Alabama outlaws abortion . . .

Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,898
12 weeks seems quite short to me, especially if you are using the metric of the fetus' ability to survive outside of the womb, even with the most up to date medical intervention, which is very low before 24 weeks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_viability

The problem here is that medical intervention will likely carry on improving (I guess, taken to the extreme, at some point in the future we might even be able to develop and artificial womb etc..) so if a cut off were based on it then that cut off would, in theory, be potentially lowered and lowered...I mean I guess you could even get to some silly point in the future where instead of advocating for no abortions you'd perhaps instead have some new pro-life position involving the removal of the foetus from the mother and external medical care of it.

I think abortions should be allowed, I do thing that when it comes to very late stage then that should only be some medial issue where the life of the mother is directly at risk a result of a physical medical issue - so long as abortions are freely available then there is an element of personal responsibility too in order to make that choice earlier on.

For the previously mentioned reasons I'm not sure that the whole "well technically we can, in some cases, with expensive intensive care facilities, keep a very premature baby alive at 24 weeks etc.." is necessarily a good base for a cut off, but I do think that when it gets much more than that then it is probably around the area that a cut off needs to be drawn. This is inherently arbitrary... that might well be a head **** for some people in the same way that creationists don't seem to get that we can have separate species without really having any point in evolution at which some creature went from being one species to another. Likewise most people are, at one end, happy that a bag of cells isn't a person and at the other that a newborn baby is a person... at some point we might draw a line and that line is going to be entirely artificial.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
28,068
Location
London
This forum seems to be heavily left biased, just like the media is these days.
Come on people - obvious troll is troll if he thinks this place is heavily left biased :p. That's not a million miles off Shapairo calling Andrew Neil left.

What exactly is intellectual about trying to overturn settled law? Or forcing the government to take a decision like that from an individual? Is 100 year prison term sentence a fair sentence? Or the lies the GOP and right are using to further this cause? For someone who accuses others of foaming, you seem to be the one with a bee in their bonnet using strike-through terms like murder.....

Funny that GOP proponents of these laws can never deal in honest debate and lobbying, it usually ends up in deceit and forcing their way on others. That's the thing about having sensible laws surrounding abortion - those who do not want it can choose not to and try educate (reasonably but you can't expect that from the American right) others to their cause. And those that may choose to do so, have the right. Alabama's law is force and control.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
29 Jul 2010
Posts
23,738
Location
Lincs
The problem here is that medical intervention will likely carry on improving (I guess, taken to the extreme, at some point in the future we might even be able to develop and artificial womb etc..) so if a cut off were based on it then that cut off would, in theory, be potentially lowered and lowered...I mean I guess you could even get to some silly point in the future where instead of advocating for no abortions you'd perhaps instead have some new pro-life position involving the removal of the foetus from the mother and external medical care of it.


For the previously mentioned reasons I'm not sure that the whole "well technically we can, in some cases, with expensive intensive care facilities, keep a very premature baby alive at 24 weeks etc.." is necessarily a good base for a cut off, but I do think that when it gets much more than that then it is probably around the area that a cut off needs to be drawn. This is inherently arbitrary... that might well be a head **** for some people in the same way that creationists don't seem to get that we can have separate species without really having any point in evolution at which some creature went from being one species to another. Likewise most people are, at one end, happy that a bag of cells isn't a person and at the other that a newborn baby is a person... at some point we might draw a line and that line is going to be entirely artificial.

I've snipped out the middle as these two paragraphs have the same answer I think.

I agree that it is feasible to imagine medical advances to continue to increase survival rates at shorter times, and the development of an artificial womb, but looking at that viability chart currently, there does seem to be a hard line at the 23-24 week stage where survival rates go from 0% at 21 wks, to 0-5% at 23 weeks and 40-70% at 24 weeks that shows there is a rapid and marked change at that point. It is estimated that the survival rate goes up 2-3% per day after 23 weeks

I think the "age" of the fetus is a slightly arbitrary line (though an understandable one to use) as viability seems to be much more based on the weight of the fetus, which for example, has a 50% chance of survival at 500g and a 90% chance at 800g. Of course weight and age correlate, but it's developmental rates that blur the line when drawing one using time.

I think abortions should be allowed, I do thing that when it comes to very late stage then that should only be some medial issue where the life of the mother is directly at risk a result of a physical medical issue - so long as abortions are freely available then there is an element of personal responsibility too in order to make that choice earlier on.

I haven't fully read the thread but I've seen it mentioned a few times, what are people meaning by a late stage abortion?
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,898
I think the "age" of the fetus is a slightly arbitrary line (though an understandable one to use) as viability seems to be much more based on the weight of the fetus, which for example, has a 50% chance of survival at 500g and a 90% chance at 800g. Of course weight and age correlate, but it's developmental rates that blur the line when drawing one using time.

Yeah I think it is a completely understandable one to use.

I haven't fully read the thread but I've seen it mentioned a few times, what are people meaning by a late stage abortion?

I presume people are thinking of 20weeks+
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
28,068
Location
London
The thing is that we generally live in a democracy, and if the good people of Alabama voted these lawmakers in on this basis, then I cannot see how there is a debate to be had about that.

If people in Alabama are against the ban, they are free to vote in new candidates on a different manifesto to overturn the result, surely?

