a question about late abortions...

[followthestarlover]

am genuinely curious, and don't want this to turn into a big controversial thread!!!

I have been thinking about some of the links posted on the thread I started about the lady who survived being aborted... and the partial birth abortion technique which just sounds hideous.

I don't think I could bear to ever do that..even if I was dying, although obviously I have never been in that situation...

but I just wondered how they perform late abortions over here, please tell me it isn't like that?
and also, what reasons do they do them for? I think they do it if the mother has cancer that needs treating? is that right? what else?

also, how late can a late abortion be up to? I mean, say you only had 4 weeks to go.. would they induce you? what is the cut off?

I am just being really nosy here, and hope this doesn't upset/offend anyone

The problem with this whole debate is that people are not given all the gory details. My baby had a condition called Cornelia de Lange syndrome. However it was not the condition that was incompatible with life but the severity of it and the pulmonary complications. Similarly, the child with cleft palate had a very severe form of it that would not have been resolved by a simple operation and a bit of SALT. I know a parent who terminated the pregnancy of a baby who had Downs Syndrome however they did not terminate because their baby had DS, they terminated because their baby had HLHS.

you don't need to have a life-compromising problem with the baby. A mild to moderate learning disability will do for a woman being offered a termination right up to 40 weeks - it happened to someone I know whose baby was diagnosed in utero with Down's syndrome in the last 4 weeks of pregnancy. Charming, huh?! Grim grim grim. The law is an ass.

Oh, and I am pro-life, however I am pro quality of life.

agreed nqc and gkwcl. i thought there was probably more to that case than met the eye.

The cleft palate case became public knowledge because a very anti-abortion trainee vicar looked up the statistics, spotted this case, and raised a huge hoo-ha about it. How cruel was that? She sparked a police investigation, FFS. Must have been torment for the poor woman involved.

actually EDAM, that vicar had been born with a severe facial/jaw deformity, that's why she kicked up a stink.

Both of you are right but unless the parent who decided to terminate her pregnancy sought counselling through her I hav eno idea why she got involved??????

I think she was questionning why the law allowed the abortion on the grounds of a cleft palate, which in many cases (including her own) can be corrected by surgery after birth.

Yes, I know why she questioned it but she also jumped to conclusions that any cleft palate must be no worse than her own and can be repaired when not all can be. If the palate has not formed at all then no amount of plastic surgery will help.

Absolutely - but that shouldn't stop the law being questionned whne it appears that the doctors may have stepped outside the law.

If a doctor was seen to be hastening the death of an elderly person, questions would be asked - and rightly so. When it's something as major as this, there should be no ambiguity whatsoever. If the law allows late abortion on medical grounds, and then a psycological element is brought into it, then the law needs to clarify whether or not a late abortion can be on any other grounds than medical.

I can't think of anything worse than having to go through a late abortion for medical reasons. It must be every woman's nightmare. I'm not saying that I think the vicar was right or wrong - just that occasionally the law needs to be clarified in something as major as this. Was she right or wrong to get involved? Not sure.

GKWCL,

I admire what you did just having seen this post.
I had many scans due to bad water retention and apparant slow growth.
My dd was 3 weeks prem and also had a Diaphragmatic hernia which was really bad as all her organs including her appendix were in her chest.
They said she wouldn't survive and gave her a 10% chance of living, fortunately dd proved them all wrong and went to have surgery 4 days after she was born, it was a sucess, but it was not an easy journey. She only has half of her left lung and right one is smaller than normal, but she is healthy.
I have thought since she was born that had they have picked it up at the 33 week scan, and given how serious it was, i probably would have aborted as too young to have probably dealt with it.!!!!!
I think you did a very brave and commendable thing.

Butty.xxx

Butty

Bless your DD, I am so glad she was a fighter and is thriving now

I don't think the vicar was right to get involved if I am honest. Of course the law should be questioned but I feel the vicar could have joined a pro-life lobbying group and focussed her efforts that way rather than singling out an individual case.

Lets not forget, two doctors do have to agree to the termination so it would not have been signed off as a matter of course.

I don't think anyone makes these types of decisions without a great deal of soul-searching. This is all about loving parents trying to do the right thing for their families and we should all do our best to support people who find themselves in such tragic circumstances.
Big hugs to you all!

But as Butty says, there were doctors who were ready to terminate her baby. Having 2 doctors to sign the form doesn't act as a failsafe, which is why the law has to be followed to the letter in all cases.

Although as I said, I'm not sure whether or not she should have got involved, it certainly highlighted the issue of late abortions. The other example recently was of the Amercian woman who was born alive after a saline abortion. I know that it was different circumstances, but what I think it did do is highlight the fact that we probably shouldn't go down the Amercian path - which again is why the UK law should be followed to the letter at all times.

Not a pleasant topic. However, just in response to jinglinggoblin the medical profession are not really in a position to judge about abortions. My sis is a GP and feels really upset about the number of women she sees for whom abortion is nothing more than a minor inconvenience. As a doctor training, they are asked to view abortions as a surgical proceedure. Those who feel very strongly against it may decide not to take part. My sis felt she ought to see what happens if she was going to be referring people. She said it was very, very sad. However, she is not there to judge, just like she can advise people not to smoke as it causes cancer, but she doesn't refuse to see them when they have bronchitus. The women she sees who are on the 4th or 5th abortion she repeatedly tries to discuss improved contraception, things such as the coil so that they can't forget to take their pill or use a condom but for whatever reason she says it is a losing battle.
I don't think the medical profession consider anything beyond 24 weeks gestation as an abortion. It is considered differently.

I have a friend whose baby son died in the summer because of a severe, undetected heart problem. She's now pg and having v detailed scans just over halfway through her pregnancy. if this child had the problems her previous baby had, I would support her in whatever decision she made. I suspect she would choose termination if this baby's chances were as poor as his brother's (the condition would've meant 3 ops in infancy followed by a heart/lung transplant in his teens).

Paolosgirl,

I think you have got your wires crossed.
There was never any talk of terminating my daughter as they did not detect he defect until she was born and the chances of her surviving were very slim.
My point was that had they have discovered the problem at my 33 week scan, they would have induced me and survival would more than likely have been nil given the circumstances, but as she managed to survive in the womb till 37 weeks she had more chance.
However, my point was that should i have found out the seriousness of the problem at the 33 week scan, there would have been talk of termination due to her low survival rate. This is what i was advised would have been suggested by the surgeon after the operation.
I was very young and would probably have gone through with it as i would have found it harder to meet her and then lose her if you get what i mean.!
Butty.xxx

Sorry Butty . I think the point I was trying to make was that there were doctors who would have induced you if the problem had been picked up at the scan - and yet because it wasn't, you went on to have your daughter, who survived, thank heavens.

I guess what I'm trying to say (not very well, I know) is that the the mdical profession can and do recommend late terminations for babies that can and do survive, and that is why the law must be applied rigidly, with no room for manoevure and no room for interpretation.

I agree totally with what you are saying, but in some cases, i really dont think that there is much else that can be done if you get what i mean.

Butty.xxx

Sometimes a late abortion is a necessary evil. A friend of mine was diagnosed with leukaemia half way through her pg. She had the stark choice of terminating the baby or forgoing treatment for herself. As she already had two little girls under four she chose to have treatment. She gave birth, after an injection to stop the baby's heart, to a much-wanted little boy, whom they named and cuddled after his delivery. Sadly, my friend died about 18mths later of her illness.

suedonim that's so sad

I have nothing but respect for the doctors that peform terminations. Grim though it is they are performing an extremely valuable service.
My grandmother had an illegal backstreet abortion in the 50s because she could literally could not afford to feed 2 children at the time, though she desperately wanted another child.
The operation left her infertile and with serious complications.
Thank god there are doctors who are prepared to do it, though like everyone on this thread I agree it is sad that some abortions are peformed so late...