More Cartoons
You can bet the farm that N.O.W., Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and Hilary Clinton will be lined up to put forward their opinion of how this case should be decided. On the other side, James Dobson, the American Family Association, the ACLJ, and most Evangelicals will be presenting their position just as fervently.
Before this debate goes any further, let's start with an understanding of what "partial birth abortion" is, from a medical standpoint. Both sides should agree that it is a "medical procedure," regardless of what else it may be.
The following instructions/descriptions of the procedure are taken from a paper entitled Second Trimester Abortion: From Every Angle, available here as a PDF. It was presented at the Fall Risk Management Seminar of the National Abortion Federation in September of 1992. Though it was presented 14 years ago, the medical details remain largely the same. Dr. Martin Haskell is the author.
In a 1993 interview, Haskell said he used to perform dismemberment abortions (definition, also called D&Es) up to 24 weeks. He went on to say,
But they were very tough. Sometimes it was a 45-minute operation. I noticed that some of the later D&Es were very, very easy. So I asked myself why can't they all happen this way. You see the easy ones would have a foot length presentation, you'd reach up and grab the foot of the fetus, pull the fetus down and the head would hang up and then you would collapse the head and take it out. It was easy. . . . Then I said, "Well gee, if I just put the ultrasound up there I could see it all and I wouldn't have to feel around for it." I did that and sure enough, I found it 99 percent of the time. Kind of serendipity.
Below is his description, along with illustrations (available here), of this procedure that he now "routinely performs… on all patients 20 through 24 weeks," or 4 1/2 to 5 1/2 months pregnant. I will summarize as necessary, but will use exact quotes as often as possible. I will avoid block quotes for the sake of readability.
When you hear "partial birth abortion," think of this procedure:
The patient goes in two days before the surgery for preliminary preparation of the cervix. She returns the second day for further preparation and dilation of the cervix. On the third day, the patient is given Pitocin, the cervix is prepared, and the "membranes are ruptured, if they are not already." "The surgical assistant places an ultrasound probe on the patient's abdomen and scans the fetus, locating the lower extremities."
"The surgeon introduces a large grasping forcep [sic]… through the vaginal and cervical canals into the corpus of the uterus. Based upon his knowledge of fetal orientation, he moves the tip of the instrument carefully towards the fetal lower extremities. When the instrument appears on the sonogram screen the surgeon is able to open and close its jaws to firmly and reliably grasp a lower extremity."
"The surgeon then applies firm traction to the instrument causing a version of the fetus (if necessary) and pulls the extremity into the vagina."
"With a lower extremity in the vagina, the surgeon uses his fingers to deliver the opposite lower extremity, then the torso, the shoulders, and the upper extremities."
"The skull lodges at the internal cervical os. Usually there is not enough dilation for it to pass through. The fetus is oriented dorsum or spine up."
"At this point, the right-handed surgeon slides the fingers of the left had [sic] along the back of the fetus and 'hooks' the shoulders of the fetus with the index and ring fingers (palm down). NExt he slides the tip of the middle finger along the spine toward the skull while applying traction to the shoulders and lower extremities. The middle finger lifts and pushes the anterior cervical lip out of the way."
"While maintaining this tension, lifting the cervix and applying traction to the shoulders with the fingers of the left hand, the surgeon takes a pair of blunt curved Metzenbaum scissors in the right hand. He carefully advances the tip, curved down, along the spine and under his middle finger until he feels it contact the base of the skull under the tip of his middle finger."
"Reassessing proper placement of the closed scissors tip and safe elevation of the cervix, the surgeon then forces the scissors into the base of the skull or into the foramen magnum. Having safely entered the skull, he spreads the scissors to enlarge the opening."
"The surgeon removes the scissors and introduces a suction catheter into this hole and evacuates the skull contents. With the catheter still in place, he applies traction to the fetus, removing it completely from the patient."
"The surgeon finally removes the placenta with forceps and scrapes the uterine walls with a large Evans and a 14 mm suction curette. The procedure ends."
So, from a medical perspective, that's what a D&X, or "Partial Birth Abortion" is.
Now, go back through and replace the word "fetus" with "baby" and "surgeon" with "murderer" for a less medical, but more accurate description.
Did anyone else notice that every single medical term used assumes the "fetus" is a human being? Skull, shoulders, brain, spine, torso, extremities. That sounds an awful lot like a person to me. Combine that with the fact that this "fetus" has its own unique genetic makeup (at conception), has a heartbeat (at 3 weeks), measurable brain wave activity (at 6 weeks), and can even suck its thumb (12 weeks), and you've got just about every single sign of life a doctor could ever think of.
Thus, it seems like describing a fetus as anything other than a living person would take a tremendous leap of faith or religious zealotry. For a person to make such a claim, they would have to totally disregard medical and scientific evidence, clinging to their subjective, dogmatic, and irrational beliefs in spite of direct refutation from the material world around us. They can call it "reproductive freedom," but medically and scientifically it is the termination of a human life.
I'm not ready to make such an irrational claim. Let those religious wackos defend their "reproductive freedom," but I think I'll stick to the medical and scientific facts of this debate.
RSS 2.0
