Abortion after 20 weeks: One woman's story

[Jose Fly]

Why I had an abortion after 20 weeks

I have been happily married for more than a decade, and I have two beautiful children. When my husband and I found out last year that I was pregnant again, we were overjoyed.

At 20 weeks, my husband and I went for our favorite prenatal visit: the detailed ultrasound anatomy scan...

...When the OB/GYN entered, I remember asking point-blank, “Is there a chance our child will be okay?” He responded kindly, softly and unequivocally: “No.”

In our baby’s brain cavity, where gray matter should have been visible, there was only black. The diagnosis was the same from every doctor: Something — we would learn it was not genetic or chromosomal — had caused two leaks in our baby’s brain, one on each side, destroying it almost entirely.

We would have done anything to save the baby. We asked if there was any possibility for repair, if the brain tissue could regrow. There wasn’t. My baby would either die in the womb or shortly after birth.

Our child would never gain consciousness.

I have never known horror quite like that. Adding to the pain, the brain stem was not affected, so the baby’s body was still moving involuntarily. But I knew there was no person in there anymore. I couldn’t sleep and could barely eat, and every time the baby jerked, I suffered and mourned.

I had a choice. I could try to live with the husk of a child inside of me for more than 100 days, swallowing tears at every cheery inquiry as I grew bigger. Or I could have an abortion. And the choice wasn’t just about me. I have young children who would have had to see their mother endure this torture and give birth to someone they would never meet. So we made the painful, but I believe merciful, decision to terminate.

I watched a family member go through something very similar, except they decided not to abort. I saw them experience months of depression and anxiety, and when the baby was born it was in constant pain and died in less than 2 days. I also know it ruined them financially.

After seeing that in person, I became firmly pro-choice. Not because I think they should have aborted, but because I think in situations like this, people should be allowed to decided for themselves what the best course of action is. I don't think anyone can truly say what they would do, until they are actually in that situation. It's horrible and unimaginable.

But as my wife (an OB nurse) points out all the time, "This isn't the movies...pregnancies go terribly wrong all the time".

 

[Stripe]

So your argument is that murder makes people feel better.

 

[Jose Fly]

So your argument is that murder makes people feel better.

So your argument is that the government should make all medical decisions for people?

 

[Stripe]

So your argument is that the government should make all medical decisions for people?

:AMR: What? Since when has your government slipped so badly that it will force abortion on people?

 

[Stripe]

And is it really your argument that murder is OK because it makes people feel better?

 

[Jose Fly]

And is it really your argument that murder is OK because it makes people feel better?

No. Just as your argument isn't "The government should make all medical decisions".

 

[Tambora]

I read something about a similar situation where it was diagnosed the child would not live long after birth, it it even made it till birth.

The mother decided to go full term.
Her reason:
Knowing the child was going to die, she wanted it to feel a moment of being cuddled, kissed, and loved.
The baby only lived a couple of hours after birth.

 

[Jose Fly]

I read something about a similar situation where it was diagnosed the child would not live long after birth, it it even made it till birth.

The mother decided to go full term.
Her reason:
Knowing the child was going to die, she wanted it to feel a moment of being cuddled, kissed, and loved.
The baby only lived a couple of hours after birth.

Yep. That's why in situations like these, I think the decision on what to do should be left to the parents and their doctors. You, I, and the government should stay out of it.

 

[Stripe]

No.

Then what is it? You didn't present much of rational value to justify your notion that murder should be allowed. The only reason you seem to have — as irrational as it is — is that murder should be allowed because one mother who murdered her disabled child felt better than another who didn't.

If your argument is not "feelings," what is it?

 

[Jose Fly]

Then what is it? You didn't present much of rational value to justify your notion that murder should be allowed.

*sigh*

As has been explained ad nauseum, this isn't "murder". "Murder" is a legal term for an unlawful killing of a person. Since what this woman did isn't illegal, it's not "murder".

My point is, these types of situations happen, and are unthinkably horrible and traumatic. We're talking about a fetus that has no brain....no brain at all. I can sympathize with the mother and appreciate her decision to abort. I can also sympathize with my relatives who chose not to abort.

What would my wife and I do in that situation? I honestly can't say because it's impossible to merely imagine yourself in it. But at the very least, the option to terminate the pregnancy should be available.

 

[PureX]

The single biggest problem I've had with organized religion over the course of my life is it's incessant desire to rule over people, instead of serving them, as they so often claim to be doing. And the abortion issue is yet another glaring example to me of this fatal ideological flaw within religious Christianity, and among many religious Christians.

The reason abortion should be legal is because it is a viable and reasonable solution to SOME very difficult reproductive situations. And as such it's stupid not to employ this solution in those particular situations. And who and when this solution should be employed is a decision that people should make for themselves, and with their doctors (and in consultation with their spiritual guides, if they choose). it's not a decision that should be dictated to them by their neighbors, or by some religious sect or other and their influence on political policies.

