Washington Post: Planned Parenthood’s defense of infanticide

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 3:33 PM GMT
    I used to be pro life but I've moved towards being pro choice but this is horrifying. And these people believe they are entitled to government funding??

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/marc-thiessen-defending-infanticide/2013/04/08/36e44294-a061-11e2-9c03-6952ff305f35_story.html

    Testifying against a Florida bill that would require abortionists to provide emergency medical care to an infant who survives an abortion, Planned Parenthood lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow was asked point blank: “If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?” She replied: “We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”

    Jaws in the committee room dropped. Asked again, she repeated her answer.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 3:33 PM GMT
    And post birth abortions aren't just a theoretical:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/04/10/philadelphia-abortion-clinic-horror-column/2072577/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 3:53 PM GMT
    riddler78 saidI used to be pro life but I've moved towards being pro choice but this is horrifying. And these people believe they are entitled to government funding??

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/marc-thiessen-defending-infanticide/2013/04/08/36e44294-a061-11e2-9c03-6952ff305f35_story.html

    Testifying against a Florida bill that would require abortionists to provide emergency medical care to an infant who survives an abortion, Planned Parenthood lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow was asked point blank: “If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?” She replied: “We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”

    Jaws in the committee room dropped. Asked again, she repeated her answer.


    OK, so who should that decision be left up to?

    Personally, I disagree with the one physician thing, in light of your article about a criminal doctor. Two present would prevent your horror story from occurring, unless they were in collusion. Or...are you implying that doctors would willingly kill an already born baby if the parents asked them to? icon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 4:14 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    riddler78 saidI used to be pro life but I've moved towards being pro choice but this is horrifying. And these people believe they are entitled to government funding??

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/marc-thiessen-defending-infanticide/2013/04/08/36e44294-a061-11e2-9c03-6952ff305f35_story.html

    Testifying against a Florida bill that would require abortionists to provide emergency medical care to an infant who survives an abortion, Planned Parenthood lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow was asked point blank: “If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?” She replied: “We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”

    Jaws in the committee room dropped. Asked again, she repeated her answer.


    OK, so who should that decision be left up to?

    Personally, I disagree with the one physician thing, in light of your article about a criminal doctor. Two present would prevent your horror story from occurring, unless they were in collusion. Or...are you implying that doctors would willingly kill an already born baby if the parents asked them to? icon_eek.gif


    The doctor is being rightfully charged with murder - or do you think that he shouldn't be? Planned Parenthood however doesn't see this as murder.

    Do you?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 4:17 PM GMT
    ROFL! Of course the doctor should be charged with murder. Nice try, though.

    So where did the PP say he shouldn't be charged?

    And again, who do you think should make the decision?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 4:22 PM GMT
    meninlove said ROFL! Of course the doctor should be charged with murder. Nice try, though.

    So where did the PP say he shouldn't be charged?

    And again, who do you think should make the decision?


    Nice try for what? If a baby is born, there shouldn't be a decision of whether or not to kill it. What is the decision you're proposing?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 4:29 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    meninlove said ROFL! Of course the doctor should be charged with murder. Nice try, though.

    So where did the PP say he shouldn't be charged?

    And again, who do you think should make the decision?


    Nice try for what? If a baby is born, there shouldn't be a decision of whether or not to kill it. What is the decision you're proposing?


    Nice try to make me out to be good with born baby killing. icon_lol.gif

    ..and I concur; the child has the right to life.

    Tell me, if the child was born brain dead, should it put on life support for the duration of his/her life, even if that vegetative life is for another 50 or 60 years?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 4:30 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    riddler78 said
    meninlove said ROFL! Of course the doctor should be charged with murder. Nice try, though.

    So where did the PP say he shouldn't be charged?

    And again, who do you think should make the decision?


    Nice try for what? If a baby is born, there shouldn't be a decision of whether or not to kill it. What is the decision you're proposing?


    Nice try to make me out to be good with born baby killing. icon_lol.gif

    ..and I concur; the child has the right to life.

    Tell me, if the child was born brain dead, should it put on life support for the duration of his/her life, even if that vegetative life is for another 50 or 60 years?


    Was that ever an issue here? Look at what the Planned Parenthood advocate is saying.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 4:34 PM GMT

    "If a baby is born, there shouldn't be a decision of whether or not to kill it."

    This is what I'm addressing here and now.

    Meanwhile, this is occurring and when it was posted on RJ you had nothing to say...

    http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-138271711.html

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 4:39 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    "If a baby is born, there shouldn't be a decision of whether or not to kill it."

