|
|
|
|
Defending A Woman's Right to Have an Abortion
Through the Second Trimester of Pregnancy
|
|
| Life
and Liberty for Women is not afraid or ashamed
to speak of and defend a woman's right to have an
abortion through the second trimester of pregnancy |
|
| Life
and Liberty for Women is not ashamed of legal
abortion as defined by Roe vs. Wade. That means
that we fully support a woman's right to decide
to terminate her pregnancy in the second trimester,
even in late second trimester, before viability,
because, when all is said and done, she is convinced
that she cannot parent a child at this time in her
life; she simply can't offer her child the quality
of life she believes her child deserves. |
|
| We fully support a woman's
right to decide to terminate her pregnancy in the
second trimester, even in late second trimester,
before viability, because she has determined that
she can't give birth and give up her child for adoption.
That conclusion would certainly reflect how she
herself would feel about carrying her baby for 9
months and then giving away her baby, but such a
decision against adoption would also reflect her
feelings about the uncertainty she feels about the
quality of |
|
|
| life her child would have
if adopted out. Women are aware that their child
might or might not end up with a loving family to
raise them. Additionally, they are aware that even
with the most loving family, a child may grow into
adulthood with serious self-esteem issues arising
out of "being unwanted and given away." Women considering
adoption think very seriously about those two consequences
just as they think very seriously about the consequences
to themselves and the potential life they carry
that carrying to term and parenting would present
or having an abortion would present. |
|
| Those of us who work daily
to protect and defend Roe vs. Wade, understand that
some late second trimester abortions are a result
of an unhealthy fetus and/or unhealthy woman but
we are also very much aware of the reasons why some
women, and in particular poor women and young teenage
girls, find themselves making this decision in the
second trimester, even into late second trimester
and we must articulate that to the public without
shame and with all forthrightness. |
|
|
|
|
It is important to understand the reasons
why abortions occur in the second
trimester, and why a woman might wait until the second trimester.
|
|
| Here it is important to
articulate the several reasons why a woman who wishes
to terminate her pregnancy might wait so long. |
|
| In 1987 a study, the Alan
Guttmacher Institute found that 71% of women did
not recognize that they were pregnant or had misjudged
gestational age. 48% had difficulty arranging for
an abortion, particularly raising the money for
an abortion. 33% were afraid to tell their parents
or partner, and 24% said they were having great
difficulty deciding to have an abortion. These women
were also more likely to be having personal health
problems, fetal health problems, or to have suffered
rape or incest. |
|
| It is important to understand
the reasons why and under what circumstances abortions
occur in the second trimester. There are four possibilities.
|
|
| First, you can have a
healthy woman and a healthy fetus. Life
and Liberty for Women stands tall and proud
for the right of any woman to decide to terminate
her pregnancy, prior to viability, for any reason
she deems is right for her life and the potential
life she is responsible for. |
|
| Second, it is between
14 and 18 weeks before amniocentesis can begin to
detect |
|
|
| some serious and/or life
threatening fetal anomalies. Consequently, it may
be mid to late second trimester before an unhealthy
fetus may be discovered. In this case there would
be a healthy woman and an unhealthy fetus. A woman,
in consultation with her physician, family, and
clergy, must be the one who makes the decision about
continuing the pregnancy or terminating it, not
some politician or antiabortion religious fanatic.
|
|
| Third, a woman who has
a health issue, such as a heart condition, cancer,
high blood pressure, diabetes, etc., that may or
may not have been apparent at the onset of pregnancy,
but can complicate a pregnancy, especially as the
pregnancy progresses, is also a very real possibility.
