In jurisdictions where it is legal; do physicians who practice 3rd/late-term abortions, up to and at the point of delivery, violate ethical standards of medicine such as the "Hippocratic Oath?"
I can't see killing a baby just before or during birth as a good thing. It is one thing to remove a child to save the mother. It is another to also kill that child. I am not here to judge others. Just thinking about this makes me sad and mournful.
I would never have a abortion. This person who destroyed her child will have to live with that the rest of her life. I don't care what others do, as long as they don't force their options of right and wrong upon my life. I can't conceive of destroying a baby. But not my body not my choice!
This is very much ultimately where I stand as well. I can pretty easily separate my personal feelings on a given issue from the civil, legal arguments (though it's hard for many)
I have to place the decision on the conscience of the individuals involved. Not for me to judge except in specific cases
You don't want to get me started on this topic. Apparently, I'm the odd one out in the comments on this, and I like all if you guys, so I'm just going to leave it at that. ;)
What could make you so odd? Seems like everyone here at least understands both sides of the argument.
Spill it! Be brave! ;)
I knew I was testing some boundaries with our little group when I posted the question...????
Nope, Spock. Not on this one. Don't worry, I've got plenty of other opinions to go around.
I understand. I've pretty much come to the conclusion that this is a virtually *impossible* situation to properly legislate.
So many variables & gray areas.
I've mentioned before that I have a family member who has used abortion several times simply as 'birth control.' I have a tough time with that
Third trimester is where I get off the abortion train.
It's a baby at that point.
Unless the mothers health is at risk.
Just curious, where do you guys draw the line of humanity (where, before this point, it's not a baby, but after that point it is)?
My personal beliefs and my political/legal beliefs are regularly in two different places
Legally? Not rigid about it at all. Those decisions belong on the conscience of the individuals involved and not my own
First trimester: not a baby
Second trimester: multiple grey areas
Third trimester: black and white, it's a baby.
I can't be more honest about it, than that.
I almost didn't vote on this because I don't think there's any way to say yes or no without knowing specific circumstances and I didn't want to commit to either position as a general answer. I think the case you describe below is at least as compelling my reasoning would be somewhat different.
I'll look for news stories, but my first thought is that the use of a "but a doctor could have legally aborted them" defense is a very bad precedent. I THOUGHT the only use of late-term abortions was supposed to be a threat to the mother's life or a fatal & painful disorder of the fetus, but I..
..don't know what the legality is in different places. And I found out earlier today that that isn't adhered to. But "oh well, they could have been aborted anyway" seems a VERY preposterous & damaging direction to go in. Virtually no one thinks a normal healthy late-term fetus should be aborted.
The only time I can think of when this occurs is to save the life of the mother, and it's rare. I'm sure it poses an ethical dilemma for the doctor, but I view it as similar to a surgery to save a conjoined twin, knowing one may die because of it, but both will certainly die without it.
I'm not gonna touch this as a beta poll :)
Nah... Doesn't have to be volatile. I think most of us here understand both sides.
While I may not totally agree with everything, I understand the logic both ways.
What caught my ear was when this attorney discussed the *method* of termination at delivery. A little unsettling for me. ????
Here's the curveball... If the argument is that she just did what a doctor can do legally; I'd have to say 'not guilty'
I'm sure it would be unsettling. I would think it would be hard to convince a doctor at labor that giving birth poses too high a risk for the mother.
How could she make that argument unless her life was at risk - medically, not just from agitated parents?
We'd have to look at various late-term abortion laws across the US.
My understanding of what this attorney was saying (and I may have understood him) was that there are jurisdictions where termination at delivery is legal, even if the mother isn't in danger.
This scenario is what inspired the poll
I didn't know that was the case anywhere, but if it is the case where she is, I'd have to side with her. I'm not sure misdemeanor practicing medicine without a license could even apply when done by the patient on the patient.
But it's never been the case in the US where it is legal to kill a baby after birth even if it had been legal to abort it as a fetus immediately prior to birth. Whatever one thinks about abortion at whatever stage of pregnancy, that's been an absolute dividing line, I have a strong feeling that...
..the attorney you mention isn't really interested in the actual case (partly because I think there's a far more likely rationale for her defense), but has an agenda regarding late-term abortions. If he's HER attorney & that is true, I think he'd be using her case for his own ends & I don't like it.
I may not have typed that as clearly as I good have.
The radio host/attorney, David Ridings, wasn't advocating any particular position on late-term abortion as far as I could tell.
As a defense attorney himself, he was merely discussing numerous strategies her lawyers could take
At one point, he seemed to suggest (if I understood him correctly) that there were late-term clinics in some areas that can legally perform the procedure *after* delivery using some type of tool.
This caught my ear, as you'd imagine. I'd hope a physician wouldn't do this for non-medical reasons :(
Inspiration for this poll.. One of the 'hot local news' topics where I live is the case of Lindsey Lowe, a young mother who smothered her newborn twins in order to conceal the pregnancy from her parents.
She has been charged with multiple felonies, and the late-term abortion argument has been raised
I often listen to a radio show hosted by a lawyer, & Tennessee law is discussed. The Lowe case is the topic of discussion today as I'm listening, as the trial is approaching.
One of the arguments was that a doctor could have terminated he pregnancy even at delivery & she would not have been charged
She might not have been charged, but unless it was legal by reason of medical necessity, the doctor probably would have been. Taking the doctor's place, in that case, doesn't help her in this case.
Well, I'm not saying this is the case.
The radio host, Nashville defense attorney David Ridings, was suggesting that this *could* be a strategy that her defense team implements.
There's more to the story. Possible mental health issues, etc. Google something like 'Lindsey Lowe Trial' if interested
Pretty weird. At least she's not using the self defense / thought I heard an intruder argument that seems so popular these days.
There are pretty clearly mental issues involved, unless the woman was physically incapacitated for a couple days after the delivery & the murders. I thought at first her situation might be similar to that of Andrea Yates (remember her?), who had postpartum psychosis. Don't think so now, though.
There's a special place in hell, for people like that.
How did I miss this earlier?
It's definitely murder. And it's a really hideous story. But did you read any of the news stories? There's clearly something really wrong with her, besides having suffocated twin newborns.
I'm still researching it, after I get more informed on the whole case, I'll respond.
Agreed, murder and mental issues, no question. After reading the description of the events I was stunned - I couldn't that to any creatures, never mind my own babies. I can't see any tie-in to abortion in any trimester or in any way to what she did. If a Doctor did it, it would be murder too.
The thing that tips it from unimaginably cold-hearted murderer to certifiable crazy person, for me, is that she hid the bodies & the placenta in a laundry basket & left them there. She & her sister were living in their parents' house. The parents discovered 1 of them 2 days later, while she was...
..at work. I just read that last part, which shows she wasn't incapacitated for those 2 days, so now I say totally crazy. Any simply cold-hearted murderer would have done SOMETHING to get rid of the bodies; leaving them there was just... idiocy. And I no longer think it was...
..postpartum psychosis as with Andrea Yates - she smothered them immediately after birth; no time to develop psychosis. <shudder>
After looking into it extensively, she's not insane.
She is the type, you see on Dr. Phil.
She should be convicted of murder.
Temporary insanity plea is out of the question.