jillio

Because, Cheri, the technique was not illegal 22 years ago. It was only banned in 2003. As long as a physician had a medical foundation for performing a second trimester abortion, it was not illegal to use the technique that you call "partial birth." Today, doctors can still perform 2nd timester abortion under certain criteria. However, they cannot use the technique of partial birth. So even if a mother's life was at stake, or the fetus had a birth defect incompatible with life, and the abortion was perfectly legal, the doctor would have committed an illegal act by using that particular technique.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that all 2nd trimester abortions are done using the same technique. That is simply not accurrate or true.

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

jillio

The transcript is from court testimony in 1992. That is prior to the ban on the D & X technique. It in no way supports the claim that the procedure is still being used today. The technique was not illegal at the time the testimony was taken, or at the time the procedure was being used. And, a good protion of the testimony refers to a technique known as "dismemberment abortion" which is a different procedure than "partial birth".

Cheri

You said that it was illegal for any form of abortions above the 2nd trimester unless there is a medical reason for it, right? as I remember very clear that's what you said on another thread.

__________________

jillio

Yes, Cheri, that is exactly what I said. And second trimester abortions can still be performed when there is a medical reason. But a doctor cannot legally use the technique of "partial birth" to complete the procedure. It was outlawed in 2003.

It is perfectly legal for a doctor to perform an abortion before the end of the first trimester for any reason upon the request of the pregnant woman. But it is not legal for him to perform the abortion using a dirty coathanger. You are confusing a banned technique with the actual procedure.

Legal: first elective abortions performed by a doctor at the woman's request.

Illegal: performing that abortion without a medical license. Performing that abortion using unnaccepted medical techniques (i.e. a dirty coathanger.

Legal: abortions extending past the first trimester in the case of a woman's life being at risk or in the case of a fetus that is so defective that the deformities are incompatible with life.

Illegal: performing abortions extending past the first trimester, even when medically indicated, using the technique known as "partial birth." If it is medically indicated, the abortion is not illegal. Using the partial birth technique is. A doctor performing a 2nd trimester abortion for therapeutic and medically accepted reasons (risk of death to the woman or incomaptibility with life for the fetus) has not done anything illegal. If he uses the "partail birth" technique to complete a legal procedure, he has done something illegal. The abortion was not illegal, the manner in which he completed it was illegal.

Cheri

You are not answering my question directly, stop jumping ahead. I'm talking about 22 years ago, I'm not talking about now. So get to the program, Jillio.

I am not confused between banned techniques with the actual procedure, My abortion wasn't with a coat hanger nor was it for any medical reason either.

__________________

Reba

The transcript was from the trial in the Southern District of New York brought
by the National Abortion Federation and several abortion doctors

http://www.umass.edu/legal/Arons/Spr...TIONNYEDIT.pdf

jillio

I am answering your question directly Cheri. You are just not comprehending the answer.

We are not discussing your abortion, Cheri. We are discussing the legality of abortion today. Twenty two years ago, "partial birth" technique was legal. Today it is not.

Cheri

But, You also stated that partial birth abortion was only to be used if the mother's life is at risk or any medical reasons back then before it was banned. I'm trying to find out from my dad what kind of abortion I had, I'm waiting for his respond.

__________________

Reba

I remember local doctors being arrested for performing illegal abortions before Roe v. Wade. They performed the abortions in their medical offices, with sterile medical instruments. They were arrested for the way they performed abortions; they were arrested for performing the abortions, period.

So, if doctors were performing illegal abortions in the past, and willing to take the chance of arrest, what makes anyone think that they aren't willing to do illegal procedures now?

When people give their personal testimonies of their abortion experiences, why assume that they are lying?

jillio

The Act prohibits any physician in the United States, “in or affecting interstate or foreign Commerce [from] knowingly perform[ing] a partial-birth abortion.” 18 U.S.C. § 1531(a). Partial-birth abortion is defined under the Act as: an abortion in which the person performing the abortion (A) deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and (B) performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus.
…The Act applies regardless of the stage of pregnancy and thus bans partial-birth abortions both before and after fetal viability. The Act subjects physicians to possible criminal and civil penalties. A violation of the statute constitutes a felony that carries a sentence of not more than two years’ imprisonment, and/or a fine. Terms also used to describe the procedure include “dilation and extraction” or “D&X,” “intact dilation and evacuation” “intact D&X,” “intact dilation and extraction,” “intact dilation and evacuation,” the “intact variation of D&E,” and “the breech extraction variant of D&E.” …As one physician who submitted written testimony to Congress stated, “[T]here is no uniformly accepted medical terminology for the [abortion] method that is the subject of this legislation.” (Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2002: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the House Committee on the Judiciary, 107th Cong. 52 (July 9, 2002) [July 2002 Hearing] (testimony of Dr. Pamela Smith); …However, “partialbirth abortion” is a frequently used legal term as demonstrated by the many state statutes to employ it. See Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914, 994-95 (2000) (Thomas, J


