Tags: Abortion | Health Topics | Supreme Court | medical | necessity | procedure

Abortion: A Serious Medical Procedure — Always

Abortion: A Serious Medical Procedure — Always

Pro-life and anti-abortion activists in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 27, 2017. (Andrew Harnik/AP)

By
Tuesday, 31 January 2017 11:01 AM Current | Bio | Archive

Anti and pro-abortion forces are sickening in their fight over abortions, because the battle  is framed in a manner designed to inflame, not resolve the issues.

Abortions are a medical procedure and should be seen in that context.

The cowardice of obstetricians is flagrant in their not demanding that such considerations not be the sole province of politicians, nor moralists bent on denying physicians the use of these often necessary procedures.

In my youth, the news was replete with examples of young women who suffered the consequences of back alley abortions, using coat hangers or a cola douche, methods often resulting in severe infections, even death.

The first pregnant patient I was assigned was severely beaten in her 4th month of pregnancy, causing her to begin to spontaneously abort her fetus, whose arm was dangling out of her cervix. I delivered three anencephalic (no brain) fetuses within one month. Their existence was incompatible with life; one being so toxic as to threaten the well-being of its mother.

Within a period of 10 minutes I saw a pregnant patient lose four of her eight pints of blood, due to unexpected complications of a pregnancy, requiring its termination.

In 500 deliveries I dealt with pregnancies so rare and unusual that Duke and the University of North Carolina (Wilmington) commented on the availability of my care for them, which saved their lives in a rural setting.

I’ve seen pregnant women go into status epilepticus (repeated seizures) due to preeclampsia (a possibly dangerous complication of pregnancy).

People fail to appreciate that tubal pregnancies, molar pregnancies, pregnancies accompanied by cancers, and other conditions may threaten maternal existence; reasons to consider terminating that pregnancy.

Selective abortions of women carrying more than four fetuses are often considered — women are not dogs or animals carrying liters, and such intrauterine numbers on board threaten the health of the fetuses and mother.

The decision to have and perform abortions are not taken lightly.

These are not choices on demand, but medically indicated options.

It is seldom about women’s rights or choice but should reflect medical necessity.

Until you are standing there at that moment, you have no earthly idea about the considerations which must be taken into account. Emergencies are often quick and unexpected. They require immediate action not a mandated waiting period.

Get out of people’s beds in dictating their behavior and leave the affairs of a woman’s womb to those who appreciate the problems which can arise in a pregnancy.

Abortions are not birth control, as many with a one child philosophy, like China, or the pro-choice movement seem to believe. Pregnancies by rape and incest are issues not to be ignored but are choices that should be allowed further consideration by women forced into those against their will.

By the same token, denial of consenting adults the right to use birth control, as determined in Griswold v. Connecticut, is unconstitutional. I have seen women forced into sterilization by states and in rural hospitals where some felt they already had too many children, as if someone made them God.

Over half of all conceptions are spontaneously aborted likely because of genetic abnormalities incompatible with life. This tissue, if studied, has value in promoting life for today’s and future generations. To save the life of the mother is a consideration of Judaism which appreciates the bond of mothers with children, as well as their required protection of their children’s lives.

Over decades, as I’ve watched White House signing ceremonies around the issue of abortion, I am sadly struck that those present are usually white men who aren’t likely to get pregnant, though they can impregnate many, or women past child bearing desirous of censuring reproductive actions on women.

There is room for Planned Parenthood on many fronts but the federal government should not fund it, nor fund elective abortions or Viagra — for those still trying to stay in the game.

Those desiring reproductive choices should be willing to pay for their own legal choices, and not ask taxpayers to do so.

Dr. Ada M. Fisher was the first black woman to serve as the Republican National Committeewoman. She was a candidate for the U.S. Senate from North Carolina, a candidate for U.S. Congress, and a candidate for the North Carolina House of Representatives. She is the author of "Common Sense Conservative Prescriptions Solutions for What Ails Us, Book I." For more of her reports, Go Here Now.

© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

   
1Like our page
2Share
AdaFisher
Those desiring reproductive choices should be willing to pay for their own legal choices, and not asking taxpayers to do so. Abortions are a medical procedure and should be seen in that context.
medical, necessity, procedure
739
2017-01-31
Tuesday, 31 January 2017 11:01 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved