After the murder of abortion provider George Tiller for doing third-trimester abortions, there were a lot of hysterical accusations about the number of abortions he did and the reasons for them. I looked for solid research on the reasons. I read the personal experiences of people who had to face third-trimester abortions. They wanted to have a baby, but genetic or developmental errors intervened. Given the frequency of these defects, Dr. Tiller probably did about a 100 – 200 a year, but that’s just a rough estimate on my part. It’s certain he didn’t do 60,000, which would keep him working feverishly every day for two lifetimes.
The reasons they gave were basically the same as those I found in a research paper from 1999. This paper studie second-trimester and third-trimester abortions at one hospital over several years. Only “singletons” were studied, so none of the fetuses were conjoined twins. About 2/3 were done in the second trimester and 1/3 in the third trimester. The reasons for a third-trimester abortion were:
* In 40%, an earlier test indicated that a defect existed but not how serious it was. Doctors delayed and re-tested to see if the defect was serious enough to be life-threatening. Some genetic conditions can be mild or severe, so to prevent unnecessary abortions the doctors waited.
* In 37%, an earlier test failed to find the serious defects that showed up later.
* In 18%, a diagnosis for this kind of defect can’t be made until the third trimester. This often seems to include anencephaly, a fatal birth defect.
* And in the remaining 5%, doctors or parents delayed the decision to abort. I correlated this with what I’ve read about doctors ordering yet another another test to make sure, waiting for a referral, parents not able to believe the news, having hysterics and going home, and praying for a miracle.
Reference:
Dommergues M, Benachi A, Benifla JL, des Noëttes R, Dumez Y., British Journal of Obstetrical Gynaecology, 1999 Apr;106(4):297-303. The reasons for termination of pregnancy in the third trimester. PubMed ID: 10426234.
If third-trimester abortions are outlawed, some parents may choose earlier abortions when it’s not certain they are needed.
Some critics mentioned club foot as a reason for abortion. Club foot means that at least one foot is turned in. It is not a reason for abortion, but it is a warning to screen very carefully for other health problems. The same goes for other deformities of the digits or limbs. Club foot is associated with spina bifida and anencephaly and other birth defects, some of them fatal.
One defect that can be missed at the second-trimester scan is anencephaly, in which the brain fails to develop. It is uniformly fatal, often before or during birth.
Anencephaly, view of back of head
Monday, 22 June 2009 at 23:30
Yet the face might look perfectly normal. I suspect much of what motivates the anti-choice crowd is the natural association of what looks like a person with the presence of a person. They cannot abide the fact that what makes us who we are develops gradually, and in some cases won’t develop at all. Whether they couch it in religious terms, or try for a purely secular version, the narrative that drives them is the notion of ensoulment, a magical moment where personhood arrives.
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 03:00
[...] a look at “What causes third-trimester abortions?” at Science [...]
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 08:14
Thanks for gathering some facts. This is what I thought and now I have somewhere to point people.
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 08:57
Over at the Questionable Authority, a pro-lifer stated that his website included the following data: From January 1989 to May 2002, he performed 2,210 abortions, or about 165 a year. I also saw a report that he performed 230 in 2003. So 100-200 per year is a good estimate for the last 20 years. Call it 4,000.
So whence the claim of 60,000? Supposedly, he said it in an interview. However, I’ve tried to track the source. Everything I could find led to one of two places. One was a website that had a short ~10-second clip in which someone claimed to have performed over 60,000 (or 16,000 – it wasn’t clear) abortions, but gave no details regarding the interview, such as when it was or who performed it. The other source was a downloadable ring-tone of the same clip, again with no corroborating details.
To get to 60,000 abortions, he would have had to perform at least 3,200 per year starting sometime in 1971 to 1988 (he took over his father’s practice in 1971 and refused to perform an abortion for the first woman that requested it, but she died from a “back-alley” abortion, which is why he changed his mind). That’s more than one per hour on a normal work schedule.
What I suspect may have happened is that the interview (assuming it is not a false flag op) was actually with Dr. Carhart, who has announced he will take over from Dr. Tiller. I saw data that his clinic performed just under 2,000 abortions in one year, sufficient for 60,000 over the course of 36 years. Keep in mind that his clinic was full-service and included early-term abortions, which are much quicker to perform.
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 09:08
My question is … are all these “serious defects” uniformly fatal? Serious enough to be “life-threatening” doesn’t necessarily (to me at least) indicate they will be fatal.
