Cord Blood Stem Cells Information - Why isn’t it legal for parents to kill their newborn baby before the umbilical cord is cut?

Why isn’t it legal for parents to kill their newborn baby before the umbilical cord is cut?

- When a woman is pregnant and full-term (40 weeks or ~9 months), it is OK and legal to: 1) Administer a lethal injection to the baby while still in the womb, killing the baby, and then delivering the baby’s dead body. 2) While in the womb, gradually dismember the baby, taking off and out the arms and legs, head, and body…in pieces. 3) Deliver the baby breech (feet first) to the point in which the legs are dangling out of the vagina with the baby’s toes wiggling…and then inserting a powerful metal vacuum suction device up and through the baby’s body and into the baby’s skull and sucking out the baby’s brains. - Commonly in obstetrics (especially in multiparous patients), there is what is known as a “precipitous” delivery, in which a baby delivers extremely fast and before expected. As a physician I have delivered many babies of moms who barely make it to the hospital…delivering their baby in seconds…even without gloves, at times! Sometimes during an abortion, the live, healthy baby “precipitously” delivers before the abortion doctor can kill the baby. It use to be that the abortion doctor could then smother the baby and kill it before cutting the umbilical cord. But for some reason, the Partial Birth Abortion law, passed in 2003, finally making this illegal…though it still happens “behind closed doors” in abortion clinics. Of course, I have never participated in an abortion. Thankfully, in medical training, I had the option of foregoing such “education”. But on to my question… So…if numbers 1, 2, and 3 above are considered OK and legal, then why wouldn’t it be OK and legal for parents (or the doctor) to simply kill the newborn child…before the umbilical cord is cut? In the womb…and it is OK to kill the baby… But 5 seconds later and out of the womb, it is not OK to kill the baby? In the womb, and parents have the “choice” to kill their baby… But 5 seconds later, they no longer have that choice? Is their “freedom of choice” taken away from them…in a matter of seconds, based on the exact “location” of their baby? - Third Trimester abortions are LEGAL in the U.S. They do them all the time at places such as this: http://www.drtiller.com/

