Late-term abortion facility to abort 37-week baby for $17k

a reply to: butcherguy

I'm fairly sure we really don't want to know...

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: silo13

BTW whose baby is it supposed to be in the video? (Remember I'm deaf).

How did I not know that you are deaf? It is in your name!

Duh?
Many people didn't know when they talk to me.
Shoo.

a reply to: fiverx313

Funnily enough, both of you are right. Genetic tests are done outside of the clinic, and the baby was born healthy. However, both of you misinterpreted what the genetic tests are. They calculate the chance of a baby having a defect, not whether he actually has the defect. In this case it was 1/80, which is still high compared to the rest of the results. However, that's still only a 1.25% chance of the baby having the defect. It's still possible that the baby has trisomy 18 if he had partial trisomy 18 (stay with me here) because he only has 'partial' extra material on his 18th chromosome so he doesn't seem deformed. Although I have to admit this is very unlikely, but still a possibility.

a reply to: ShiveredIce

Thanks for the input, much appreciated.

I have to say though a 1 in 80 chance would still be pretty scary when thinking about Trisomy18:

Cleft palate

Clenched fists with overlapping fingers that are hard to straighten

Defects of the lungs, kidneys, and stomach/intestines

Deformed feet (called "rocker-bottom feet" because they're shaped like the bottom of a rocking chair)

Feeding problems

Heart defects, including a hole between the heart's upper (atrial septal defect) or lower (ventricular septal defect) chambers

Low-set ears

Severe developmental delays

Chest deformity

Slowed growth

Small head (microcephaly)

Small jaw (micrognathia)

Weak cry

source

Still - a later term abortion?

a reply to: silo13

This is so sad.

What's worse is the people defending it.

originally posted by: silo13
a reply to: fiverx313

So you don't think any of the information is true at all?

That this girl was never advised to do anything but abort?

They explained how it would be done - in detail - by injecting drugs into the babies heart to make it die then gave her the price?

That's what the thread is based on, not the video.

i'd have to say that given the overall agenda seen in the video, that i am doubtful if the account she's giving is fully accurate.

the clinic that performs the abortion would likely talk about the procedure and the price, yes. she didn't go to the clinic to be advised to not have an abortion, after all.

as for her medical provider who gave her the blood tests, its' hard to say what was discussed. i'm skeptical of this account, though.

a reply to: silo13

but further testing could show more. which, I am assuming that further testing would have been advised, which would have eliminated at least some of the complications that are possible, or validated them.
heck a lot of times, the genetic testing for this is done because something was found on other tests, like the sonagram!

a reply to: fiverx313

Well I've asked for in 'Skype interview' with the young woman on the video AND the video in full. Who knows, I've had stranger things happen when 'investigating' something for ATS.

It still bothers me the nurse said they would preform the abortion (and how *shudder*) knowing how far along this young woman was.

I'll see what I can dig up.

originally posted by: silo13
It still bothers me the nurse said they would preform the abortion (and how *shudder*) knowing how far along this young woman was.

i understand that it's troubling to consider, but late term abortions like this are not performed on a whim. there's generally either a serious birth defect or a serious health risk for the mother.

i'll be interested to hear if you turn up anything further, thank you for taking the time.

a reply to: fiverx313

where are you getting that all those genetic tests were blood tests??
two may of been, but if they both turned up positive, the next one should have been through amniocentesis (where amniotic fluid is tested) or CVS (where they take a few cells from the placenta).

www.acog.org...

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: fiverx313

where are you getting that all those genetic tests were blood tests??
two may of been, but if they both turned up positive, the next one should have been through amniocentesis (where amniotic fluid is tested) or CVS (where they take a few cells from the placenta).

www.acog.org...

i'm probably incorrect. there is a screenshot of a test result in the video but i'm not sure you can tell what kind of test it was -- or if it was even really that particular woman's test. i think i just made an assumption based on someone else's post.

i appreciate you clarifying, i didn't mean to add to the confusion. the video is a little vague on the details.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: butcherguy
I thought Planned Parenthood did ultrasounds.
That was part of the big to-do when the secret videos were made. PP said that they provided much more abortion services, like prenatal care.
I just did a google search. They do ultrasound testing.

it's not a planned parenthood clinic, is it?