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 18:37
Anencephaly is fatal. Being born with no or a damaged heart, no kidneys, no esophagus is fatal and is common in diagnoses of Down Syndrome. Spinal bifida can be fatal depending on the extent of the damage. Were you aware that the mean stillbirth rate in the United States is approximately 1 in 115 births?
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 13:32
[...] June 22: Science Notes: What causes third-trimester abortions? [...]
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 15:39
None of these abortions are “necessary”, not one. The intentional killing of an unborn baby is never justified. I find that the pro-abortion crowd like to spin it as a “need” even though it’s not. Why is there a constant attempt to make it seem like abortion is an absolute necessity? That’s simply dishonest. Emotional trauma does not ever justify taking someone’s life or hurting another person, whether they’re born or unborn, and if we think a baby will die or be disabled when they are born, so what? Is that a crime? Give them to another family for adoption. Wow, selfishness seems to be the rule of the pro-abortion crowd. Unbelievable.
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 18:44
I’ll reply why is there a constant attempt to make it seem like abortion is never necessary? If the baby will die or be disabled there is no crime but there’s isn’t any point in the woman continuing the pregnancy for another couple of months either. A total disregard of the woman’s life, health and emotional wellbeing seems to be the rule of the anti-legal abortion crowd.
Saturday, 27 June 2009 at 22:44
So, does that mean you believe a baby born without a brain (ancephaly) can be given up for adoption? They have NO BRAIN!
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 17:39
How about to prevent suffering for a baby that’s going to die anyway, if it makes it to birth? Trisomy 13, Trisomy 18, triploidy, anencephaly, exencephaly, and fetal cancer are fatal.
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 20:24
lifeobserver, how many disabled infants have you adopted? Have you thought about problems that can kill or maim the mother? (Are these included in your graph monado? I could be wrong here I admit.)
Also I do not believe the unborn are people, and you cannot force your beliefs on me.
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 22:32
Oddly enough, health of the mother was not mentioned as a cause.
Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 23:13
Also I do not believe the unborn are people, and you cannot force your beliefs on me.
Beliefs are forced on people all the time. They’re called laws.
Saturday, 27 June 2009 at 15:26
Makes one wonder why they don’t put horribly deformed fetuses on billboards. Of course, ever wonder why the kids they prop up on “save the children” infomercials are always lighter skinned and rounder eyed?
Saturday, 27 June 2009 at 22:49
No, laws constrain actions, not beliefs.
For example, it’s illegal to shoot people who aren’t threatening you because you object to their legal choice of profession.
Monday, 6 July 2009 at 04:19
where do laws come from and how are they derived? is it not from a beliefs system that proclaim certain actions/behaviors are “wrong”. but why are they “wrong” then? by what authority? and are “common sense” laws irreversible? for example, should and could “unlawful to murder” ever be overturned? why or why not? why is it illegal to shoot someone in particular or anyone at all?
Tuesday, 7 July 2009 at 08:22
You could try using empathy and logic: who is the victim? Would you like someone to shoot you? No. Do you think that someone might be justified in shooting you if you were trying to kill them? Yes. Is it fair to try to change behavior by terrorism instead of democracy? No. Would you want someone forcing you to take risks that they’re not taking for the benefit of someone else? No. That’s the argument against conscript armies. It is also the argument against forced childbirth. Would you want someone dictating to you what you must not have an abortion? Probably not. That is an argument against anti-abortion laws. That is also the argument against forced abortion, as in China under draconian population control laws.
Wednesday, 8 July 2009 at 00:49
but, why should anyone be empathetic at all? on what basis or grounds do you derive your logic? where do these feelings of being kind and such come from? unjustified killing, being fair, do unto others, etc, is a “moral code” that we all innately have from our consciences b/c we were born to know. I would most definitely want someone, especially qualified, to tell me why I wouldn’t want an abortion. Just the same I would want a professional doctor to tell me the risks of why I would or wouldn’t want back surgery or brain surgery or removing a tumor. yet those surgeries do not involve the termination of another living human.
i think you’re trying to say each situation is different and to an extent, I would agree. You and like minds are trying to imply that 3rd trimester abortions happen only or mostly b/c of some defect that would otherwise have prevented the baby from living outside the mother anyways. But people have aborted for less. much less. and it’s an awful crime and sickening that anyone shouldn’t think twice about an innocent baby being literally cut up and sucked out of their safe haven.