Such a case may see a healthy fetus and an unhealthy
woman or if the fetus is found to be unhealthy as
well an unhealthy fetus and an unhealthy woman can
be a reality. Again, it is essential that a woman,
her physician, family, and clergy make a decision
as to whether an abortion is best for her and the
potential life she is responsible for and further,
what procedure will best protect her health, future
fertility, and life. Only those individuals know
the facts and only they can call upon their own
conscience and religious and moral value system
to make such a heart wrenching decision. |
|
|
|
|
The Alan Guttmacher Institute indicates
that only 1%
of abortions are performed at 21 weeks or later.
|
|
| It is not at all surprising
that the antiabortion movement will not speak these
truths and realities when they discuss second trimester
abortions. Clouding these truths with emotional
manipulation and lies better serves their agenda.
What is surprising to me, is that the abortion rights
movement gets so tangled up in their "rectangular
message box" and fear of alienating moderate voters
and financial supporters that they fail to make
the critical distinctions and delineations between
the numbers and the reasons for second and third
trimester abortions which in turn has further confused
the public and led to state and federal legislative
loses and ballot box losses. Later on I take a more
in depth look at the abortion rights movement's
failure, the consequences and the solution. |
|
| Next, It's important to
discuss for a moment the numbers of abortions that
occur in the second trimester. In January of 2000
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
(CDC) reported the latest statistics gathered on
abortions performed in the United States. In 1997,
the CDC said that 1,184,758 abortions |
|
|
| were performed, the lowest
level in two decades. Additionally, approximately
88% were performed during the first 12 weeks of
pregnancy. In actual numbers that would mean that
1,042,587 were performed in the first 3 months of
pregnancy or in the first trimester. That leaves
approximately 14,217 that were performed after the
first trimester. |
|
| The Alan Guttmacher Institute
indicates that only 1% of abortions are performed
at 21 weeks plus. That would mean that in 1997,
in real numbers, approximately 11,484 abortions
were performed at 21 weeks plus. In 1997 the Guttmacher
Institute said that approximately four one-hundredths
of one percent (0.4%)of abortions are performed
in the third trimester or after viability. In real
numbers that would be approximately 474 abortions
were performed in the third trimester out of over
1 million abortions overall in 1997. That means
that depending on the total number of abortions
in a given year, where the high has been near 1.6
million, anywhere between 400-700 abortions a year
out of one million plus occurs in the 7,8,or 9th
month or after viability. |
|
|
|
|
the medical community believes that viability
generally occurs between 25-28 weeks
|
|
| Further, these statistics
would indicate that in real numbers the number of
abortions occurring in late second trimester, starting
at 21 weeks and ending at the end of 24 weeks, would
be approximately, 11,010 out of over 1 million abortions
in 1997. Remember: that 11,010 accounts for abortions
not only for women who unfortunately have waited
and made their decision to terminate their pregnancy
late in the second trimester, but also in that number
are abortions of women who have health issues themselves
that have complicated the pregnancy and given cause
for the termination of the pregnancy to protect
her health or life. Also in that number are women
who have terminated their pregnancy after amniocentesis
and other tests have indicated the presence of serious
fetal defects and anomalies. |
|
| Further, keep in mind
that the medical community believes that viability
generally occurs between 25-28 weeks. While there
have been fetuses of less weeks that have survived,
the number of variables and factors that effects
every pregnancy differently, makes predicting exactly
when any particular fetus will be viable most unpredictable.
Fetuses born |
|
|
| 23-26 weeks may or may
not survive and may have some physical and mental
deficiencies that range from mild to more severe.
The fact is that there is a threshold at which the
human body is capable of surviving outside of the
womb and further surviving with minimal physical
and mental difficulties. A fetus born below that
threshold is in the gray unpredictable area where
some will live with minimal difficulties, others
will survive with major difficulties while others
will not survive at all. Simply, it is a fact of
life that we must deal with. |
|
| In a recent Newsweek special
issue in an article titled "New Hope for Preemies,"
a 23-week female preemie was described thusly, "She
fluttered on the very edge of viability. Her skin
was paper-thin and tore open easily. Fetal fuzz,
called langugo covered her shoulders and back. Her
ears, still developing cartilage, ran seamlessly
into her jaw line. Her eyelids were fused together.
While some things were amazingly complete - her
fingernails, the life lines across her palms - her
heart, lungs, and brain were not up to the task
of keeping her alive." |
|
|
|
|
a child born at 24 weeks has a 1 in 4 chance
of surviving without neurological impairments
|
|
| The article goes on, "about
11% of all US babies were born premature. About
one half of the tiniest still die. Babies who leave
the womb too soon have multiple weaknesses, including
brains and eyes that are subject to hemorrhaging,
and heart and lungs too immature to maintain circulation.
These can kill them in their incubators or may result
in such life long problems as blindness, deafness
and cerebral palsy." |
|
| While technological advances
have given some extreme preemies a better opportunity
than ever to survive and offered some limited ability
to mitigate the physical and mental consequences
to such premature birth, the article reminds us
that, "While more and more premature babies are
surviving, many don't leave the NICU unscathed.
A recent study of 811 extremely premature babies
(all delivered between 20 and 25 weeks) found that
half had some disability at 30 months and one quarter
were considered severely disabled." |
|
| The article also reminds
us that, "at some hospitals,"
meaning many hospitals may be ill equipped to save
preemies or mitigate the consequences of premature
birth, "a child born at 24 weeks has a 1 in 4 chance
of surviving |
|
|
| without neurological impairments."
I emphasize at some hospitals,
because if you are a poor woman, without insurance,
or in a rural area with little access to better
hospitals with the most modern equipment available,
guess what, your preemie has little to no chance
of surviving let alone surviving without life long
physical and or mental consequences. |
|
| Experts and researchers
who deal daily with preemies so understand the threshold
I was just speaking of, the threshold that the human
body must reach to just survive outside of the womb
and further to survive outside of the womb with
minimal to no lasting physical or mental defects
that, says the article, "As researchers learn more
about the causes of premature birth , hopes for
preventing it are improving." Even though researchers
also work to find better ways to help save preemies
and mitigate the lasting consequences of such a
premature birth for those who do survive, they realize
the real solution, because of that inescapable threshold,
is to prevent the fetus from exiting the womb before
it has so developed as to be actually and really
viable. That is a very significant fact to recognize
as we discuss late second trimester abortions. |
|
|
|
|
we can lower the number of second trimester
abortions by
providing cumbersome free access to abortion services for
poor
women and teenage girls and increasing educational efforts
|
|
| Next: It's a fact that
we can impact and lower the number of second trimester
abortions. We can do that very simply by providing
cumbersome free access to abortion services for
poor women and teenage girls and increase educational
efforts. |
|
| With regard to minor girls
access to safe and legal abortion services, The
2001 National NARAL (National Abortion and Reproductive
Rights Action League) book, "Who Decides? A State-by-State
Review of Abortion and Reproductive Rights," which
tracks yearly the status of reproductive health
care issues, found the following to be the case
as of December 31, 2000: |
|
| • "42 states have
laws that require a minor to obtain the consent
or to notify an adult, typically a parent, prior
to an abortion. 32 of these laws are currently enforced.
