As we speak (or, as I write), several state legislatures are considering proposals that would restrict “late term abortions.” Over the years, the pro-life movement has focused on abortions that are performed in the later stages of pregnancy. That’s a good strategy on their part. I’d do the same thing if I were them. But let’s delve into this a little more deeply.
I’ll get right to the tough one for the pro-choice movement: third trimester abortions, abortions after 24 weeks, abortions on a viable fetus.
You’ve seen the graphic pictures of aborted fetuses on pro-life websites and placards. I haven’t the foggiest idea where those pictures came from but, let’s face it, they do depict what the fetus looks like in the third trimester. Anyone who has given birth knows exactly what I’m talking about. But here’s the catch: only about 100 of these abortions are performed every year and they are performed on wanted pregnancies.
In just about every state, third trimester abortions are illegal except in cases where the woman’s life or health is endangered or, in some states, where there was a fetal abnormality. So, a woman having an abortion at that late stage is there because something has gone terribly awry. It is truly a sad situation. Pro-lifers suggest that these abortions are performed for less-than-serious reasons. They love to say that a girl can get an abortion “just before birth” because she “could not fit into her prom dress.” The fact is that any woman seeking an abortion at that stage for a reason like that would be turned away. There has got to be a very compelling reason.
Then, we get into another touchy area for defenders of legal abortion – abortions performed between 13-24 weeks. Approximately 9% of the abortions in this country are performed in the second trimester. The bottom line is that a woman at this stage can go to a clinic and get an abortion with no questions asked, i.e., there does not have to be a “compelling” reason like the ones required in the third trimester. What makes these abortions so touchy for some is that they are performed later in the pregnancy when the fetus is clearly taking shape. Indeed, if that pregnancy was wanted, it would definitely be referred to as a “baby.”
Then, about 91% of all other abortions are performed at 12 weeks or under.
We all wish that if a woman is contemplating an abortion, that she have it done as early as possible. For obvious reasons, it will be a less emotional experience and, yes, it would be less expensive.
However, I want to suggest that the pro-life movement might be responsible for a number of these later abortions. Think about it…
The women who get these abortions are disproportionately poor or young. So, say you’re a woman on Medicaid and you learn you are pregnant. If you could just go to a clinic and hand them your Medicaid card, you would no doubt get there as soon as possible. But, because of federal law, you are suddenly faced with having to raise about $400-500 for the abortion and that could take you several precious weeks. At the same time, a pregnant minor who lives in a state that requires her to get the consent of her parents might delay that process if she feels she cannot talk to them. While we hope that every minor could go to her parents, without any such laws she could go to a clinic right away as well.
We encourage women to have abortions sooner rather than later if possible. And the pro-life movement should think a little more about how their legislative agenda might actually be the cause of more late-term abortions.

March 31, 2010 at 4:56 pm
How many so-called “pro-lifers” eat veal? They must know about the conditions in which veal calves are raised and slaughtered, yet they obviously are not discomfited to the point of foreswearing the delicacy.
The attitude one has regarding late-term abortion depends in large part on one’s conditioning toward it. Any of us would wet our pants to be confronted in a darkened alley by an adult-sized fetus. But with proper “pro-life” conditioning, we are conditioned to regard it as a baby, even though we don’t have the power to make it so.
So-called “pro-lifers” have an advantage in the PR campaign, in that we are able to abstract from the concrete to the potential– because we know a fetus can develop into a real human being, we can be pushed to view the potential as the actual. Nobody calls them on this faulty rhetoric.
LikeLike
April 1, 2010 at 9:10 am
A fetus IS a human. I’m sure you’ve looked up the definition. I don’t think you get the point, because you’re obviously delusional. I think Pat also feels that a fetus in the last trimester is considered a BABY, because if it were allowed to be born, it would be so. There is nothing far-fetched or ABSTRACT about that!
You are obviously a man with no children…
LikeLike
April 1, 2010 at 10:14 am
The interesting thing is that when someone becomes pregnant and they plan to give birth, from day one it is a “baby” to them. They never use the word “fetus.” In that last trimester, I personally consider it a baby because it might be able to live outside the womb. That’s why I would not support abortions in the third trimester unless the woman’s life was endangered or if there was some kind of several fetal abnormality. Fortunately, there are not that many cases like that. The vast majority of abortions are performed in the first trimester.
LikeLike
April 1, 2010 at 4:39 pm
Thank you, James, for allowing me the opportunity to trot out my standard brag: I don’t consider myself a “real” man, because back in my prime, real men left the kid behind when they left the marriage. I was afraid my son would have some really rough sledding if his mom raised him, so we agreed that I should have custody. This was in the years before child support was mandatory, and I didn’t think that she owed me anything for raising him, so I sure wasn’t looking at it from a financial aspect.
So, I was a single father for 14 years and spent eleven of them working at a minimum wage job. It was only when I asked a customer who worked for the welfare department if my son was eligible for health coverage through the government that I found out most people couldn’t live, much less raise a child, on $87 a week. This is by way of saying I was a poverty-level single parent who didn’t even know there were support systems out there.
The stresses in his life were enormous– his life would have been much better if I had been aborted. I unknowingly subjected him to the most pernicious form of child abuse, yet everybody thought I was a good father. (If you don’t know what the most pernicious form of child abuse is, you shouldn’t really be telling anybody they ought to remain pregnant.) I had a lot of unresolved anger (still do), and while I managed not to dump it all on him, the darma he grew up in was not that beneficial. He still finds me emotionally toxic; but that’s okay, because after having paid his dues, he’s entitled.
Fortunately, when he was 14, the local parent-child center opened up, and I was amazed at how much I hadn’t known. I managed to backpedal on enough of the bad stuff I was doing so that he didn’t become a “lost child.” (Again, if you don’t know what a “lost child” is, . . .) After he graduated, I had accumulated enough good parenting skills to realize I shouldn’t was them, and that’s when I got heavily into staffing groups at the p-c center, getting into a Big Brother role and volunteering 600 hours and 8% of my gross annual income in such work over the next 20-30 years. My IRA is Swiss cheese, but there are a few kids who just might be a little better off for it.
Some of the kids I spent all the money and time with included one who attempted to decapitate himself with a piece of string, one whose father used to punish him by burning the soles of his feet with a cigarette lighted, one whose stepfather made sure he kept in the Cinderella role in the household and who was ready to kill his stepbrothers if he could… And on, and on. It got so that I was dealing with kids from two families at the same time. And when I went through the list of the fathers whose kids my son had gone to school with, not a one of the top nine would take on one that I couldn’t– a kitten-killer.
I am not a hero; none of those kids or their parents think I’m a hero, and I certainly haven’t rescued anybody except myself. If you don’t believe me, ask my kid. But I am not about to go all romantic and start persuading any woman that she is carrying the most precious life imaginable– because I can’t guarantee I’ll be around to help her care for it.
Let me know when you decide to join RRTL. Visit the blog! Google “aborticentrism” It’s the only way to find it.
LikeLike
April 2, 2010 at 12:22 pm
Thanks for the insight. I am humble enough to apologize for my utter contempt for you, at times. And thank you for your brag. I think you may be human after all…
LikeLike
April 2, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Thank you, James; I look forward to the day when you join RESPONSIBLE Right to Life. You’ll double the membership!
LikeLike