Abortion to Protect the life of the Fetus. No, I am serious here.

[usregimechange]

Poll question: Abortion to Protect the life of the Fetus. No, I am serious here.

I watched a thing on the discovery or science channel about fetuses that develop inside their twins. Called Fetus in Feto (sp?). They have no chance of survival. They are very very rare. They said about 100 in medical history recorded but... Do twins deserve protection (last semester life exception) from anti-abortion laws as well?

[Warpy]

1. It's called a TERATOMA

and exists as a genetically discrete tumor within the body of the host twin.

Often they cause trouble in later life as they press on adjacent organs and structures and must be removed.

I have no clue why you're babbling about abortion here. Abortion is the choice of the WOMAN involved in the process and the state has no business interfering in it except to set standards of safety for the procedure.

[usregimechange]

2. Thanks but...

I am babbling about abortion because no court to my knowledge has used this for a rationale of keeping later term abortions. They could and it is both pro-choice and pro-life.

[usregimechange]

3. And by the way I am talking about another fetus being inside a twin

not a cyst.

[Warpy]

6. Look up "teratoma"

[BlueEyedSon]

7. No, a teratoma is not a parasitic twin.

An adult can develop a teratoma, for example.

[Malva Zebrina]

4. so I wonder : Does it have a soul?

I have never understood that if, according to the pro-life people, at the very instant of conception, one sperm, one egg = a soul, how can that explain the insertion of another soul in a twin that develops after that? Does this purported soul also split into two?

[Warpy]

5. Yeah, learning about teratomas would seem to stop them dead

along that line of reasoning, but we're not talking about rational people.

Sometimes the teratomas are small and remain so. Some have been found to contain hair and teeth. Some are life threatening. Most probably remain undetected.

All are genetically separate from the host's body. Yet no right to lifer seems particularly concerned with killing this genetically separate organism which presumably got a soul in with the paternal DNA. They only care when there's a woman to be enslaved.

[Tess49]

10. Again, a teratoma is NOT the same as a parasitic twin

Teratomas are rather common, in fact.

[MaineDem]

8. I don't understand

Are you saying they deliver one twin alive?

Is it an induced delivery? A caesarian? I really don't understand. I'm assuming the term "abortion" doesn't actually apply here but like I said, I don't understand the process you're talking about.

[MissMarple]

9. Exactly why congressmen and clergy shouldn't practice medicine

through legislation. Even if they do have a medical license, they aren't delivering care to an individual, a real person.

[Malva Zebrina]

11. Might explain some of it if one can wade through it

http://www.thefetus.net/page.php?id=290

The question still remains

Does this have a soul and should the woman be required to birth it for the reason that it does have a soul and therefore it should be allowed to continue on in it's development since it is considered a "baby"?

See this is where the "pro-life" mantra does not compute as far as I am concerned

Those who claim to be pro-life have no idea of the monsters and yes that is what they are called in medical terminolgy, that women would be forced to bear.

There are also monsters that women would be required to birth that are not connected to twin monsters, or monsters being carried by a single fetus.

But no--pro-life--if it is conceived, it has a soul and to hell with the woman, it must be birthed.

Sorry but I am getting so weary of those who clainm to be "pro life" and at the same time "pro-choice"

They have no idea of what can really happen and just are entranced with cute little pictures of a "baby" at the measurement of half an inch without arms or legs, being portrayed as a full blown delivered baby.
There is nothing better than allowing a woman to make her own decisions re her own pregnancy.

[LittleClarkie]

12. I've had a discussion with a friend re: exactly when fetus becomes person

some of the more extreme folks I've met say the moment of birth and not before. I lean more toward conception, but my conservative friend is willing to compromise with "as soon as the fetus can survive outside the womb." We decided we could both live with that definition.

It's important to remember that the Republicans don't want to get rid of abortion either. What then would they use as a wedge issue.

[Malva Zebrina]

15. Some people do have the belief that once it is born it is then considered

a person and that is the a reaonsable view, imo.

A one pound fetus that is miscarried and is kept alive by modern \day technology with breathing aparatus,is indeed kept alive,
but is that the criteria we actually want to use for determing when life as a human being begins? By the ability to keep it alive using modern day science?

If so, then should we not consider other reasonable modern day scientific technology such as RU 486 or morning after pills also? If not, then why not?

[LittleClarkie]

16. What about an 8 month fetus?

How about a week before delivery?

A person yet, or not?

[Malva Zebrina]

17. what about a six month fetus kept alive by scientific technology?

and what about Ru 486? Or the morning after pill that would be readily available to women?

And what about modern technology keeping alive a fetus that would not have survived before these techniques?

Plenty of fetuses have been born at eight months gestation and if they are born then they are born with a birth weight and development that is sufficient to enable them to survive on their own, and then they can, once born and no longer dependant upon the mother, be considered human beings with rights of their own. These can survive without much intervention at all.

Additionaly, often it is a miscalculation in birth dates due to the confusion of the date of the last menstrual period.

[LittleClarkie]

18. Clarification: our criteria was "survive outside the womb without help"

This is what I'm talking about. This is what I'm asking about. My post was not about RU 486. I don't know anything about RU 486. My post was not about keeping a one pound fetus alive with equipment.

What about a fetus that can survive unassisted? What about a fetus that is 8 months along? What about a fetus that is a week away from being born? A person or not?

[MissMarple]

13. Even the Catholic Church is having an ongoing discussion on "ensoulment".

By on going, I mean over hundreds of years. Their position changes back and forth over time, and ensoulment is a pivotal issue.

[Malva Zebrina]

14. They can debate it all they want and leave it ongoing for as long as they

want. Women have little if no voice in that religion even when it comes to their own health . It is a strict patriarchal system, and those patriarchs revel in their self appointed, male power over women, and it is only men (who never ever could know the risks and perils of a pregnancy they demand must be forced and completed) who make the policy and form the theology and do the debating.

[GoldenOldie]

19. I believe the term is Fetus in Vetro

And it is an egg that has split but does not develop and lives as a parasite off the fully formed twin. The developing normal fetus absorbs its twin (?) within its body where it proceeds to feed off the normal fetus. As a parasite it may have a semblance of an arm or leg and what may appear to have a beginnings of a skull and it continues to grow and can eventually kill the normal fetus or child.

This is way beyond the scope of the fundies understanding. I would love to hear their arguments for keeping this parasite alive.

[Erika]

20. Republicans are limited to black & white thinking only

Would they force a woman to give birth to a monster? Yes, and then they would deny funds for the medical care/needs of the mother/monster saying society has no duty to do such.

[Is It Fascism Yet]

21. other, abortion whenever the mother wants one for any reason whatever. n/t