|
|
|
| • Of the 32 states
that currently enforce notice or consent laws, only
Utah does not have a judicial or other by-pass provision
allowing a minor to secure a court order in lieu
of notifying her parents. |
|
| • 8 states permit
a minor to notify specified adults other than her
parents, under certain circumstances. Also known
as a trusted adult clause. |
|
| • Delaware, Maryland,
and West Virginia permit a minor to obtain an abortion
without parental consent or notice in certain circumstances
if a physician or health professional waives the
requirement. |
|
| • In addition, 11
states allow a minor to obtain an abortion without
parental consent or notice if she declares she is
a victim of abuse, neglect, rape, or incest." |
|
|
|
|
parental notice/consent laws force teens
to seek abortion services in
other states and increase the likelihood of a second trimester
abortions
|
|
| We need to repeal all
parental notice/consent laws that have proven to
force teens to seek abortion services in other states
and further increase the likelihood that they will
not obtain an abortion until they are in the second
trimester. |
|
| For example, in Minnesota,
the proportion of second-trimester abortions among
minors terminating their pregnancies increased by
18% following the enactment of a parental notification
law. In Missouri since its parental consent law
went into effect in 1985, the proportion of second
trimester abortions among teens increased from 19%
in 1985 to 23% in 1988. These findings were noted
by Patricia Donovan in "Our Daughters' Decisions:
The Conflict in State Law on Abortion and Other
Issues," 1992. |
|
| A 1986 ACLU report about
Minnesota's parental consent law, found that when
minor |
|
|
| girls utilized the judicial
by-pass provision contained in that law, a provision
which is contained in most all of the parental notice/consent
laws on the books, that not only did the courts
approve most by-pass requests, but the court proceedings
were responsible for delaying their abortions by
more than one week, and sometimes up to three weeks.
|
|
| We know that many teenage
girls are often unaware of their pregnancies until
late in the first trimester and some even into the
first of the second trimester. Combine that reality
with the looming hoops of parental notice/consent
laws and the usual fear, panic and indecision that
envelops an unintended pregnancy and one begins
to see the impact on reducing the number of second
trimester abortions repealing parental notice and
consent laws would alone have. |
|
|
|
|
offering Medicaid funding to poor women
for elective abortions
under the guidelines of Roe vs. Wade can prevent women delaying
an abortion decision into the second, even late second trimester
|
|
| Next, by offering Medicaid
funding to poor women for elective abortions under
the guidelines of Roe vs. Wade, we can prevent women
delaying an abortion decision into the second, even
late second trimester, because they lack the financial
means to pay for an abortion. The Supreme Court
decided Roe vs. Wade in 1973. By 1976 the "Hyde
Amendment" was passed (and is still in force) by
Congress that denied federal Medicaid funds to poor
women to pay for an abortion, except in the case
of rape, incest, or life of the woman. Soon many
state legislatures took up the same question and
voted to deny poor women state Medicaid funds to
pay for an abortion or voters, when asked to decide
that question, said no, as with my own state of
Colorado. |
|
| Again, the 2001 National
NARAL (National Abortion and Reproductive Rights
Action League) book, "Who Decides? A State-by-State
Review of Abortion and Reproductive Rights," which
tracks yearly the status of reproductive health
care issues, notes that through December of 2000
the following: |
|
| • "18 states fund
abortion for women in their state medical assistance
programs in all or most circumstances (AK, AZ, CA,
CT, HI, IN, MD, MA, MN, MT, NJ, NM, NY, OR, TX,
VT, WA, WV). |
|
|
| • 26 states including
the District of Columbia, exclude abortion from
their state medical assistance programs except in
cases of life endangerment, rape, or incest. (AL,
AR, CO, DE, DC, FL, GA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MI, MO,
NE, NV, NH, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, TN, UT,
WY). |
|
| • 16 states require
that the rape or incest be reported to a law enforcement
or social service agency in at least some circumstances
in order for the woman to receive public funds for
an abortion (DE, ID, IN, IA, LA, MA, MD, MT, OH,
OK, PA, SC, UT, VA, WI, WY). 7 of these make no
exception for a woman judged by her physician as
unable to comply with the reporting requirement
(IN, IA, MD, MA, VA, WI, WY). Arizona requires a
minor under 18 or an incapacitated adult to obtain
the written consent of a parent or guardian and
documentation that the crime of rape or incest was
reported to the proper authorities in order to receive