Public Comments

It's a tragedy of epic proportions.
your "additional details" aren't even necessary to answer this question TAKE A WILD GUESS!!
Third trimester abortions are illigal in the U.S., and please, if your going to ask a "question" that is a statement, at least write it yourself.
Hon, when you can actually give birth, come back and talk to me about this subject.
Most of the time 3rd trimester abortions are not allowed except in cases where the baby is going to be horribly deformed, or the life of the mother is at extreme risk. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.
reading that turned my stomach :( if people don't want babies, they should have sex. but i do think there are some grey areas with exceptions
actually, abortions this late in a pregnancy are already illegal, and nobody has a problem with that. how many unwanted children have you adopted into your home? do you have a uterus? if the answer to either of these is no, then just shut up.
It should be legal up to the age of 5.
Well said! I do have a uterus, and there is an adopted child in the home.
Abortions are illegal in the USA AFTER the first trimester so your overly dramatic "question" is totally misinformed. Interesting to note men are almost always anti abortion and yet, none of them have been raped or been pregnant or go through giving birth...you can't handle a head cold yet you preach to women? If you dislike abortion so much, keep it in your pants and don;t have sex with anyone. That way you won't have to worry about it in your own life. What others choose to do is none of your business. Next?
IMHO their freedom of choice is taken away as soon as the child is concieved. a friend had her child at 5 months. it was over a year of medical hell but.... he's 6 or 7 now and no trace of being that tiny preemie!
http://www.near-death.com/storm.html
It's a shame for the US. No European country has the same tyrranic laws. "When a mother can kill her own child, what's left of civilization to save?" Mother Theresa
First off the child is out and breathing air on it's on, if the parent's did not want the child they could have aborted before the 3rd month. It would be extremely vicious and cruel to do it after all that time. Are you that jacked up in the head to come up with this question? Ask your self why abortion is necessary could it be that women that have abortions have very good reasons for doing it? You are making light of a choice that is none of your concern nor do you have to encounter it in your life. You are as jacked up as your question in my humble opinion. There are no abortions after the 3rd month if a child dies in the womb of course they have to remove the child and those children die for various reasons but they can not remain in the mother. What your sick mind is talking about is when a child has died in the womb and the child must be removed or else it would risk the mothers life by creating a serious infection within the body and I can't go on cause it's a terrible situation that has nothing to do with abortion you horrid person.
Ok peoples - abortion IS still legal up until just before birth in the U.S. The relatively recent laws enacted restricted WHY they were performed. The late term abortion rate hasn't even dropped. Abortion doctors simply cite "danger to the mother" as a reason and leave it at that. Of course, that danger may be no more than that for any other pregnant woman, but that doesn't legally matter. That being said, this isn't really a question. It's just a rant. While I think you are right in opposing abortion, this is still Y!A. If you don't have a question, don't post it. And to the lady who said she'd listen to him when he could give birth: 1. Kidney stones are considered more painful then giving birth, so many men are actually able to know the pain levels of childbirth. 2. I'll listen to what you have to say about abortion when you've experienced being aborted. There are some relatively good reasons for having an abortion, but your implied reason, which basically amounts to little more than "It really hurts" is the poorest of the poorest reasons.
Excellent question exposing the hypocrisy of abortion in any form. A fetus is a fetus. If it is illegal to smother or stab it to death just outside the womb, how can it be legal to kill it inside the womb? We are talking about a difference of only a few inches in space, or even a few minutes in time. If someone causes a pregnant woman to lose her baby they can be charged with murder. But a doctor can remove a fetus and it is called CHOICE. I got the creepy shivers and a nasty taste in my mouth just thinking about a sharp tool going into a womb and cutting a fetus into pieces. AAAACCCCHHHH! I can't imagine any doctor who could knowingly do that to a viable fetus with a heart beat. Not long ago I read an article detailing how there were SO many people reaching retirement age and there weren't enough young people of working age to keep paying into social security. Well DUH, if not for all the abortions done in the last twenty to thirty years there WOULD be more people in the workplace. But wait! We have millions of people coming in illegally to take those jobs. Do you suppose? Was that the plan all along? Reduce the American population to make room for the immigrants who would work for far lower wages?
That's exactly the point. The line drawn is nearly arbitrary. It's a slippery slope. If it's okay at this point, then why not at this point; and if a this point, then why not at this point? Life begins at conception. Every human life starts the same way. The embryo/fetus/baby is undeniably human as it's dna shows us - it's not a giraffe or a whale. For those of you who think this is a woman issue, you are mistaken. It is a life issue. A baby issue. A societal issue.
well I am a woman too, gave birth 3 times, and would do it again if I was young enough. these women who say you should have no opionion becuz you are a man, makes no sence, the man plays 50 percent of the role in a pregnancy, and should by all means have a say about abortion, it is his child too. Yea, you are correct, that taking a human life when its on the legal side is not murder but on the other side, it is murder, it is very inconsistant, abortion will be out lawed, this scourge on our counttry will last much longer, there are hundreds of thousands pro life young people as well as old who are against it and standing up against it. anyone who could dismember a sweet cuddly baby has lost their mind, their conscience is dead, and they are on the road to perdition, if we cant protect human life at its most vunerable state then none of us our safe, as shown by teri shivoh, enthunasia, stem cell research, breeding babies where the probability that most will die and only 1 or 2 live, is sick. Thank God, that some of us are still human, and sane, and not out of touch with reality as the pro death culture. thats a good definition of psychotic!!!!!!!!!! out of touch with God and his laws.
Third trimester abortions are not allowed in a number of US states. What you're describing are partial birth abortions, which are also illegal in many states. The theoretical purpose of collapsing the skull or such is to lessen the physical trauma on the mother. After she's given birth, those reasons obviously vanish. And if you want anyone to take you seriously when you accuse doctors of smothering babies, you'd better have evidence. And ban on partial birth abortions had nothing to do with smothering live babies. Smothering a baby is murder in all 50 states and always has been.
A lot of people have pushed forward a canard to try to disrespect you. The 1973 Supreme Court decisions Roe v. Wade & Doe v. Bolton struck down all then-existing restrictions on abortion. Abortion could then be committed at any time during the pregnancy, and for any reason. Ostensibly, late term abortions were allowed only for the "health & welfare of the mother". However, "health & welfare" were defined in such a nebulous manner as to allow all late-term abortions. Even the recent passing of a restriction on partial-birth abortions has holes in it and, effectively, prevent NO abortions. By the way, it is called partial-birth abortion because, as you describe in paragraph 3, the baby is partially delivered before he/she is killed. There have been, and are still, recurring attempts in the U.S. Congress to enact a bill that would allow parents to have their children killed for a specified amount of time AFTER they are born. Senator Barrack Obama is a huge proponent of all such measures. We also have seen where children who were meant to be aborted, but have the audacity to survive the attempt, were still killed after birth, usually by using a scalpel to slice the artery in their thigh. The things that the pro-abortion forces are blind to is this: We went to war to halt a regime that was practicing human experimentation, to include fetal experimentation. Over the past 60 years, we have painted them as monsters and horrific. However, in our own country, in this day and age, we engage in similar experiments that, thanks to improved science and mechanics, far outstrips anything that was done by the Nazis. I firmly believe that, in the last 35 years, we have come to a point where we must now apologize to the Nazis. Between abortion, fetal and born human experimentation & euthanasia, we have far surpassed them in the evil we do, legally.
Killing is killing. From the moment of conception...the baby has life..and a soul. It shouldn't matter if it's the morning after pill or after the baby is delivered.
There's a book written by Chuck Colson (Watergate, Breakpoint, Prison Fellowship, Angel Tree), in which a little boy is in primary custody of his mother. At the last moment, as the boy is soon approaching his second birthday, the father realizes his ex-wife is planning to have the boy "disposed of" as an inconvenience to her professional career, since it is legal in their society, to make such a decision to dipose of an "unwanted product of conception"), if said entity has not yet reached age two, chronologically. (At which point "it" finally becomes an *actual* human being, subject to legal protection under the U. S. Constitution)! This legal procedure applies in just as *unilateral* a manner as is currently legal in Twenty-first Century America, to dispose of an "unwanted product of conception"! The above scenario makes as much sense as the "legal" - albeit *immoral* - practice of abortion on demand; despite that anyone with a level of intelligence above that of a clod of dirt knows that the fertilized egg becomes a unique human being, not exactly like either of his or her parents or any possible sibling! EDIT: Please carefully note that *all*, so-called, pro-choice (actually, "pro-abortion" *and* "pro-infanticide") people, here and elsewhere, were not, themselves, aborted!
I'm thinking it should be legal anytime until they graduate from eighth grade and move out on their own!