Each of the plaintiffs’ witnesses was well-versed in the grisly art of abortion.
Dr. Timothy Johnson, a plaintiff in the case, is chair of the department
of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Michigan Medical School.
He has performed second-trimester dismemberment abortions and observed
partial-birth abortions, and was offered as an expert witness for the plaintiffs.21

From your links:

The article was written in 2004, and was in reply to a protest on the ban of partial birth abortions, a ban which had already been enacted.

Testiomy was offered regarding the technique that was used prior to the ban, as is evidenced by the past tense usage in the testimony.

The testimony in no way implies or states that in 2004, the technique is still being used. The doctor giving the testimony referrs to a technique he "observed" being performed by another doctor prior to the ban.

Once again, the entire article is about protesting the existing ban. Which simply supports the fact that the procedure has been banned.

jillio

No, Cheri, that is not what I said, and that is where you are confused. I said that 2nd trimester abortion was illegal under those circumstances. Second trimester abortion and partial birth abortion are not interchangable terms. One refers to time of gestation, and the other refers to the technique used. There are several techniques that can be used to perform a 2nd trimester abortion. The only one that has been banned is "partial birth". Even if a woman's life is at stake, or the fetus has conditions incompatible with life, "partial birth" cannot be uised to perform a second trimester abortion. That doesn't mean that a 2nd trimester abortion is illegal uinder these circumstances. It means that they have to do it another way.

jillio

And that is because prior to Roe V Wade, elective abortion was illegal, no matter how the abortion was performed. Today, it is not. The only thing that is illegal is the manner in which the abortion is performed. Today, those doctors would not be doing anything illegal. However, if they were to perform a 2nd trimester abortion legally using an illegal technique ("partial birth") they would be inviolation of the law. If they performed a 2nd trimester abortion for medically indicated reasons, and did not use the technique of "partial birth", they are again, not doing anything illegal.

Cheri

It's you that are confusing me, because you say one thing and then say another. You don't seem to answer the question I asked, if you did, it would have been less the confusion. Now, moving on.

__________________

jillio

I have not contradicted myself at all. Ask the question again. I will answer it and try to do so in a way that you can understand.

I think the confusion has come in because you are assuming that "partial birth abortion" and 2nd trimester abortion are the same thing. They are not the same thing.

jillio

Guess the question can't be remembered.

Reba

Some topics are too painful and personal to be discussed publicly in this forum.

jillio

Yes they are. But evidently, the question was asked at some point, because it was stated that I failed to answer it. So, if it was okay to ask it once, it shouldn't be any more difficult the second time around.

Oceanbreeze

__________________

Oceanbreeze

Actually, no it is not!

The correct medical term for it is intact dilation and extraction. This is rarely done late term abortion performed on women who are carrying fetuses with catastrophic deformities.

Intact dilation and extraction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

__________________

KarissaMann05

Since you thought all pro-choicers never force anybody else. Well, that's not true. *Some* pro-choice boys don't want their girlfriends have a baby, they pick on their girlfriends until they got abortions for boys. I will say that depend.

I read some entries in pro-choice community sometimes..

__________________

Credit by KarissaMann05

jillio

It took the male to create the child, didn't it? Why shouldn't he have input? And the only way one can be forced, is to physicaly restrained and have a procedure done that they are opposed to. If a woman walks into a clinic and gets up on a table and allows the procedure to be done, she has ecxercised a choice. Ultimately, the decision is hers. The procedure cannot be done without her consent.

KarissaMann05

__________________

Credit by KarissaMann05

Oceanbreeze

That's not being pro choice. That's being abusive. If guys don't want to be fathers, then they shouldn't "dip their wick". It's that simple. I find it really hard to believe that a guy would force a girl to abort. In most cases, he just takes a walk.

I will share a story with you. My Mother got pregnant with me out of wedlock in 1968. My father came from a wealthy family, and it was possible for my Mother to go across state lines and obtain an abortion. She chose not to do that. As soon as I was born and it became known that I had medical problems, my father wanted less and less to do with my Mother and I. He was completely out of my life by the time I was six months old. I am actually grateful. My biological father was a drug addict who ended up dying from hepatitis B several years later. I never knew him.

Jessie, people make choices. Both m