Just pointing out that clinics that do abortions have the capability of doing ultrasounds.

I mean, you were saying that this clinic didn't do ultrasounds, and another facility would have to do the ultrasound for a kickback. I don't know that it is true.

We know they do. It's part of the late term procedures. They have to make the baby is positioned correctly so they don't mess up those important (and lucrative) body parts they'll sell for extra dollars afterward.

a reply to: dawnstar

Ultrasounds can spot defects that point to genetic testing though. They scared us into it when I was pregnant.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: seasonal

I see you are still drinking CMP's kool aid. Well you certainly make a good case study about the damaging effect of fake news.

She was haggling over baby parts. It doesn't matter if she was getting rich off it or not, she was talking about selling them and they were talking about how they work to preserve certain parts during a procedure.

originally posted by: ketsuko
She was haggling over baby parts. It doesn't matter if she was getting rich off it or not, she was talking about selling them and they were talking about how they work to preserve certain parts during a procedure.

yes, well, god forbid a clinic should be able to cover its expenses and continue providing services, right?

a reply to: fiverx313

yes, well, god forbid a clinic should be able to cover its expenses and continue providing services, right?

Am I missing something - aren't their expenses covered in the fee?. Its like saying when I had my hernia op my surgeon gave me the option of not paying if complications arose.

Is the US system "no success no pay"? I'm really clueless with your comment.

a reply to: ketsuko

ya, there are several screenings throughout a pregnancy.. ultrasound and blood tests being of them. but if either of them show some kind of abnormality they refer them to a specialist for more testing. of which CVS or anmiohoweveryourspellit would be required along with more advanced imaging ect. and most women (and the fathers) are so heartbroken they go for second and third opinions.
assuming that the story is correct, they were gonna try to get this women on emergency medicaid, which makes me wonder, did her lack of insurance and funds cause her to skip the battery of testing that would have been needed to determine weather that 80/1 possibility was really a genetic defect or not? to me, the answer to that question is rather important because ya, people are right those beginning blood tests aren't that accurate, that's why women are referred to specialists for further testing. but, if the women is financially blocked from getting that further testing, then I really ain't interested in hearing all the griping about how the testing was inaccurate! especially since most of the people doing the griping are probably members of the republican "why do I need to have maternity care included in my insurance" party!!!
ya know, the party that failed to fund the child health insurance program and wanted to do away with the pre-existing protections....
both of which probably could be quite useful when it came to managing to care of a sick, handicapped, deformed baby!!!

the scary medical possibilities doesn't stop at birth either, I've had my share of them when my kids were younger, cystic fibrosis, mental retardation, seizures, to name a few........ tell ya something, it's a heck of alot easier to cope if you can actually afford the testing to determine weather the possibilities is a reality or not!!!
instead of focusing on saving the baby by trying to end all those 1.3% late term abortions, maybe it would be more productive to actually acknowledge the worthiness of maternity care and healthcare in general and stop trying to cut the heck out of the gov't programs and insurance for those nice huge tax cuts that only the most wealthy will be able to enjoy!!! if you make it easier financially for women to have and raise kids properly, maybe women would be less willing to avoid birthing them??

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

the fetal tissue is donated for research, of which, if that research hadn't been done in the past, you would find yourself probably in a world with a few less common vaccines!! well, preserving that tissue to be donated costs money. the law allows the medical provider to recoup that cost from who ever they are donating the tissue to...

a reply to: silo13

I doubt it.
It's against the law.
The baby can survive outside the mother at that age if it's healthy.. I was a thirty six week baby. A full month early and that was back in the medical stone age of the fifties.
If the child is so sick it will not survive it doesn't really matter.
How sad.

a reply to: ketsuko

Yeah and? It's called business. Do you object to funeral directors charging you for a casket, burial plot and service for your loved ones too?