I am feeling better enough to post a rant!
A friend posted a link on his Facebook page to this ridiculous distortion of an article on National Review Online, which accuses Supreme Court of the United States nominee Elena Kagan of distorting medical fact and the positions of ACOG regarding the so called “partial birth abortion” ban, when solicitor general for the Clinton administration.
He wrote “This is the woman who may have a lifetime seat on the most powerful Court in the United States” and linked to the article. Here is what I wrote in reply:
Thank goodness if she is appointed, which seems very likely.
She did not contradict the language in the ACOG draft at all. They said it was never the case that there was “no other option”. There are inferior procedures that are actually more dangerous to the mother, and more difficult for the practitioner. Yes, they were options, and are now the only option. She suggested language that said an intact D & X may still be the best option, which was obviously indicated by the rest of ACOG’s position. As a member of ACOG, I am completely comfortable with that.
I think it is disgusting that this rare and difficult procedure that was only used in the already most difficult of cases has been politicized like this. And, now is unavailable to doctors. Physcians can still perform later term abortions where (and when) it is legal and indicated; they just can’t use this safer procedure. This ban had nothing to do with gestational age, just technique.
In fact, a D & X is a procedure that is psychologically much kinder to the mother in this difficult circumstance, because she can hold the intact fetus, (or baby, if you use the vernacular), which was most likely incompatible with life on its own or with her ability to survive until it could be viable, and have a proper mourning period. Physicians are now forced to dismember the fetus in utero before removing it, making this impossible. I hope you realize this is the implications of the ban.
I am assuming, considering what I know of your other political leanings, you are not generally a fan of government telling physicians what procedures they should use, based on politics. ACOG clearly was opposed to the ban, and her language in NO WAY misrepresented their position at all.
This is completely ironic considering that science and medical opinion was completely usurped in many cases in the Bush administration. Look into the history of trying to get emergency contraception approved for over the counter use, for example. I hope you were as adamant about respecting ACOG’s positions then.