Pro-choice Late-Term Abortion

Late-term abortions, which is also commonly referred to as post-viability abortions or induced termination of pregnancy are considered to be abortions which are typically procured between the 20th weeks and third trimester of gestation. Late term abortion is, therefore, a terminology used when it comes to describing abortions taking place in ones pregnancy. Apparently, there different laws that have been implementing in various countries to clarify on many issues surrounding late-term abortions. For instance, in some parts of United States, the induced termination of pregnancy is legal. This law asserts that doctors have a legal obligation to decide on the viability of a fetus, that is, the ability of the fetus to maintain its survival outside the womb in the presence or absence of the artificial aid. The state is however given the powers of enacting appropriate abortion restraints, ultimately making the process of abortion to be burdensome.

Irrespective of the legal support for the post-viability abortions, the whole process should be banned. According to reports on Planned Parenthood, it is revealed that approximately 99% of the abortions typically take place before the 20th week of the pregnancy. Anwar (2016) also asserts that close to 18000 third-trimester abortions are done yearly, which is equivalent to a 1% of the millions of abortions carried out in United States (Anwar, 2016). Apparently, a 20-week old fetus is self-aware. US Constitution was mainly written to protect the rights of the perceived weak and minority people in the society. It is unethical to warrant the killing of the fetus just because they are unwanted.

It can, therefore, be contended that late-term abortions are the forms of murder which need to be abolished. This paper will focus on highlighting various facts and ideologies which attest that indeed post-viability abortions lead to the killings of the fetus which are viable and can survive outside the body of a woman. The topic is significant to human sexuality since it will be advocating for human safety and eventual eradication of the practices which are a threat to ones health.

Why should Late-Term Abortion be considered to be a Murder?

According to the findings published by Center for Disease control and Prevention (CDC) in 2011, approximately 1.3% of the abortions were carried out after 21 weeks of pregnancy. With over a million abortions performed yearly in the United States, it can be alleged that about 13000 children are killed every year since those fetuses are capable of surviving outside the womb (Berry, 2016). Regardless of the abortion industry and pro-abortion campaigns claiming that the number of the late-term abortions are insignificant, the reality is that the rates of the post-viability abortions are growing rapidly. The abortionists regularly argue that the entire act is beneficial since abortion is only done in a case of a childs disability or as a way of protecting the mother. However, this has turned out to be a leeway through which innocent children are being killed under the practice of late term abortion.

Women should not be granted the permission to perform late-term abortion since the fetus can survive on its own even when outside the womb. Just like those women who sire children and dumb them secretly in the trash ought to be held accountable for murder, so is the individuals abort a late term pregnancy. Such people should also face murder charges since the fetus can survive on its own (Berry, 2016). If a mother is not ready to have a baby through the standard procedure, then it is significant to use a caesarean section and later on, seeks the option of adoption for the infant. Otherwise, the humane and honorable act a mother can do is to carry the pregnancy to the term and finally give birth. This is an indication that the prevention of the unwanted pregnancy should be emphasized on time before conception as opposed to the time after conception.

Recently, there have been legal issues surrounding the practices of the induced termination of pregnancy. For instance, in 2010, two doctors were embroiled in a legal tussle for performing late-term abortions in Maryland clinic. The doctors were arrested and subsequently accused of murder, especially after the police retrieved a freezer containing many fetuses which were 20-35 weeks old (Daily Mail Reporter, 2011). The investigation on this matter had begun a year earlier after there were allegations that the doctors carried out a failed abortion on an 18-year old girl which turned out to be tragic after rupturing her uterus. From this case file, it is revealed that Dr. Steven Brigham and Dr. Nicola Irene Riley had been licensed in other states but not in not in Maryland thus raising concerns over the legality of the lawfulness of their clinic in Elkton, which is adjacent to Delaware border.

Authorities had alleged that an 18-year old woman had a 21 weeks pregnancy; however, through the late-term abortion, she not only lost her child but also resulted in the rupturing of her uterus which is likely to bear a significant risk to her future pregnancies. Further investigations by the police also led to the retrieval of another freezer containing 35 late-term fetuses (Daily Mail Reporter, 2011). Some of the fetuses found were aborted as late as 35 weeks which is close to the regular period of a full-term pregnancy. It can be asserted that the clinic and the collusion of the accused doctors were perpetuating the murder of infants under the pretext of the induced termination of pregnancy.

