OCTOBER 15, 2005
VOLUME 2 NO. 17

EDITORIAL

President Bush, leave the
late-term abortion law alone


On September 26, President George W Bush asked the Supreme Court to vote on his Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. The Act, which he signed in 2003, proposes an end to abortions performed at more than 24 weeks. At the time, President Bush told a raucous crowd: "For years, a terrible form of violence has been directed against children who are inches from birth, while the law looked the other way."

Mr Bush's timing is no accident. A changing of the guard is happening at the US Supreme Court. The president's golden boy, John Roberts, the new Chief Justice, is keeping everyone guessing about where he stands on abortion.

The fact of the matter is that partial-birth abortions — or intact dilation and extraction (intact D&X) abortions — account for only 0.2% of abortions in the US, according to a 2000 survey by the Alan Guttmacher Institute. These abortions are almost always a last resort because either the mother or unborn baby is in danger. Ectopic pregnancies, invasive carcinoma of the cervix and severe pre-eclampsia, are a few of the commonest reasons on the mother's side. In terms of the fetus, it's usually because of severe rare birth defects that can usually only be detected as of the second trimester, like anecencephaly, hydrocephalus or conjoined twins who share a set of lungs or one heart.

Here in Canada, intact D&X abortions are entirely legal. The one catch is that few physicians are trained to do the complicated procedure. When Canadian women need one, they're often sent to the US. In 2003, 30 women from Quebec and 15 from Ontario made the trip.

Famous Canadian abortionist Dr Henry Morgentaler doesn't believe late-term abortions need regulation — he says ethics and health considerations already guide physicians.

Intact D&X is not a decision women or physicians take lightly — but there is a need for it in a sad, small number of cases. Hopefully the US Supreme Court will realize this when they begin debating the ban, probably this spring.

In the event that they don't, Canada will welcome those US physicians who are skilled in the procedure, and the tide of desperate women will turn northward.

— Julia Cyboran, Managing Editor

 

 

back to top of page

 

 

 

 
 
© Parkhurst Publishing Privacy Statement
Legal Terms of Use
Site created by Spin Design T.