what percentage of abortions are due to mothers health
- Some medical experts counter Rep. Joe Walsh's argument
- OB-GYN group says abortions may exist necessary to relieve mother's life
- Walsh backed off his statement, citing "very rare circumstances"
Abortions are sometimes needed to save the lives or health of pregnant women, several medical experts said Friday, countering comments that were fabricated and then partially retracted by Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh. Even a leading grouping opposing abortion, the National Correct to Life Commission, issued a argument saying that its position is "to permit ballgame if necessary to forbid the death of the female parent."
Walsh, who is seeking reelection, told reporters Th that "advances in science and technology," had eliminated whatsoever need for abortions to save the lives or wellness of women and said, "'Wellness of the mother' has go a tool for abortions anytime, for whatever reason." On Friday, he backed off the statement somewhat, saying there are "very rare circumstances" in which the procedure is necessary to save a adult female'due south life.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists issued a statement saying: "Abortions are necessary in a number of circumstances to salvage the life of a woman or to preserve her health. Unfortunately, pregnancy is not a risk-free life event."
Conditions that might lead to ending a pregnancy to relieve a woman's life include severe infections, heart failure and severe cases of preeclampsia, a condition in which a woman develops very loftier claret pressure and is at risk for stroke, says Erika Levi, a obstetrician and gynecologist at the University of N Carolina, Chapel Hill.
"There are certain cases where ending the pregnancy is the only option, cases where information technology would be putting the mother'southward life at take chances to continue the pregnancy," she says.
STORY:GOP rep backtracks on abortion comments
When a pregnancy must be ended before a fetus is feasible, "the upshot is an abortion," says Vanessa Cullins, Vice President for External Medical Affairs for Planned Parenthood Federation of America. But she says at that place also are cases after viability in which an abortion is safer than an induced childbirth or surgical delivery.
Cecily Kellogg, 44, a author who lives near Philadelphia, says that was the situation she faced when she was nearly half dozen months meaning with twin boys in 2004 and adult severe preeclampsia. One fetus had already died and "my liver had shut downwardly, my kidneys had shut down and they were expecting me to start seizing at whatsoever infinitesimal," she says. The doctors said they had to apace amplify her cervix and perform an abortion to save her. "I fought information technology," she says. "Just they told me I would die — that information technology was either me and my son or just my son."
She says it was a "horrible experience," just the right thing to do. She and her husband had a daughter in 2006. Her story is at her blog.
The National Correct to Life Committee would not elaborate on its brief statement saying abortions should be immune if they are needed to save women's lives, said communications official Jessica Rogers. A more than absolute view is expressed by the American Life League, a grouping opposing abortion which has a statement at its web site signed by 481 doctors who agree that: "There is never a situation in the law or in the upstanding practice of medicine where a preborn child's life need exist intentionally destroyed. ... A physician must do everything possible to save the lives of both of his patients, female parent and child. He must never intend the death of either."
Cassing Hammond, an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Northwestern Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, says cases in which doctors must decide whether it is safety for a significant woman to evangelize a fetus in a medical crisis are complex and outside the expertise of doctors who do not perform the procedures. He says he sees many such cases.
Virtually abortions are not for wellness reasons. The non-profit Guttmacher Institute says three-quarters of women having abortions say they tin't afford a child, and an equal number say having a baby would interfere with work, school and the ability to care for others, including existing children. A study published in Guttmacher's International Family Planning Perspectives in 1998 said risk to a woman's wellness was the main reason for 2.8% of U.S. abortions in 1987-88.
Note: An before version of this story incorrectly referred to Cassing Hammond as "she." Hammond is male. We apologize for the mistake.
wunderlichmilatichated.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/10/19/abortion-mother-life-walsh/1644839/