Here’s the thing, the latest studies say a fetus cannot feel pain until 35-37 weeks. So, your Dad’s information is a little bit out of date (previous studies suggested 24-28 weeks, but the most recent ones say 35-37, so I’m going with those at the moment)

That said less than one percent of abortions are happening at 24 weeks or later and ALL of them are on pregnancies that are wanted at that point because no one wakes up at 32 weeks and thinks ‘nah, I don’t wanna do this now, I’m going to get an abortion instead’. It doesn’t happen.

Now, you say you’re only supporting the ones at risk for the mother but what about the other reasons for late term abortions? Why would you force anyone to give birth to a fetus with severe defects that will cause suffering and death just because those defects were not detected until 28 weeks?

If you’re saying ONLY the health of the pregnant person than it excludes people who are aborting because their fetus is not compatible with life or would suffer immensely for anywhere from hours to a couple of years after birth only to die anyways. They still deserve to make their decision and decide whether they wish to give birth and watch their then sentient and aware infant suffer immeasurably and watch it die, or have an abortion and spare the fetus from future suffering and themselves from more psychological and emotional suffering then they are already experiencing.

You can call yourself ‘pro choice’ but the fact is you’re not really thinking about the reasons people NEED abortion to remain legal in late stages and NEED and DESERVE to be supported when they get one in late stages. I strongly suggest watching the documentary ‘After Tiller’, it covers the actual stories about people who are seeking late term abortions, and shows the reasons that these procedures are vitally important.

That said, people around forty weeks often revoke consent to fetuses by inducing labour, if the fetus can survive on it’s own, then I think that is a viable alternative.

fumblys  asked:

Opinion on late term abortions ? Like into the 3rd trimester .

Well, we know that the majority of abortions occur in the first trimester (92%), and the very few abortions during the third trimester (1.2%) are primarily done for the safety of the pregnant person. And that’s already almost a year, so of course that was an elective pregnancy that didn’t turn out the way the person wanted. So I find it very cruel of anti-choicers to generalize and frame emergency abortions as elective ones without any facts. [source]

Of course there are people who seek late term abortions, but we are not entitled to judge their situation. There are a number of reasons to have an abortion at any time, and every single one of them are valid to me. So my opinion is ultimately Actual Person > Potential Person. Always.

anonymous asked:

I am currently debating abortion with someone. I need a reliable link to some stats that show how rare an abortion after 20 weeks is and that it us usually only because of extreme circumstances. I have looked though a lot of your posts, but i can't find one even though i remember there being one. Do you have one? states that 7.3% of abortions occur between 14-20 weeks and 1.3% occur at or after 21 weeks.

I do not currently have a link that gives the circumstances for these abortions. I hope the one I gave you is helpful! 

anonymous asked:

so a friend of mine just posted an article regarding late-term abortions and how the fetuses will be born alive and left to die. the article made it seem like this is a common problem with late term abortions (because the baby, once birthed, is breathing and could be viable) and a friend of his said that one of the leading factors in the downfall of a great society is infanticide (wtf?). how would you respond to something like this? i'm pro-choice w/o question, but i don't know how to respond.

This is not a common issue at all. For one thing, late term abortions are rare, very rare, and usually they are occuring because the fetus is already dead (So no, it’s not breathing when it comes out and certainly not born alive), actively dying, has severe abnormalities that would kill it or is actively endangering the pregnant persons life and must be removed immediately if there is any hope for either of them.

On top of that, the procedure for late term abortions is most commonly a Dilation and evacuation (D&E). This is an impossible procedure to survive, and the procedure is as follows:

  • Give you a pain medicine injection in the cervical area (paracervical block) along with a sedative. If the procedure is done in an operating room, you could receive a spinal anesthesia injection into the fluid around the spinal cord. This numbs the area between your legs. Or your doctor may use general anesthesia, which makes you unconscious.
  • Grasp the cervix with an instrument to hold the uterus in place.
  • Dilate the cervical canal with probes of increasing size. An abortion in the second 12 weeks will need the cervix to be dilated more than required for a vacuum aspiration.
  • Pass a hollow tube (cannula) into the uterus. The cannula is attached by tubing to a bottle and a pump that provides a gentle vacuum to remove tissue in the uterus. Some cramping is felt during the rest of the procedure.
  • Pass a grasping instrument (forceps) into the uterus to grasp larger pieces of tissue. This is more likely in pregnancies of 16 weeks or more and is done before the uterine lining is scraped with a curette.
  • Use a curved instrument (curette) to gently scrape the lining of the uterus and remove tissue in the uterus.
  • Use suction. This may be done as a final step to make sure the uterine contents are completely removed.


As you can see, fetuses aren’t likely to survive or be ‘born alive’.

Even when this procedure isn’t used, and despite ALL ODDS the fetus is born alive and begins breathing there is something called the 'Born-Alive Infant Protection Act’ which prevents a technician from 'leaving the baby to die’ or commit infanticide. Violators of this law are statistically most likely to be a parent, not the physician and a violation of the law is quite steep.

Here is a good site though that will explain this a lot better than I can, it proves the 'born alive’ thing is actually myth.

Also check any sources on this article your friend provided. Chances are high that it sites biased pro life sites, or hasn’t got sources to back it up. (And if it’s from Liveactionnews, AngelFire, LifeNews, Lifesitenews or OperationRescue then it’s a safe bet it’s all hokum.)

anonymous asked:

how do you feel about abortions in the second and third trimesters?

I don’t think they should be made illegal, because they are necessary for medical reasons. Especially ones in the third trimester.

Second trimester abortions happen for a number of reasons, most being health, and third trimester abortions are almost always because of health concerns.