Essay NURS FPX 4010 Assessment 4 Stakeholder Presentation NR

Authorities in New Jersey had revoked the medical license for Dr. Brigham in 2010 after terming his operations a clear and imminent danger to the public health and safety (Daily Mail Reporter, 2011). This was about Dr. Brighams practices which involved performing of late-term abortions resulting in the killing of the fetuses which had a chance of living outside the mothers womb. The murder charges on Dr. Steven Brigham and Dr. Nicola Irene Riley came at the time when there were intensified efforts from some state governments to eradicate the practice of late-term abortions. For instance, in Philadelphia, a clinic was closed and its employees arrested after overseeing the abortions on the women with pregnancies which are 24 weeks old. Kermit Gosnell, the owner of the clinic, was arraigned in court to face murder charges (Daily Mail Reporter, 2011). Apparently, it is alleged that seven babies as well as well as a patient succumbed to the painkiller overdose while awaiting the completion of the abortion procedure.

These cases were a direct implication of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act which was enacted under the administration of President George W. Bush in 2013. The policies under this bill were correctly put into effect to limit the ability of doctors and other health practitioners when it comes to giving post-viability abortions. The law does not specify the period upon which the abortion is banned, but it is applicable during the second term of the pregnancy that starts between the 16th and 26th week (Blumenthal & Beverly Winikoff, 2007).

From the 20th week of gestation, the fetus is considered to be entirely viable since it can live on its own, outside a womans body. According to the policies implemented in Maryland, the Planned Parenthood do not allow abortions on the pregnancies that are above 19 weeks (Blumenthal & Beverly Winikoff, 2007). The efforts and emphasis placed on the enactment of abortion laws in different states and other parts of the world are the depictions of the publics negative perception towards the late-term abortions. Induced termination of pregnancy is portrayed as a way of certifying the mass killings of the infants who have the right to live, thus highlighting the need of culprits to be charged with murder.

In the last presidential elections in the United States, the issue of abortion was brought up in various debates consisting of the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates. When asked about her views on the issue of the late-term abortion, Hillary Clinton described the practices as an incidence which is rare, and it is mainly done whenever there are fetal anomalies. As a pro-abortion Democrat, Hillary Clinton was portrayed to be confirming the purported lies that are associated with late-term abortion (Bilger, 2016). As the person who was vying for the biggest office not only in the United States but also in the world to advocate for the policies that protect the lives of different people in the society. The common reason used by the pro-abortionists is that the practice is mainly done whenever a womans life or health is at risk or when a fetus has a critical health problem. However, this not always the case as different studies indicate that women opt for late-term abortions for purely elective purposes.

While analyzing Hillarys support for post-viability abortions, Dr. Lawrence Koning an OB-GYN in Corona, California alleges that there is an ideal medical situation that certifies aborting or killing of a baby in the third trimester under the pretext of saving the life of a mother (Bilger, 2016). According to Dr. Lawrence, individuals should consider delivering a baby via caesarean section which guarantees a 95% chance of an infant surviving. This is enhanced by the availability of the NICU care. This implies that C-section is a fast and safe method as compared to partial birth abortion to mothers.

There is also the need of addressing the confusion that surrounds the premature delivering of an infant facilitated through the technique of induced labor or caesarean section and voluntary termination and subsequent killing of a late-term pregnancy. In both instances, they are referred to like abortion, but the circumstances leading to the act are particularly different. In the first scenario, the target is to save the lives of a child as well as that of a mother. On the contrary, the second situation is motivated by individuals selfish interests which involve a forceful termination of the pregnancy leading to the death of a baby (Bilger, 2016).

It is, therefore, imperative for the pro-abortionists to desist from capitalizing on this misunderstanding to suggest that the pro-lifers have been opposing the actions of a doctor in both instances. Such capitulations also portray the pro-lifers in a negative manner as people who do have the interests of the people at heart, that is, they are not bothered whether a mother dies or not (Bilger, 2016). However, this is not true since the pro-lifers are only interested in pointing out that late-term abortions are simply but the killing of infants who have higher chances of living outside of a womans womb.

When it comes to the application of the induced labor, the doctors are portrayed to be giving their best to ensure the lives of a mother and a baby are saved. More often, the child is likely to be too young to survive in the artificial or outside the womans body thus losing a babys life. It should be noted that the pro-lifers are not opposed to this procedure but rather, they are against the wilful, intentional and the apparent brutal and destructive approaches used in ending the life of a baby, in particular through late-term abortion (Anwar, 2016). It is this intentional killing of the fetuses through post-viability abortions that makes this practice to be demonized and the need of apprehending the culprits before the court of law to answer the charges of murder.

Apparently, the obstetrician care usually makes a pregnant woman responsible for the welfare of two patients who include the unborn baby and the mother-to-be. If at some point complications arise, especially towards the end of the pregnancy, the health practitio…

Pro-choice Late-Term Abortion