Thursday, July 02, 2009

Abortionist explains why she provides 2nd trimester abortions

Radha Lewis says,

I chose to be an abortion provider to prevent undue suffering for my patients

But the fetus has to be the scapegoat. Because voiceless, hidden, unborn children in women's uteruses have no power and no input.

The other day, a colleague and I cared for Rita, a 36-year-old mother of five who was nearly five and a half months pregnant. Rita had always been healthy, but was now hospitalized for more than four weeks at two different hospitals. An infection in her heart had destroyed two of Rita's heart valves, requiring open-heart surgical repair, then a second operation to install a pacemaker.

This young mother unsuccessfully requested an abortion from the dozens of doctors who treated her, but nobody was willing to provide this service until Rita's heart surgeons declared that her pregnancy threatened her life. Within 72 hours, I found myself in an operating room taking care of Rita so she could recover and return home to care for her family.

Pro-life physicians say that even when a mother's life is at stake, there is no need for abortion.

But let's say, for argument's sake, that there was no other recourse.

Does an abortionist have to rip the baby limb from limb, as they do in second-trimester abortions?

Couldn't she have removed the baby through a c-section or some other equally, non-destructive operation?

Why no. That would actually involve respecting the unborn.

Although Alice’s circumstances were not life-threatening in the same way as Rita's, I argue that they are no less significant. But they were not sufficient to persuade the large hospital in the liberal state of California where I practice. Instead, nonexistent "hospital policy" was invoked by disapproving administrators and senior pro-life physicians. As a result, she was sent home to have a child she does not want, or take matters into her own hands with potentially devastating consequences.

Wait. She doesn't show up at her Planned Parenthood appointment, but she didn't want the baby?

Is she competent to make medical decisions or not?

In my experience, every woman who comes in seeking a second trimester abortion has a compelling reason to do so.

Well they're all compelling, aren't they? Since when does a feminist EVER say "gee, that reason, sorry, not good enough to kill your fetus."


If there were circumstances when she wouldn't perform a 2nd trimester abortion, perhaps that would lend credibility to her statement.