People don’t wait until they’re that far along in a pregnancy, say “lol jk I don’t want this” and go get an abortion. 

strawberrymilkquake  asked:

.... That last pro-life person tho o_O I don't think I have ever felt so physically pained by another person's thoughts. Having the child (as you said) for 10 days was not worth it, nor was it a good idea. My cousin had a similar problem with her first infant and it was such a horrible, horrible experience for her. She knew her child was gone and she wanted them to go ahead and be at peace, much like this woman did. It's so upsetting to see stuff like this :/

I agree… it’s very frustrating to see people say these things about fetuses that cannot survive, especially considering continuing the pregnancy will bring more pain and suffering to everyone involved when the pregnant person asks for an abortion.

Like even just watch the documentary After Tiller, you see countless stories similar and being given an abortion and just… how anyone could deny someone a late term abortion after hearing their stories and then call themselves compassionate and caring is truly beyond me.

Even stating or implying that late term abortion is only ok if the woman’s life is in danger or the fetus is unhealthy (which pro-choicers do a lot) contributes to women carrying unwanted pregnancies. Social factors play a massive role in the choices we make in life, and if we are constantly getting the message that abortion is somehow wrong pounded in to our heads from day one, that restricts us from being able to actually make a free choice

Anti-spanking is a pro-choice cause

There’s a story from the childhood of late-term abortion doctor Warren Hern that stuck with me. From this excellent Esquire profile of him (quotation marks added to the original):

When he was ten, [his mother] and her husband, they went out one night and left the girls with a babysitter who spanked the oldest girl for refusing to go to sleep. When they got home, Warren said, “Mother, I don’t want you to hire anybody else to take care of Cindy. I can take care of her.“ So they never hired a babysitter again.

This anecdote was part of a larger point about how helpful and compassionate Hern had been all his life, a trait that dovetails with the compassion and dedication that his patients testify to. He also has a reputation for impatience and grumpiness (poor prenatal diagnosis and termination of wanted pregnancy at the link), but let’s allow an old guy who’s had death threats leveled at him for decades some faults.

The story also got me thinking about how closely the pro-choice position is related to opposition to corporal punishment. The moral argument for abortion rests on bodily integrity, that no one has the right to intrude upon another’s body without their consent. (If anyone gets the uncontrollable urge to pipe up with “but what about the baby’s body?” please refer to this post.) The anti-abortion position holds that pregnancy is an exception to this general rule, whether due to the parent-child relationship, the pregnant person’s choice to have consensual sex, or the argument that killing is out of proportion to the kind of intrusion or danger that the fetus poses to the pregnant person in most cases.

Whatever the stated argument, though, decades of studies demonstrate that sexism is the consistent predictor of the anti-abortion position. It is based on the idea that a woman’s primary role is to be a mother and pregnant women who reject this calling must be controlled, whether through legal or social coercion, to be brought into conformity with that role. (This by no means takes away from the fact that not all people who become or can become pregnant are women. See this post about the relationship between anti-abortion sexism and its erasure and mistargeting of people who are assigned female at birth and do not identify as women.)

The pro-corporeal punishment position is similarly based on ideas about a group of people, in this case usually children. It is based on the idea that a child’s role is to be submissive and obedient to the direction of parents and other guardians, and those who are not may be controlled through pain and fear in order to be brought into conformity with their given role. It further assumes that children, or some children, cannot be reasoned with or convinced and there are circumstances where only forcible control is effective.

The anti-abortion argument and the pro-corporal punishment argument, in other words, are each based on discriminatory ideas about the nature of a marginalized group that is seen as less deserving of autonomy and respect, objects for control rather than agents of their own destiny and development. With both of these positions the means for control involve the denial of bodily integrity, the right to make medical choices in the case of abortion and the right to be free of violence in the case of corporal punishment.

The pro-choice position rejects this discriminatory line of thinking by stating that, no, in fact women and persons of other genders (or no gender) who may become pregnant have full rights over their reproductive decisions. It is they, not laws and politicians, who have the right to decide whether and when they will be parents. Similarly, being against corporal punishment means arguing that actually, it’s as wrong to hit children as it is to hit an adult to control them. Children may not have the full knowledge and decisionmaking capabilities as adults, but that doesn’t mean they deserve to be subjected to violence and fear in order to keep them submissive and obedient.

Being pro-choice and being anti-corporal punishment, in sum, are different facets of the same universal respect for the autonomy of all persons, particularly those that have been historically marginalized. There is every reason for someone who is pro-choice to be against corporal punishment, and to explore and practice different models of parenting that rely on conversation and consent rather than physical force and the fear it generates. It’s certainly what I aspire to as an expectant parent, and it is in full keeping with my pro-choice beliefs.

generallyabadidea  asked:

Wow, some butt-hurt little monkey fuck gets his squirrel nuts in a vice grip because you wont show your junk and suddenly you are a racist, homophobic, pile of shit? Wow, obviously this goat fucker doesn't pay attention to the people on your page or the stuff you post. Sexual harassment is sexual harassment, male or female, and this poster child for late term abortion is 100% sexually harassing. Too bad the pathetic fuck wad isn't able to man the fuck up enough to tell you who he really is.

Lol it’s just keyboard warriors nothing we haven’t dealt with before

anonymous asked:

yes you can get an abortion up to 24-26 weeks by choice obv with assessments and you have to convince a few drs why and they all have to agree its in the best interests of the baby, but jenelle could just talk about jace, drug use mug shots and she has the money to dr shop to get one to agree its sad but past 26 weeks its no but they could talk to her about adoption but i dont think jenelle is that selfless to do something in the childs interests then her own

I can’t see a late term abortion happening.