    This is what I'm addressing here and now.

    Meanwhile, this is occurring and when it was posted on RJ you had nothing to say...

    http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-138271711.html



    Er - no. This is what the Planned Parenthood advocate said:

    "Planned Parenthood lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow was asked point blank: “If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?” She replied: “We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”


    And further, I have no idea which topic you're talking about. You seem to think that I care to read all topics. Sorry, I don't.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 5:41 PM GMT
    I am confused....why is it wrong to leave the decision to the doctor?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 6:01 PM GMT
    There is not enough information in the question. If the fetus was aborted prior to 20 weeks and was not viable, medical futility alone should inform the doctor and the family's decision. Even if the child were born after 20 weeks, if there were circumstances that predict an extremely poor outcome (duration of hypoxia, genetic defects), withdrawal of care is permissible, after consent of parents.

    The answer is generic enough that it satisfies the law and ethics. Note that the doctor's perspective is taken into account--he or she has to satisfy the law and his or her conscience. Patient autonomy is taken into account--the patient in this case is the mother, and the live born fetus (whose mother has legal rights to determine his or her medical decisions).

    Difficult ethical situations are best not answered in the political atmosphere of the state legislatures, and certainly not by questions charged with "gotcha" intent.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 6:03 PM GMT
    Chainers saidI am confused....why is it wrong to leave the decision to the doctor?


    Good question; he posted a story about one abortion doc killing babies that were born. So perhaps he's saying doctors can't be trusted.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 6:25 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    Chainers saidI am confused....why is it wrong to leave the decision to the doctor?


    Good question; he posted a story about one abortion doc killing babies that were born. So perhaps he's saying doctors can't be trusted.


    Did I say that it was wrong to leave the decision to the doctor? I must have missed that buried in your agenda.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 6:26 PM GMT
    q1w2e3 saidThere is not enough information in the question. If the fetus was aborted prior to 20 weeks and was not viable, medical futility alone should inform the doctor and the family's decision. Even if the child were born after 20 weeks, if there were circumstances that predict an extremely poor outcome (duration of hypoxia, genetic defects), withdrawal of care is permissible, after consent of parents.

    The answer is generic enough that it satisfies the law and ethics. Note that the doctor's perspective is taken into account--he or she has to satisfy the law and his or her conscience. Patient autonomy is taken into account--the patient in this case is the mother, and the live born fetus (whose mother has legal rights to determine his or her medical decisions).

    Difficult ethical situations are best not answered in the political atmosphere of the state legislatures, and certainly not by questions charged with "gotcha" intent.


    They should absolutely be answered and defended in the political atmosphere of state legislatures. You don't think that there is a conflict at all when this arises as a result of a botched abortion?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 7:22 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    q1w2e3 saidThere is not enough information in the question. If the fetus was aborted prior to 20 weeks and was not viable, medical futility alone should inform the doctor and the family's decision. Even if the child were born after 20 weeks, if there were circumstances that predict an extremely poor outcome (duration of hypoxia, genetic defects), withdrawal of care is permissible, after consent of parents.

    The answer is generic enough that it satisfies the law and ethics. Note that the doctor's perspective is taken into account--he or she has to satisfy the law and his or her conscience. Patient autonomy is taken into account--the patient in this case is the mother, and the live born fetus (whose mother has legal rights to determine his or her medical decisions).

    Difficult ethical situations are best not answered in the political atmosphere of the state legislatures, and certainly not by questions charged with "gotcha" intent.


    They should absolutely be answered and defended in the political atmosphere of state legislatures. You don't think that there is a conflict at all when this arises as a result of a botched abortion?


    Entire medical ethics papers can be devoted to such questions, and to squeeze an answer within the confines of a hearing is just not the best way to do it.

    Btw, no government funding goes towards abortion as it currenty stands.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 7:26 PM GMT
    q1w2e3 said
    Btw, no [US] government funding goes towards abortion as it currenty stands.

    Unlike China (isn't that riddler's actual citizenship of record?) where forced abortions have been practiced. Shouldn't he be telling us about the evils of abortion in China, before he talks about the US?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 7:54 PM GMT
    Washington Post. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2013 7:58 PM GMT
    dudewithabeard saidWashington Post. icon_rolleyes.gif


    The Post has gone downhill, but it's still a really good paper by comparison to almost anything in the US other than the NY TImes.

    Anyway, this is just an op ed piece, not regular reporting. They regularly run them from all sides of the aisle.