General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I opened the bathroom door and found my roommate's girlfriend in a pool of blood [View all]Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)is that it seems to be based on a lack of knowledge about what can go wrong with pregnancies. Many defects cannot be detected until after 20 weeks, well into the second trimester. Who determines which defects are serious enough? You already mention the possibility of excluding Down Syndrome (T21). But T21 occurs on a spectrum, with some of the feti diagnosed in vitro because they also had very serious physical deformities. And even after birth the outcomes can vary quite a bit (and this cannot necessarily be predicted prior to birth), with multiple health issues that can range from mild to debilitating, and with mental disability that can range from mild to profound. What about Fragile X or similar genetic conditions that lead to mental disability or to psychiatric issues? Like T21, it can be a serious lifelong condition with multiple outcomes, and yet people are not constantly debating it - why is that? Or what about spina bifida, which can also vary quite a bit in level of seriousness, from so mild that it is hardly noticeable, to severe physical and mental disabilities? Not to mention the hundreds of other more rare diagnoses, which may in fact warrant similar exception status that you want to grant T21, but which are not well known or constantly debated? Who is going to decide which conditions are to be included in the ban and which not? Or are we going to rely on the court of public opinion, with the public making medical decisions that really should be in the hands of families and doctors?
These gray area diagnoses place families in very difficult positions, since they also have to think about things such as long-term care, especially in those cases where a worse outcome occurs. Indeed, these gray ares can be very complex to legislate, and it is difficult to see how the state can compel families to bring children with serious and complex health issues into the world as long as the state is not also willing to provide lifelong medical care, education, and long-term care facilities with well-trained, kind, and well-paid staff who will not abuse the vulnerable people in their case (as happens all too often). The "easy" one (in terms of seeing legitimate reason for abortion) is anencephaly, where the fetus has no brain. Or maybe the other two common trisomies, T13 and T19, which has almost no life expectancy and severe mental disability. But the grayer area ones get complex. Same with the mother's health. How close must she be to death before an abortion is warranted? Are we we going to have cops and lawyers in the doctor's office? Will ethics boards at hospitals be called in to make medical decisions for crisis pregnancies like they do in Catholic hospitals?
Abortion is complex, but Roe v Wade was already a compromise decision: privacy to the point of viability, state interest in the viable fetus after that. Viability is usually taken to be at around 24 weeks (which is really 22 weeks after conception). Enough time for the majority of unwanted healthy pregnancies to be decided on, and for most of the medical diagnoses to be made in the case of the unhealthy pregnancies. In some tragic cases it is discovered after 24 weeks that the fetus is not viable, and some states have interpreted RvW to include third trimester abortions in such cases. It works well enough without having to add some artificial "abortion for all first trimester, and a list of allowable abortions second trimester," which you suggest.