And what if these lawmakers have little to no understanding of women's reproductive systems and contraception as some have shown? And what if some admit they know the law is too harsh - essentially making this a political stunt? I would also assume Alabama voters would be more open to exceptions - something the lawmakers wilfully blocked.

So if the people voted for someone who wanted to bring back segregation, shouldn't batter an eye lid?
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Jul 2010
Posts
23,738
Location
Lincs
I guess it depends who/what you're referring to? That might make it clearer then I guess the posters in question could also clarify.

Well I quoted Roar who mentioned it, so I'll wait for a reply and I've seen Caracus2k and others mention late term abortions in another thread and I wasn't sure what they defined as that. But your 20+ weeks seems to fit with what they are saying. Hence my general comment that they wouldn't be happy with UK law, since it's set at 24 weeks
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Mar 2008
Posts
32,741
Well I quoted Roar who mentioned it, so I'll wait for a reply and I've seen Caracus2k and others mention late term abortions in another thread and I wasn't sure what they defined as that. But your 20+ weeks seems to fit with what they are saying. Hence my general comment that they wouldn't be happy with UK law, since it's set at 24 weeks

Which will be because the statistics support that 24 weeks isn’t able to provide a living child the vast majority of the time.

I’m not a doctor so I don’t know what they say to women going for this, but I imagine they lay out the limits clearly and if the mother to be wants an abortion it should be done well within that period, otherwise I’d hope they’d try to support the idea of carrying to term once the 2nd trimester begins.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
28,068
Location
London
Hmmn, If a majority did so. Then why not?

Or do you only agree with democracy when people make the "Correct" choices? ;) :p

“To the bill’s many supporters, this legislation stands as a powerful testament to Alabamians’ deeply held belief that every life is precious and that every life is a sacred gift from God.” Kay Ivey - Governor of Alabama

If they are invoking God or religion - absolutely! Religion has no place in government.

She is not forced to keep anything. 1) She can perform an abortion herself, 2) she can give the child away after birth. The law has not even passed the upper houses yet.

Gotta love the rest of the world telling Alabama they are wrong.

I happen to disagree, but hey, it is their state, and they are free to decide what to do for the best, and as a representation of public opinion.

And how does she pay for the birth if she doesn't have adequate healthcare coverage like a lot of Americans? Who is likely to stop it passing the upper houses? This is Alabama after all.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Mar 2008
Posts
32,741
She is not forced to keep anything. 1) She can perform an abortion herself, 2) she can give the child away after birth. The law has not even passed the upper houses yet.

Gotta love the rest of the world telling Alabama they are wrong.

I happen to disagree, but hey, it is their state, and they are free to decide what to do for the best, and as a representation of public opinion.

Do you have any ******* idea what doing abortion yourself is like?

Perhaps even an inkling of why abortion has been a topic of contention for centuries until the movements in the late 19th centuries? It wasn’t legalised ‘just cause’.
 
Soldato
Joined
10 May 2012
Posts
10,054
Location
Leeds
12 weeks seems quite short to me, especially if you are using the metric of the fetus' ability to survive outside of the womb, even with the most up to date medical intervention, which is very low before 24 weeks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_viability

And also, I saw something recently that was talking about premature births, and even though all everyone talks about is the 'miracle' of modern medicine in keeping them alive it does to be another of those cases where quality of life isn't taken into account and even though premature babies are surviving, they are prone to a lot of long term health issues.

You have to be slightly careful when looking at rates of premature births as before 37 weeks is classified as premature and at that stage it's unlikely the baby will have developmental problems with medical intervention, I'm talking about the extreme end of around the 24-26 week mark

3 months is long enough for someone to know they're pregnant and make a decision.

https://www.whattoexpect.com/pregnancy/week-by-week/week-12.aspx

12 weeks is actually more developed than I thought, it's the size of a lime and has a developed pituitary gland and immune system. You can't dismiss premature babies as being unworthy of life because they might have developmental problems, this is bordering on eugenics
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,898
Well I quoted Roar who mentioned it, so I'll wait for a reply and I've seen Caracus2k and others mention late term abortions in another thread and I wasn't sure what they defined as that. But your 20+ weeks seems to fit with what they are saying. Hence my general comment that they wouldn't be happy with UK law, since it's set at 24 weeks

It isn't clear what you mean, what are you referring to - you're assuming they think it should be higher or lower?
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Jul 2010
Posts
23,738
Location
Lincs
3 months is long enough for someone to know they're pregnant and make a decision.

In most cases probably, but it can easily be 6 weeks before they know. That angle wasn't being discussed though, it was the arbitrary line based on the fetus' viability outside of the womb, even with medical intervention. And that doesn't occur in any meaningful way until after 24 weeks

https://www.whattoexpect.com/pregnancy/week-by-week/week-12.aspx

12 weeks is actually more developed than I thought, it's the size of a lime and has a developed pituitary gland and immune system. You can't dismiss premature babies as being unworthy of life because they might have developmental problems

i didn't just dismiss them, I was just pointing out it wasn't as black and white as live or die

this is bordering on eugenics

Umm, No it isn't, it's typical hyperbole though when trying to have a rational discussion

Eugenics : the science of improving a population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics.

There is no genetical aspect to the determination of the viability of the fetus being made here

It isn't clear what you mean, what are you referring to - you're assuming they think it should be higher or lower?

I was assuming they think 24 weeks is too long, as Roar just confirmed
 
Back
Top Bottom