The abortion technique involving pulling a foetus to bits

[excreationist]

This has implications for morality - whether this should be allowed or not, etc. I guess it should be tolerated.

I started a new thread because people were ignoring this illustration and instead wanted to keep on discussing topics that I wanted to give up on.

This seems to be from a pro-abortion source:
It even uses the euphemism "a surgical procedure to remove tissue from the uterus"

Dilation and Evacuation: Procedure, Indications & Recovery

Dilation and Evacuation is a surgical procedure to remove tissue from the uterus, often after miscarriage. Know more about the procedure and preparation.

www.medicoverhospitals.in

Note it talks about the head being crushed in order to remove it.

The following video basically says the same thing but it involves a cartoon.
It is from "former abortion doctor" Kathi Aultman.
Like I said it is mostly confirmed in the illustrations.


If people don't believe the illustration please explain why and if possible provide evidence (Copilot is good for that).
Obviously they'd have problems with the cartoon but I included it because shows the technique in a clearer way. So ideally people should respond to the illustration but perhaps no-one will because it is more difficult to respond to.

Copilot said this:

The question of fetal consciousness during a dilation and evacuation (D&E) procedure is complex and depends on neurological development. Scientific research suggests that fetal consciousness requires a developed cerebral cortex and functional neural connections, which typically form later in pregnancy.
During the second trimester, when D&E procedures are performed, the fetal brain is still developing, and there is no conclusive evidence that the fetus experiences consciousness or pain in the way a fully developed human does. Some studies indicate that pain perception may require cortical processing, which is not fully developed until after 24 weeks of gestation.

Do people think that is inaccurate and Copilot is pro-life?

So that confirms that in that abortion procedure the baby is not anesthetized.

So do people think that illustration is accurate? If not, why? Do you think it is true that the foetus isn't anesthetized? Ideally provide evidence to support your opinion.

 

[southernhybrid]

https://www.saintlukeskc.org/health-library/understanding-dilation-and-evacuation-de

Why D&E is done​

D&E may be done for many reasons. It may be done if the baby in the womb has severe health problems. It may be done if the mother has severe health problems. It may be done in cases where an abortion was not possible earlier in the pregnancy. Or it may be done to fully remove tissue in the uterus after a miscarriage. A D&E removes the placenta and fetal tissue. It also clears some of the lining of the uterus.

Risks of D&E​

All procedures have risks. The risks of D&E include:

• Injury to the cervix
• Infection
• Severe bleeding
• A hole in the uterus (perforation)
• Tearing of the uterus (rupture)
• Not all pregnancy tissue is removed from the uterus
• Need for a surgery to repair the cervix or uterus

It sounds as if this procedure is done for serious medical reasons as listed in the link. I seriously doubt any doctor would choose this procedure unless the mother's life was at risk or the fetus was unlikely to survive outside of the womb or had already expired. My experience working in Ob Gyn is very limited but I've never heard of anything like this being done without good reason. No woman would put herself through this without a really good reason. To think otherwise is simply ignorant. I usually avoid these discussions but felt there needed to be some clarification regarding why such procedures are sometimes done. I'll leave it at that and btw, I never watch videos posted by members here, nothing personal.

 

[ideologyhunter]

I have no insight on the material you posted, but I'm curious: what is your stance on abortion, in the shortest form? Were you, for instance, glad that Roe was struck down, or do you wish we still had Roe on the books?
Myself, I'm pro-choice, but it's not an issue I spend much time thinking about. I'm single and way past parenting age, so it's not an issue with personal consequences for me. With all the vitriol surrounding it, it's also not an issue on which I plan to put any kind of activist imprint.

 

[excreationist]

It sounds as if this procedure is done for serious medical reasons as listed in the link. I seriously doubt any doctor would choose this procedure unless the mother's life was at risk or the fetus was unlikely to survive outside of the womb or had already expired.

Well I looked up the options using Copilot:

What abortion methods are there for a later term abortion?
Late-term abortions, typically performed after 20 weeks of pregnancy, involve different medical procedures depending on the circumstances. Here are some common methods:
- Dilation and Evacuation (D&E): This procedure involves dilating the cervix and removing the fetus in pieces. It is usually performed between 15 to 19 weeks of pregnancy.
- Induction Abortion: After 19 weeks, labor can be induced using medications like prostaglandins to expel the fetus.
- Feticide: In cases beyond 22 weeks, feticide may be performed, where a lethal injection stops the fetal heartbeat before removal.

That second method might result in the foetus being born alive and then it is left to die.