To me, the very fact that so many religionists and their religious organizations feel it's their right to dictate these kinds of decisions to others tells me that they don't care at all about the lives of those they presume to dictate to. Because if they did, they would understand and respect the necessity for autonomy in the living of our lives, even when we do wrong. Without it, we just exist. We don't live. And without it we cannot be ourselves. We can only ape the behaviors forced upon us by others.

Religious Christians claim they love the sinner, and so want to force them not to sin. But this is an absurd proclamation even on the face of it, as no one can stop someone else from sinning. Because the sin is in the desire, not the act. And no one can control the desire of another. Also, to love someone is to love them for who they are, not for who we want them to be. So love does not express itself as control. And anyone who claims so, and thinks so, is lying to us and to themselves.

 

[Stripe]

This isn't murder.

Sure it is. A mother had her child executed because he was disabled. No matter what regulations men invent, that is always murder.

My point is, these types of situations happen, and are unthinkably horrible and traumatic.

Or sometimes they go completely unnoticed for 44 years.

We're talking about a fetus that has no brain....no brain at all.

No, we're not. We're talking about a living human being who was murdered because a scan showed an abnormality inside his head.

I can sympathize with the mother and appreciate her decision to abort. I can also sympathize with my relatives who chose not to abort.

Is that your argument? You sympathize, therefore murder is OK.

The option to [murder my own son] should be available.

 

[Jose Fly]

Sure it is.

Nope, sorry. You don't get to redefine words to suit your needs and demand everyone else abide.

Or sometimes they go completely unnoticed for 44 years.

If you think there's no difference between that and having no brain at all, well....maybe you should go in for a scan or two.

Is that your argument? You sympathize, therefore murder is OK.

I've already told you, no. Is this really the best you can do?

 

[Stripe]

Nope, sorry. You don't get to make up regulations to suit your desire to murder unborn babies and not get called a murderer.

If you think there's no difference between that and having no brain at all, well....maybe you should go in for a scan or two.

Your article makes it clear that the baby didn't have "no brain at all." He would not have been alive otherwise.

It's clear that the condition he had was likely terminal, but that does not justify his murder. And clearly you have no idea of just how prevalent situations like this might be or how terminal they are.

Your argument now seems to be that you can be murdered according to brain size.

 

[Jose Fly]

Nope, sorry. You don't get to make up regulations to suit your desire to murder unborn babies and not get called a murderer.

Except I'm not making up anything. Abortion is legal, and "murder" only refers to the illegal act of killing someone.

IOW, I'm the one operating from reality.

Your article makes it clear that the baby didn't have "no brain at all." He would not have been alive otherwise.

It had a brainstem, that's it.

"In our baby’s brain cavity, where gray matter should have been visible, there was only black."

It's clear that the condition he had was likely terminal, but that does not justify his murder.

Not murder.

And clearly you have no idea of just how prevalent situations like this might be or how terminal they are.

We know for a fact that they happen, and it's pretty well established that people born without any brains aren't going to live (although you're proving to be a possible exception).

Your argument now seems to be that you can be murdered according to brain size.

Nope.

 

[Stripe]

Except I'm not making up anything. Abortion is legal, and "murder" only refers to the illegal act of killing someone.

Nope. Regulations men make up do not mean murder is not murder.

IOW, I'm the one operating from reality.

"In our baby’s brain cavity, where gray matter should have been visible, there was only black."

So your argument is that murder is OK as long as a scan shows a certain degree of blackness.

 

[Jose Fly]

Nope. Regulations men make up do not mean murder is not murder.

Um....people define words. You know that thing called a "dictionary"? People make those.

So your argument is that murder is OK as long as a scan shows a certain degree of blackness.

Nope.

 

[Stripe]

Um....people define words. You know that thing called a "dictionary"? People make those.

Dictionary entries do not change whether an act is murder or not.

Nope.

So what is your argument? This mother should be allowed to murder her unborn baby because...?

 

[Jose Fly]

Dictionary entries do not change whether an act is murder or not.

Who determines whether something is "murder"?

So what is your argument? This mother should be slowed to murder her unborn baby because...?

Already answered. Pay attention.

 

[Dan Emanuel]

Sad.

In circumstance's like these (I charitably assume that they are Christian's), I am comforted by the papacies' teaching, that while abortion remain's forever a gravely illicit act, that duress (which I think I reasonably see in this account of this poor mother and family) diminish's or even nullify's, there eternal guilt.

Sometime's if not most time's, such circumstance's explain easily why somebody was positively prevented from making the right choice. Circumstance's like these actually remove the ability to act in a truly free way. As such, we are unjustified in judging there choice, in part because, in similar circumstance's, we would probably do the same thing.

This fallen world itself scandalize's us sometime's. What kind of a test would it be, for a mother to conceive and then learn that her baby is developing without a brain? A horrible test. Thats why I don't think its a test. Only a masochist would give somebody a test like that. She didn't fail any test. Given the circumstance's, they're is almost no wrong answer.


DJ

1.1
​