public funds for an abortion. Mississippi and South
Dakota exclude abortion from their state medical
assistance programs except when the woman's life
is endangered. These state policies violate federal
law prohibiting participating states from excluding
abortion from the Medicaid program in cases of rape
or incest as well as life endangerment." |
|
|
|
|
our tax dollars are paying for things we
do not "morally support"
like thousand dollar toilet seats or wrenches, and abortion
for
poor women and teenage girls should be covered too, even if
radical anti-abortionists don't "morally support"
them
|
|
| Why should you be able
to exercise your constitutional right to safe and
legal abortion services if you have money but be
denied that right if you are poor? In any given
moment of any given day, our tax dollars more often
than not are paying for "things" we do not "morally
support." Military spending into the billions and
billions comes to mind. So do thousand dollar toilet
seats or wrenches. We can be "morally" opposed to
zillions of things and our tax dollar still has
an obligation to pay up for the betterment of our
society. Abortion for poor women and teenage girls
is no different. Refusing to cover abortion services
with Medicaid dollars doesn't make a moral statement
- nor do they stop every poor woman from having
an abortion - some finally raise the money - except
now they are seeking an abortion into the second
trimester - Duh!!! |
|
| We can also lower the
number of second trimester abortions by increasing
educational efforts. We can provide education to
young girls and women about their bodies and the
importance to their health of recognizing the signs
of pregnancy early on and making the decision to
have an abortion within the first trimester. |
|
|
| Finally, the abortion
rights movement must stop being afraid to publicly
express unequivocal support for that part of Roe
vs. Wade, that allows women to make a decision to
terminate an unintended pregnancy, for any reason,
prior to viability, even into the late second trimester.
|
|
| Several months ago, I
was tuned in to FOX News Talk Show "Hannity and
Colmbs." Hannity, the right wing extremist, was
questioning a spokeswoman from a one of the more
prominent abortion rights organizations about the
so-called "partial birth abortion" ban that the
Supreme Court struck down in the summer of 2000.
|
|
| First, this spokeswoman
didn't even try to make clear to the audience, the
delineation between our sides definition of late
term (third trimester) and the antiabortion sides
definition (second trimester forward). Making that
delineation clear - every time one speaks about
"late term" abortions - is crucial in being honest
about what is going on in this debate and crucial
to the defense of Roe vs. Wade. |
|
|
|
|
The number and reasons for "late term" second
trimester abortions is very different from the number and
the reasons for a "late term" as in third trimester abortion.
|
|
| Second, and most disturbing,
when Hannity played the testimony of a nurse who
had testified before Congress during the hearings
on the so-called partial birth abortion ban, testimony
that was very emotional about this so-called procedure
and its use in a 21-22 week pregnancy, prior to
viability, and then turned for a comment to this
spokeswoman, it was sad. She was nearly speechless
and proceeded to go back to the "message box" chattering
about the Supreme Court's decision. Hannity just
rolled his eyes, cut her off and that was that.
She had just been made to look like a fool and she
looked and sounded like she was embarrassed and
ashamed. It was all too clear that she did not want
to address - forthrightly - elective late second
trimester abortions. |
|
| That kind of response
from the abortion rights movement is now commonplace.
When asked about the number and reasons for "late
term" abortions, abortion rights spokespersons go
to their "message box" and declare them to be for
health and life reasons only. That is misleading
and most destructive to our cause. |
|
|
| It's misleading because
without making the delineation between the number
of and reasons for "late term" second trimester
abortions and "late term" as in third trimester
abortions very clear - every time - we are literally
lying for the sake of a "message box" designed to
fit into 60-second sound bites. |
|
| The number and reasons
for "late term" second trimester abortions, which
are still prior to viability - is very different
from the number and the reasons for a "late term"
as in third trimester, post-viable abortion. |
|
Remember - "Late term"
second trimester, pre-viable abortions are performed:
• Because a woman is exercising her right under
the guidelines of Roe vs. Wade and that means the
woman is healthy and so is the fetus.
• Because a woman is unhealthy though her fetus
may be healthy.
• Because a fetus is unhealthy though the woman
may be healthy.
• Because both the woman and fetus are unhealthy.
|
|
|
|
|
Life
and Liberty for Women
would support a woman who decided to terminate her pregnancy,
for reasons that have nothing to do with health or life concerns,
even if that decision came late in the late second trimester,
but still before viability.
|
|
| So, not all abortions
performed in "late term" as applied to the second
trimester or that is applied to both second and
third trimester abortions, as antiabortion extremists
insist on doing, precisely to confuse the issue,
is for only health reasons. |
|
| Antiabortion extremists
are aware of the movement's failure to delineate
and they lick their chops at the prospect of confusing
the issue in the public's mind. We only have ourselves
to blame for that. It's that failure and our fear
of forthrightly defending the guidelines in Roe
vs. Wade that gives women the right to terminate
a pregnancy up to the point - not of birth - but
of viability, that has allowed the battle to be
waged by antiabortion extremists and lost by abortion
rights advocates over so-called partial birth abortion
bans, "late term" bans, even the mandatory counseling
and 24 hour waiting laws. |
|
| Also, remember that the
number and reasons for "late term" as applied to
third trimester, post-viable abortions, makes it
very clear that those abortions occur only to protect
the health and life of the woman. Period. |
|
| These arguments - this
explanation and delineation of the term "late term"
makes perfect sense to the public once they hear
it. |
|
|
| So does the fact-of-the-matter
that women who find second trimester abortions offensive
may choose not have one. Life
and Liberty for Women would support a woman
who felt that way and made that decision for herself.
We would also uphold Roe, proudly so, and support
a woman who decided to terminate her pregnancy,
for reasons that have nothing to do with health
or life concerns, even if that decision came late
in the late second trimester, but still before viability.
It is that simple. |
|
| Knowing we have the power
to effect a decrease in the number of second trimester
abortions without infringing on Roe vs. Wade's guidelines
makes this a no-brainer to understand and a no-brainer
to publicly and proudly support. Current abortion
rights organizations would serve their cause and
constituency best if they would lose the fear and
leave their "message box" long enough to set the
record straight, keep it straight, and properly
educate their whole constituency about second trimester
abortions and their proper role in the right of
women to make their own reproductive decisions.
This about face by abortion rights organizations
would also send antiabortion extremists scrambling
to explain and defend their lies and deceptive strategy,
something they aren't able to do. |
|
|
|
|
When you challenge the antiabortion mantra
of "abortion up to the
moment of birth" with the facts about the numbers and reasons
for
second trimester pre-viable abortions and third trimester
post-viable
abortions, disallowing them to put the two trimesters together
under
the umbrella of "late term," they are ill equipped to answer
those truths.
|
|
| I have made these arguments
about second trimester abortions in public debate
with antiabortion extremists and in newspaper op-ed
pieces for nearly four years. Not surprising, antiabortion
extremists have very little to say or find themselves
nailed to the wall when they attempt to defend their
position in light of these arguments - precisely
because they know their hands are not clean here
and that they tell lies - lots of them - to confuse
the public, emote an emotional response from the
public about "babies" that has nothing to do with
the truth and the reality of second and third trimester
abortions. |
|
| When you challenge the
antiabortion mantra of "abortion up to the moment
of birth" with the facts about the numbers and reasons
for second-pre-viable abortions and third trimester
post-viable abortions, disallowing them to put the
two trimesters together under the umbrella of "late
term," they are ill equipped to answer |
|
|
| those truths. Oh they
still chant the mantra of "killing human beings
- killing or murdering babies," but that has proven
to be an inadequate response or defense to the challenge
I have mounted to their "late term" umbrella strategy
which by their successes and our loses has proven
to serve their cause and agenda well. |
|
| But that is about to change
- not just in Colorado - but nationwide. |
|
| Life
and Liberty for Women will not run from second
trimester abortions, even late second trimester
abortions. We don't have a "message box." We'll
tell you the truth - we'll explain the intricacies
and delineate the numbers and reasons for you -
over and over and over if need be, till you understand.
|
|
|
Peggy Loonan,
Founder and Executive Director
Life and Liberty
for Women
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
