Ambrya wrote:
knoxsouthy wrote:
The reason I did that was to help you reach the conclusion that EVERY single birth the woman is in jeopardy.
SWING! and a miss.
Yes, every woman who ever carries a pregnancy to near-term and gives birth faces a remote chance of dying. But for some women with pre-existing medical conditions, that chance is elevated from "remote" to "quite likely" (this is where my friend falls) "highly probable" or even "virtually certain." Are you going to tell the woman who knows for certain that her chances of surviving childbirth are, say, less than 20% that she HAS to carry a baby to term even though it means an 80% or greater chance that she herself will die, and likely the baby with her?
Yes. But in many states the laws defining "risk to the mother" don't restrict that risk to those with an elevated risk. Any risk qualifies, so every pregnancy can be terminated on that grounds.
That's the point he was making. And it's very valid. Now, if you pass laws that say that there must be a significantly elevated risk of harm to allow a third trimester termination, I'd be all for it. Sadly, there are many states where this isn't required. Thus, when someone (like Obama) simply parrots broad language about "health of the mother" without specifying that this requires some special medical condition or problem to qualify as a health issue, he is by default actually saying he supports elective third term abortion.
The closest Obama has come is to say that "health of the mother" shouldn't apply to mental health issues. A statement he made once, was attacked viciously by women's rights groups for, and has never repeated. I think it's safe to say that Obama is unlikely to restrict abortions in the third trimester for even the reasons you think are reasonable ones.
Heck. Prove me wrong if you can. Find me a quote from Obama where he clearly defines health of the mother *and* where that definition can't be applied to any pregnancy.
Quote:
For force a woman with a pre-existing medical condition which makes carrying a pregnancy to near term and/or giving birth deadly would be every bit as criminal on your part as it would be on my part if I forced you into a car with malfunctioning brakes. You would be deliberately condemning her to death.
You're arguing this backwards though. The issue is whether Obama's position on abortion would disallow women with
no increased risk to have abortions in the third trimester. The other issue is relevant, but not the one being debated here.
Medical procedures may only be done with the informed consent of the patient (or medical proxy, if the patient is incapable of deciding).