 

[excreationist]

I have no insight on the material you posted, but I'm curious: what is your stance on abortion, in the shortest form? Were you, for instance, glad that Roe was struck down, or do you wish we still had Roe on the books?
Myself, I'm pro-choice, but it's not an issue I spend much time thinking about. I'm single and way past parenting age, so it's not an issue with personal consequences for me. With all the vitriol surrounding it, it's also not an issue on which I plan to put any kind of activist imprint.

Well I'm in Australia and apparently abortion for any reason is ok up until 22 weeks. Abortion up until birth is ok as long as two doctors approve of it and this can be for psychosocial reasons only (i.e. the mother and foetus might be physically healthy). I guess I think babies from late-term situations should be adopted out unless rape or incest was involved. Perhaps I could change my mind fairly easily but that's just my current hunch. Freakonomics says that it seems crime goes down when people can abort unwanted babies so that's a good reason to suppport abortion.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Thanks. I shoulda noticed your Australian byline, but didn't.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Something being gruesome doesn't make it wrong.

The reason to tear something to bits inside the body is to extract it through a hole smaller than it would fit through otherwise. Since there's already a convenient baby-sized hole this means whatever they are removing is bigger than a baby. The case I'm aware of is the skull is full of water, not brain. Grows too big, won't fit the birth canal. Note that the alternative is c-section, not live birth.

There are cases where tearing things up has proven to be a bad idea, but that's a matter of spreading cancer. (When doing a laparoscopic hysterectomy it can't fit through the incisions, sticking a gadget in there that would chew it up and suck it out is faster and easier than cutting it up with a scalpel. And faster is good for the patient as it means less anesthesia time. But it turns out that sometimes it sprayed undetected cancer through the abdomen.)

 

[excreationist]

Something being gruesome doesn't make it wrong.

I'm trying to determine whether people think it is even true.

The reason to tear something to bits inside the body is to extract it through a hole smaller than it would fit through otherwise. Since there's already a convenient baby-sized hole this means whatever they are removing is bigger than a baby. The case I'm aware of is the skull is full of water, not brain.

Copilot said:
"In early development, the brain is about 75–80% water, and while an adult brain still contains a similar percentage, the fetal brain is much more fluid-dense"
That agrees with the cartoon that says there is a white substance (fluid?) that comes out of the head.

Grows too big, won't fit the birth canal. Note that the alternative is c-section, not live birth.

Ok interesting point.

BTW it seems that in that procedure the foetus isn't given any anesthesia while it is being pulled to pieces though perhaps it isn't capable of feeling pain anyway.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Something being gruesome doesn't make it wrong.

I'm trying to determine whether people think it is even true.

The reason to tear something to bits inside the body is to extract it through a hole smaller than it would fit through otherwise. Since there's already a convenient baby-sized hole this means whatever they are removing is bigger than a baby. The case I'm aware of is the skull is full of water, not brain.

Copilot said:
"In early development, the brain is about 75–80% water, and while an adult brain still contains a similar percentage, the fetal brain is much more fluid-dense"
That agrees with the cartoon that says there is a white substance (fluid?) that comes out of the head.

Grows too big, won't fit the birth canal. Note that the alternative is c-section, not live birth.

Ok interesting point.

BTW it seems that in that procedure the foetus isn't given any anesthesia while it is being pulled to pieces though perhaps it isn't capable of feeling pain anyway.

I forget the name of the condition. But it results in a large, fluid-filled skull basically missing a brain. Survival outside the womb is impossible. And there's a hard limit on the birth canal imposed by the pelvic girdle. If the skull exceeds the opening in the pelvic girdle it's not coming out that way unless you break it up first. The only options are break it up/c-section/woman dies.

And there's no point to anesthesia until there's enough development to perceive pain.

 

[excreationist]

And there's no point to anesthesia until there's enough development to perceive pain.

It makes the cartoon look worse when the foetus is moving around while being pulled into pieces...

 

[excreationist]

Dilation and Evacuation (D&E): This procedure involves dilating the cervix and removing the fetus in pieces. It is usually performed between 15 to 19 weeks of pregnancy.

A fetus typically starts moving between 16 and 24 weeks of pregnancy. These early movements, known as quickening, may feel like fluttering, swishing, or tiny kicks

So it seems the cartoon could be accurate and the foetus could be moving around when it is being pulled apart...

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And there's no point to anesthesia until there's enough development to perceive pain.

It makes the cartoon look worse when the foetus is moving around while being pulled into pieces...

Anesthesia doesn't prevent moving around because it doesn't take out the reflexes, only the consciousness. If the surgeon needs to keep you from moving around they use a ventilator and a paralytic.