The truth is that the number of abortions has gone down dramatically. Much of this, I think, is due to the blogosphere. When Americans finally began to realize that Roe v Eade/Doe v Bolton allowed abortion at any time for virtually any reason, they were shocked. They never heard this is their newspapers or their network news shows.

They were even more shocked to discover the barbarous procedure called partial birth abortion. Years ago, when I first read about Martin Haskell MD, inventor of the D & X procedure, people thought I was making it up. After all, they never read about this in their papers or heard it on their network news shows.

And, most are still having trouble wrapping their minds around the fact that a man running for president refused to prohibit infanticide. Of course, his votes will never be tallied in their newspapers or their network news shows.

To me, the framing of the abortion debate stands as one of the most clear examples of biased gate-keeping ever known to man.

http://townhall.com/columnists/GuyBenson/2008/08/17/obamas_infanticide_disgrace

Nova Healthcare pablum reflects the axis of the problem. They write “patient’s needs” which should more accurately be stated as “patients’ needs.” There are TWO individuals involved.

Once again, I am left with a question: Why is this such a monumental event in the life of a woman if the unborn is nothing more than a piece of tissue and not a life?

“Health” and “privacy” are catchall elastic words. If you push the issue just a little, you soon learn that “health of the mother” covers her mental composure, financial state, standing in the community, swimsuit size, childless status, wrong sex of the fetus, new love interest, morning sickness, etc.

I am aware that abortion decisions are not all trivial in nature. But the pro-choice crowd has painted itself into having to protect a lot of indefensible junk “medicine” while pretending to stand up for the greater cause of protecting privacy.

I marvel that pro-choice advocates will waffle about when life begins, toss sentience into the mix, and attempt to make “viability” an issue. They know darn well that abortion kills a human life.

They need the escape hatch of “privacy” and “health of the mother” to allow them to have a sense of noble cause about it all.

Obama clearly supports abortion as a cure for an “accidental” pregnancy. If one of his daughters had gotten pregnant in the 1950’s, he would have sent her off to “live with an aunt” for a year. She would have returned without a child, but not childless. Now he can just have the fetus that is “punishing” her sucked into pieces and flushed. It is so much more convenient for everyone.

Nova Healthcare now approximates a hospital and offers surgical abortions as part of its gynecological services. They will also prescribe Mifepristone or Mifeprex and send the mother home to start her miscarriage. This is purely a profit center for them and their services are not cheap. But Planned Parenthood will shop around and help fund abortions.

Here is the Nova Healthcare ad copy: “Our medical staff understands the sensitive nature of our patient’s needs. And because of the controversial nature of abortion, we understand that besides the very personal decision, there are external pressures that make the decision even more stressful. The goal of our staff is to respect our patient’s choice and privacy and to support our patient through a very personal event in their lives with dignity, confidentiality, compassion and care.”

If you want to have your left foot amputated because you are mad at it, I suggest Nova Healthcare. They will respect your choice and privacy with dignity, confidentiality, compassion and care. (Did you want to take the foot home with you or do want us to discard it?)

Have a nice day.

I can huff and puff about being for or against abortion, there are other some issues to consider. Partial-birth abortion is done in special cases where there is great medical risk other than that I do not see the point in the procedure. Sometimes it’s done when that child is still-born already dead. Should the mother continue to carry a still-born child to term? I think one should ask tough questions. It’s beyond our personal belief system quiet frankly and unfortunately life is not black and white. It’s not about how we think the ought to be, but how it is. Is anyone willing to adopt a child a woman is considering to abort?

I thought feeding birds was one of those quintessentially Brit things, like saving toads. Don’t be surprised if Obama picks Hillary for VP. Related: Obama on infanticideWomen want it both ways on choice. VillainousRussia’s chief exports, after oil: …

While addressing the folk at Planned Parenthood (the largest abortion provider in the USA) Obama said that his first act as President would be to overturn the ban on “partial birth abortion”. He said “On this issue, I will not yield.”

“Pro-abortion” … “death match” … sounds redundant to me.

Interestingly, in 1992 in Ireland, the debate over abortion to save the life of the mother was raging. During the government hearings, the pro-abortion crowd was not able to find one doctor in the entire country who had actually encountered a case in which they had to make a decision about aborting an infant to save the life of the mother.

Our hospital, to my knowledge, has not had the case you offer. However, when the mother’s life is at issue, the case is fairly clear. She can accept our best medical judgment to save her life or refuse treatment and die and her baby will die with her. If she is not able to make the choice, then we move to the living will or state law.

We do have experience with a mother who was kept on life support while the fetus developed to a point of safe delivery. The ACLU tried to intervene, but they gave in fairly quickly. After the delivery, she was allowed to die. It was not the hospital board that set that course of action, however. We do not make decisions of that nature for people.

Abortion is not specifically taught in medical schools. You might ask your own doctor if she or he knows the protocols for aborting babies at different points of development. Abortionists have produced their own literature, techniques and machinery.

Gabe is right about the triage aspect of your question. In ethics, when you are faced with two rotten choices, the preference is to opt for the lesser of the two evils.

I am on the board to keep track of medical ethics. I know of cases where mothers chose to die and take their otherwise viable fetus with them. That is a tough one, whether you are a Christian or an atheist.

I will try to ask other collegues next week about whether other hospitals have been confronted with this unique problem. I have read statistics that completely obliterate the “life of the mother” and “partial birth abortion” argument. That procedure is not a walk in the park and it would be some amazing set of circumstances that would prompt an operating room to be used for a woman in physical trauma to go through partial birth abortion. Partial birth abortions are scheduled and carried out like a tooth extraction. The life and death scenario is focused entirely on the infant.

Statistically, if partial birth abortion were a life or death matter for the mother, we would have cases of mothers who died in the process. I have not found any in the literature at hand.

Do you know of doctors and nurses who work part time in general practice and part time doing abortion work? I don’t. Do most abortionists consider their trade a natural extension of gynecology or obstetrics? I wonder what response you would get if you asked the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists about education, standards and policing of abortionists.

For my money, the state is correct to police abortion clinics for safety and cleanliness. If the state is going to permit the procedure, it has health and safety issues it must attend to. But of all the doctors I have met and attended meetings with, I never met one who specializes in abortion. I may have been behind one at the Wendy’s drive through, but I didn’t know it.

It never occurred to me that I was responding to anything you said or did not say. It is interesting how often folks infer stuff that simply isn’t there. Kudos for a great imagination!

In reality, my post was strictly in response to Helio’s musings about privacy. His comments are always worth reading.

The only reason I responded to you previously was that you had misread a statement I made.

This swarm is fascinating. You guys should go to the various pro-abortion blogs where people are willing to enter the octogon and have a death-match with you.