quebec, they can also be done through community health care centres called CLSCs.

There are no provincial criminal laws - that's federal jurisdiction in Canada. The provinces, however, regulate health care. So, it may be technically legal to abort, but the abortion may not be paid for by the provincial health plan beyond a certain point, and it may also be very difficult to find a place that will perform a late term abortion.

The link was hyperlinked to Minerva's first this: it can be found here: http://canadiansforchoice.ca/Access%20a ... Canada.pdf

[Soldier of the One]

Lookie here, this renders the discussion not entirely hypothetical:

British woman 'aborts' (illegally) at 39 weeks from an unwanted pregnancy, probably through a lover. As far as we know, the fetus had no abnormalities or issues.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/britis ... l-abortion

[Minerva]

Lookie here, this renders the discussion not entirely hypothetical:

British woman 'aborts' (illegally) at 39 weeks from an unwanted pregnancy, probably through a lover. As far as we know, the fetus had no abnormalities or issues.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/britis ... l-abortion

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12854&hilit=+aborts

[Soldier of the One]

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12854&hilit=+aborts

Oh sorry, Minerva, hadn't realized it had already been cited.

[OkToBeTakei]

Lookie here, this renders the discussion not entirely hypothetical:

British woman 'aborts' (illegally) at 39 weeks from an unwanted pregnancy, probably through a lover. As far as we know, the fetus had no abnormalities or issues.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/britis ... l-abortion

Think I posted this earlier. Unless it is a different one?

ETA. Same one. Was bad enough reading it the first time.

[Minerva]

Oh sorry, Minerva, hadn't realized it had already been cited.

No worries. It's a relevant thing to bring up, I just figured it'd be more helpful to link to the old thread than to re-invent the wheel on that one.

[Soldier of the One]

OKToBeTakei: Yeah, totally.

Minerva: reading the FJ thread for context was helpful though. Does seem more like an ill-conceived induction (maybe with the goal of infanticide once born?) rather than an 'abortion'. What a bizarre story, though. So tragic.

[valsa]

Lookie here, this renders the discussion not entirely hypothetical:

British woman 'aborts' (illegally) at 39 weeks from an unwanted pregnancy, probably through a lover. As far as we know, the fetus had no abnormalities or issues.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/britis ... l-abortion

I only wish she had been able to get the abortion legally.

[OkToBeTakei]

I only wish she had been able to get the abortion legally.

From what is written. She did not attempt to. The legalities here would not have precluded her.

[valsa]

From what is written. She did not attempt to. The legalities here would not have precluded her.

From the article:

She said that she had tried to have a legal abortion but discovered that she was over the legal gestational age limit of 24 weeks.

[OkToBeTakei]

From the article:

Tried? But then did nothing for another 14 weeks. Late term abortions are not illegal in the UK.