Reality Check
If you've been listening to Supreme Court proceedings this week about the ban on so-called "partial birth abortions," you may have heard a lot about the supposedly exotic cases for which the procedure might be justified. According to the transcript of the oral argument, Solicitor General Paul Clement uses the word "rare" five times to describe what are assumed to be extremely exceptional cases.
As someone who participated in a prenatal/postpartum group for many years and who has heard a lot of blood and guts stories from other women, I just don't believe that these cases are -- in fact -- that rare. They're certainly not the kind of intimate details that one shares with neighbors or co-workers, and society already gives women enough hang-ups about their bodies, so I'm sure there is radical underreporting taking place, but -- just in my women's group -- I've heard of many, many situations in which the mother's general or reproductive health was at risk or the fetus turned out not to be viable outside the womb late-term or pregnancy and cancer coincided in a perfect storm of medical misfortune. No one in their right minds advertises the fact that they've had a late term abortion under these circumstances; acquaintances are just told that a miscarriage took place.
In the words of the attorney from Planned Parenthood, "the important point, Your Honor, is that this, that the intact D&E procedure, and the testimony was overwhelming to this effect, that -- in some cases this procedure averts catastrophic health consequences for the woman. It averts uterine perforation, it averts the spread of sepsis or infection; it averts the spread of --potentially the spread of malignant cancer throughout the women's body."
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)