Do you know of any cases where the decision by the SC today might have caused the mother's death?

[Digit]

That is, if it had been enacted years ago?

I wonder because it might have been a death sentence for me. I lack whatever hormone causes you to go into labor. My first child died inside of me at 5 months gestation, and at the time, I was seeing what I now realize was a rabidly pro-life doctor. My uterus was getting smaller, no heartbeat could be found, and even a new pregnancy test came back negative. The idiot would not remove it, as he did not "believe" in that. Even though I was showing, I knew my child was gone...in fact I knew the moment "he" died. I cannot explain HOW I knew, but all I can say is that I "felt it".

I had to get my old gynecologist to intervene to do something and they at first tried to induce, but no luck.
Then, they did a D&C and they said the fetus was mascerated, as I had been absorbing it...pretty much poisoning my body.
No need to say you are sorry, as it was a very long time ago and I am over it.

My question is more to do with women in a position similar to my own. Would they sentence the mother to a slow poisoning waiting for a dead fetus to expell itself, which it may or may not do, or could she avail herself to some sort of healthy conclusion?

I know there are other women out there who are at risk from the narrow-minded ninnies who can't grasp the death sentence they could be imposing on their daughters, wives, sisters, and dear friends.

[DURHAM D]

1. One can not examine this decision without bringing in the

religious persuasion of the five men that made this decision.

To answer your question - Yes, I know of a death because this procedure was not allowed. It was in the late 50s. The woman who died was Roman Catholic and she had been admitted to a Catholic hospital. Her Doctor was not Catholic and was preparing to perform a procedure to save the Mother's life. The family Priest and the hospital administrator stepped in and would not allow it - then (and still) the fetus trumps the mother's health.

[RC]

2. We are such an arrogant species we believe we are some higher

life form imbued with some special force. Not so. We are subject to all the problems as any other life form on this minor rock on the edge of nowhere.

[Digit]

3. Can someone tell me if I would have been allowed to die?

Considering this ruling?

I just know there are others out there, where the mother will be sacrificed for naught.
I cannot even convey my sadness at this decision.

[MonkeyFunk]

5. No you would not

the current law allows an exception to save the life of the mother.

[Digit]

7. I thought the new law did not take into account saving of the mother

That horrified me, please correct me if I am wrong.

[MonkeyFunk]

11. it does have an exemption for saving the life of the mother

the problem with it is that, for the first time, such a law did not have an exemption for preserving the health or future reproductive ability of the mother.

[REP]

10. Actually, I Don't Think It Does

I think that's why the ruling was such a blow; these limitations usually have a life or health exemption, but I don't think this one does (I could be wrong; still sick).

[G_Leo_Criley]

6. exception for expired fetus

Digit -- here is a quote from the ruling: "The Act does not restrict an abortion procedure involving the delivery of an expired fetus." Here's a link to the ruling: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=05-380

The above quote is one of the more scientific parts of the ruling, which is replete with blood soaked, right wing rhetoric about the method of abortion.

I hope that this helps.



glc

[Digit]

8. Thanks

I would never want someone to go what I went through.

I know there are some exceptions out there, but not having a medical background, I don't know what they might be.

I do know it is a sad day for women when men make make the decisions for women on matters of health and reproduction.

[leftchick]

12. there are also times when a fetus is dying

or will die shortly after birth where the mother's life is in danger. I have a friend who went through this about seven years ago. She and her husband had been trying for years to get pregnant. At seven months her fetus was diagnosed with monosomy X, a chromosomal disorder and had no chance to live for very long after birth. The mother had health issues because of the fetus and they had to make the decision they never wanted to make.

She had the fetus terminated and it was extremely painful for her and her husband. Two years later she became pregnant again and she is fine now and they have a beautiful four year old boy.

So to answer your question, I believe with the passage of this horrible ruling if it happened today, she could be dead now and her husband would have no wife or child.

[G_Leo_Criley]

13. not the same

Both situations are awful, leftchick.

But, the situation you describe is not the same as that which our friend Digit faced. In her case fetal death had already clearly occurred. But, because of a sado-masochistic doctor and his "religious" beliefs she was made to carry the expired fetus for quite some time anyway. Under the new ruling, a woman may have a D&E of an expired fetus.

In the case of your friend which you've described, the new ruling by the insane Supreme Court would indeed make it illegal to remove the fetus by doing a D&E. The only exception is for the life of the mother under the new ruling.

I don't know nor do I understand why these men must insert themselves into the most tragic, personal and painful experiences imaginable, and make them even worse.


glc

[leftchick]

14. I didn't say they were the same

my point was the fetus had not died and therefore, today, it would not be aborted under this ruling.

[tnlefty]

4. Yes, and I will say that I'm sorry for what you went through.

Since amnio is usually performed at 18 wks., I do know 2 women who went through the awful roller coaster of having an amnio, having the results come back matching what had been highly suspected via ultrasound, hydroencephaly (sp?), which is an incompatible with life situation and also a dangerous one for the mother. Both terminated their pregnancies.

I have come into contact with women who were forced to carry a fetus that had died, but not for longer than 2 weeks and that was to determine whether the woman would go into labor on her own, or if labor would have to be induced. I thought this was a very cruel thing to do, and it was very traumatic for the women involved, but hey, we're just women, right?

[Digit]

9. They suspected hydroencephaly with my one good pregancy and it turned out fine.

My wonderful daughter is now almost 22 and a cum laude college grad.

I had some spotting with her, and thought I might lose her, but managed to carry her to almost term.
At eight months, my water broke and I would not go into labor.
I had my doctors recheck her position and she was breech, so they did a C-section after making me walk around for a couple of weeks. They were determined I was not to have her until I went into labor.
Did I mention I lack the hormone to go into labor?
I could have lost her with what they made me do.

She is my only child, as I did not want to go through any of that junk again.
Oh, and I love her dearly, as if I needed to say that.

[tnlefty]

15. These women were in serious trouble and they made the decisions they

made because of the child/children they had at the time. Perhaps I should've had your lack of hormone that makes one go into labor. I delivered my first son 7 weeks pre-term, and it was a big deal at the time (he's 17 and thus suffacents hadn't been developed yet). Two pregnancies later I went into labor waaay to early, 24 weeks and 2 days. I did the in hospital bed rest and getting pumped full of drugs again, but after a few days in the hospital, he was born and he died within minutes of his birth.

With a lot of medical intervention we had 2 more boys, and I'm truly glad that your daughter is healthy. My biggest gripe with all of these laws is that there is little to no consideration for the mother nor the quality of life for any children she may already have. I've said for years that if I ever became pregnant again, I wouldn't hesitate to abort. My kids need their mother.

[Ilsa]

16. Now they usually deliver within 24 hours if your amniotic sac breaks.

There is too great of a risk for infection. Also, having an insufficient amount of amniotic fluid can pose risks for the fetus also. Ask volstork.